The document discusses the financial viability of Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) road projects in India. It provides background on public-private partnerships and the BOT model for financing infrastructure projects. A case study is presented analyzing the financials of a hypothetical 6km BOT road project using tools like net present value, internal rate of return, payback period, and modified internal rate of return. The analysis shows projections for traffic volume, toll fee schedules, and calculates the project's cash flows and internal rate of return of 15%.
2. Financial Viability of Bot Road Projects In India
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 383 editor@iaeme.com
to the material parts of transport and open utility systems, similar to gas, water and power. At this
point, the term has augmented to grasp all parts of open administrations, oversaw by both the
general population and private area1.
1.1. SCENARIO OF INDIAN INFRASTRUCTURE
India has emerged as the largest PPP market in the world with over 900 projects in various stages
of improvement as per the recent budget. PPPs have delivered some of the iconic infrastructure like
airports, ports and highways which are seen as models for expansion globally. An institution to
provide support to mainstreaming PPPs called 3P India will be set up with a corpus of 500 crores
shortly2
.
Figure 1 Sector wise PPP projects in India
2. PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
An open private organization can be depicted as a co-operation between the general population and
the private segment, in which the administration and the private segment do a project together on
the premise of a concurred division of undertakings and dangers, every gathering holding its own
particular personality and obligations. The enthusiasm for PPPs is developing, prominently because
of the development in the interest for infrastructure, restricted open assets to meet present and
future needs and acknowledgment for the private segment in the procurement of infrastructure. The
basic guideline behind PPPs is that, in spite of the fact maybe that general society area ought to be
in charge of the conveyance of a specific administration, it doesn't need to be in charge of really
giving the administration or to undertaking the venture themselves. Along these lines, all on-screen
characters of an open private association can focus on doing what they are prone to do best. Real
open infrastructural projects have dependably been embraced by the private segment under
contract. The significant contrast between this ordinary acquirement model and open private
organizations is the way that the private area can be viewed as an undeniable player.
Public private partnerships can take many forms, from simple commercialization to full
privatization, but in general PPP's can be considered as long term agreements between the public
and the private sector to provide and operate transport infrastructure and / or service3
.
PPP arrangements display three essential characteristics:
53
20
8
7
7
2
1 1
1
Sales
Roads Urban development
Ports Power
Tourism Education
Health care Airports
Railways
3. T. Ravi Teja and B.G.Rahul
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 384 editor@iaeme.com
• A significant level of responsibility and risk that is transferred from the public sector to the private
sector.
• Contractual arrangements are built around performance-based outcomes, rather than work
specifications.
• Long-term contractual arrangements.
• The financing of public infrastructure development off-the-book of governments, which might
include tapping into new sources of project revenues to secure project financing.
• The imposition of real tolls or other fees to finance the project
3. BUILD OPERATE AND TRANSFER FINANCIAL MODEL
Starting late, a creating design ascended among governments in various countries to demand
wanders for open projects from the private fragment. With BOT, the private portion plots,
supports, creates and works the workplace and at last, after a predefined concession period, the
ownership is traded to the organization. Along these lines, BOT can be seen as a making strategy
for infrastructure projects by using private movement and financing. Such infrastructure projects
fuse a wide bunch of open workplaces with the fundamental ability to serve open needs, to give
social organizations and development monetary activity in the private territory. The most broadly
perceived delineations are avenues, platforms, water and sewer systems, plane terminals, ports and
open structures4
.
3.1. DEFINITION
Build Operate Transfer is a major startup business venture where private organizations undertake
expansion and operation of a facility normally done by the government. The execution of the
private sector involvement occurs at the return of the ownership of the facility to the government
after a fixed concession period, usually 25 to 40 years.
4. SOURCES OF FINANCING
A Public Private Partnership project will include financing from different sources, in some blend of
value and obligation. The proportions of these diverse commitments will rely on upon
arrangements between the moneylenders and the shareholders. This segment takes a gander at the
principle wellsprings of financing and the assention in the financing bewilder that represents the
relationship between the distinctive speculators, the bury loan boss understanding5.
