8. Historical Perspective13th Century---Devon silver Mines
A case of “production payment loan”
(1969-1977) Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS): costs--US$7.7 billion
(1986-1994) Eurotunnel project
(英鎊) 4.8 billion --->10.5 billion
US$ 7.3 billion--->16 billion
(1988-1997) Hibernia Oil field: US$4.1 bil.8
9. Historical Perspective(1998-?)TwHSR:約US$13.6 bil. (NT$400B)
(1978)US: Impact of PURPA (Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act
Local electric utility company are required to purchase all the electric output of qualified independent power producers under long-term contracts.
The purchase price for the electricity must equal the electric utility’s “avoided cost”(marginal cost) of generating electricity.9
10. Historical PerspectiveInnovations for Project financing: from natural resource projects to manufacturing facility and Infrastructure projects
Manufacturing: the case of Bev-Pak Inc.
Infrastructure: public-private partnership to finance Generating Stations, transportation facility, and others. 10
12. Requirements for Project FinancingProject will be placed into service
Technical Feasibility: independent expert’s opinion
Operations -->economic viable undertaking
Economic Viability
market demand, products’ price
cost escalation,delay, production level, operation cost...
Availability of raw materials and capable mgt.
enough quantities
long-term supply contract (longer than the term of debt) 12
13. Appropriateness of Project FinanceIdeal Candidates
Capable of functioning as independent economic units
Can be completed without undue uncertainty
Worth more than the cost to complete
Factors Considered
Credit requirement---expected profitability & credit support
Tax implications
Impacts on the sponsors’ existing debt obligations
Legal or regulatory requirements
Accounting treatment of liability and contractual agreement.13
17. 何謂政府與民間合夥? Public-Private Partnership
The sharing of risks, management of works, and burden of financing between the public sector and the private sector. 政府公共投資民間投資計畫政府與民間合夥17BOT 廖咸興
23. Common Misconceptions on PJFPJF is a means to financing projects that cannot be financed on a conventional basis
Lenders do not require a high level of equity investment from project sponsors
Project loans are 100% secured on the assets of the project
The technical and economic performance of the project will be measured objectively 23
24. Common Misconceptions on PJFThe risk of project failure is shared equally by the lenders and the project sponsors
Lenders assume political risks in PJF24
41. 營建合約工程總包商 :TML 公司A.Target works 1.Tunnels & underground structures 2.about 50% of the construction contract price 3.on a cost-plus basis
41
42. Text book p292:TML would pay 30 percent of the cost overrun, up to a ceiling equal to 6 percent of the target price
set x = actual cost
(x - 1) * 0.3 =0.06 x = 1.242
43. 營建合約(續)B.The lump-sum works 1.場站、固定設備與機電設施 2.on a lump-sum basis
C.The procurement items 1.locomotives & shuttles 2.TML subcontract for these items,but Eurotunnel pay the subcontractors directly 3.on a cost-plus basis 4.TML 的利潤為採購費用總金額的12%43
46. How the breakthrough happened法國的TBM停在預定的位置
英國的TBM作少許的轉向最後停在法國TBM的下方
藉小型的掘削機(heading)或是人工挖掘出一條2公尺高、1公尺寬的施工隧道
英國的TBM被留在該處隨後並被灌上混凝土,法國的TBM則被拆解運送回去
最後的連結是由英國端用巨臂掘削機(roadheader)配合NATM工法所完成
46
47. 可行性分析—經濟可行性市場的競爭優勢
收入來源
market Study
Concluded that the Eurotunnel System was economically feasible(discussed below)47
49. 收入來源Shuttle fares(assumed at the opening to match the then-prevailing fares for Dover-Calais)
railway charges and tolls
ancillary revenues-- catering, duty-free sales, cables
49
56. Raw Material Risk物料提供之風險來源
-critical supplies有短缺或價格上漲所造成之損失
物料提供之風險處理方式
-工程中不同工項之訂約方式
-target works
-procurement works 成本+利潤(12%)
-lump-sum works 總價合約
56
57. Raw Material Risk依工程項目不同之風險分攤方式
(箭頭方向代表承擔單位)57
64. Historical Perspective13th Century---Devon silver Mines
A case of “production payment loan”
(1969-1977) Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS): costs--US$7.7 billion
(1986-1994) Eurotunnel project
(英鎊) 4.8 billion --->10.5 billion
US$ 7.3 billion--->16 billion
(1988-1997) Hibernia Oil field: US$4.1 bil.64
65. Historical Perspective(1998-?)TwHSR:約US$13.6 bil. (NT$400B)
(1978)US: Impact of PURPA (Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act
Local electric utility company are required to purchase all the electric output of qualified independent power producers under long-term contracts.
The purchase price for the electricity must equal the electric utility’s “avoided cost”(marginal cost) of generating electricity.65
66. Historical PerspectiveInnovations for Project financing: from natural resource projects to manufacturing facility and Infrastructure projects
Manufacturing: the case of Bev-Pak Inc.
Infrastructure: public-private partnership to finance Generating Stations, transportation facility, and others. 66
67. Requirements for Project FinancingProject will be placed into service
Technical Feasibility: independent expert’s opinion
Operations -->economic viable undertaking
Economic Viability
market demand, products’ price
cost escalation,delay, production level, operation cost...
Availability of raw materials and capable mgt.
enough quantities
long-term supply contract (longer than the term of debt) 67
68. Appropriateness of Project FinanceIdeal Candidates
Capable of functioning as independent economic units
Can be completed without undue uncertainty
Worth more than the cost to complete
Factors Considered
Credit requirement---expected profitability & credit support
Tax implications
Impacts on the sponsors’ existing debt obligations
Legal or regulatory requirements
Accounting treatment of liability and contractual agreement.68
69. Causes for Project FailuresDelay in completion
Capital overrun
Technical failure
Financial failure of the contractor
Government interference
Uninsured casualty losses
Increased Price or shortage of raw materials 69
70. Causes for Project FailuresTechnical obsolescence of the plant
Loss of competitive position in the marketplace
Expropriation
Poor management
Overly optimistic appraisals of the value of the pledged security, such as the oil or gas reserves
Financial insolvency of the host government70
71. Common Misconceptions on PJFPJF is a means to financing projects that cannot be financed on a conventional basis
Lenders do not require a high level of equity investment from project sponsors
Project loans are 100% secured on the assets of the project
The technical and economic performance of the project will be measured objectively 71
72. Common Misconceptions on PJFThe risk of project failure is shared equally by the lenders and the project sponsors
Lenders assume political risks in PJF72