• Equity contributions
• Debt contributions
• Bank guarantees/ letter of credit/ performance guarantees
• Bond/ capital markets financing
• Mezzanine/ subordinated contributions
• Inter creditor agreement
4.1. PARAMETERS REQUIRED IN FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF BOT PROEJCTS
• Financial Closure
• Wholesale Price Index (WPI)
• Cash flow
• Discount rate
4. Financial Viability of Bot Road Projects In India
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 385 editor@iaeme.com
• Reinvestment rate
• Escrow account
5. CASE STUDY
This deals with a case study which has been adopted to understand the financial evaluation of a
BOT road project using various tools which are discussed subsequently, shown in Tables.1,2,3,4,5.
Table 1 Details of the case study
Contract Price 640 Crores
Year Of Commencement 2015
Year Of Completion 2018
Concession Period 30 Years
End Of Concession Period 2044
Length Of Road 6 Km
Table 2 Traffic volume projection
Traffic Volume Projection
Total Car Bus LGV Truck MAV
35 7.7 4.9 3.85 10.15 8.4
36.75 8.085 5.145 4.0425 10.6575 8.82
38.5875 8.48925 5.40225 4.244625 11.19038 9.261
40.51688 8.913713 5.672363 4.456856 11.74989 9.72405
42.54272 9.359398 5.955981 4.679699 12.33739 10.21025
44.66985 9.827368 6.25378 4.913684 12.95426 10.72077
46.90335 10.31874 6.566496 5.159368 13.60197 11.2568
49.24851 10.83467 6.894792 5.417337 14.28207 11.81964
51.71094 11.37641 7.239523 5.688203 14099617 12.41063
54.29649 11.94523 7.601508 5.972614 15.74598 13.03116
57.01131 12.54249 7.981584 6.271244 16.53328 13.68271
59.86188 13.16961 8.380663 6.584807 17.35994 14.36685
62.85497 13.82809 8.799696 6.914047 18.22794 15.08519
65.99772 14.5195 9.239681 7.259749 19.13934 15.83945
69.29761 15.24547 10.18675 7.622737 20.09631 16.63143
72.76249 16.00775 10.69609 8.003873 21.10112 17.463
76.40061 16.80813 11.23089 8.404067 22.12618 18.33615
80.22064 17.64854 11.79243 8.824271 23.26399 19.25295
84.23167 18.53097 12.36206 9.265484 24.42719 20.156
88.44326 19.45752 12.38206 9.728758 25.64854 21.22638
92.86542 20.43039 13.00116 10.2152 26.93097 22.2877
97.50869 21.45191 13.65122 10.72596 28.27752 23.40209
102.3841 22.52451 14.33378 11.26225 29.6914 24.57219
107.5033 23.65073 15.05047 11.82537 31.17597 25.8008
112.8785 24.83327 15.80299 12.41663 32.73476 27.09084
118.5224 26.07493 16.59314 13.03747 34.3715 28.44538
124.4485 27.37868 17.4228 13.68934 36.09008 29.86765
7. T. Ravi Teja and B.G.Rahul
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 388 editor@iaeme.com
SCHEDULE OF USER FEES
TRAFFIC VOLUME in
lakhs
CASH INFLOW
Car, jeep,
van
Bus LGV Truck MAV Total Car Bus LGV Truck MAV CAR BUS LGV TRUCK MAV
Total cash inflow(in
lakhs)
Cumulative inflow
13 2030 62.95425292 125.909 176.272 302.18 352.5438164 62.855 13.8281 8.7997 6.91405 18.2279 15.0852 870.537 1107.96 1218.75 5508.13 5318.1916 14023.56465 95535.24113
14 2031 67.99059315 135.981 190.374 326.355 380.7473217 65.9977 14.5195 9.23968 7.25975 19.1393 15.8395 987.189 1256.42 1382.07 6246.22 6030.8292 15902.72231 111437.9634
15 2032 73.42984061 146.86 205.604 352.463 411.2071074 69.2976 15.2455 9.70166 7.62274 20.0963 16.6314 1119.47 1424.78 1567.26 7083.21 6838.9603 18033.6871 129471.6505
16 2033 79.30422785 158.608 222.052 380.66 444.103676 72.7625 16.0077 10.1867 8.00387 21.1011 17.463 1269.48 1615.7 1777.27 8032.36 7755.381 20450.20117 149921.8517
17 2034 85.64856608 171.297 239.816 411.113 479.6319701 76.4006 16.8081 10.6961 8.40407 22.1562 18.3361 1439.59 1832.21 2015.43 9108.7 8794.6021 23190.52813 173112.3798
18 2035 92.50045137 185.001 259.001 444.002 518.0025277 80.2206 17.6485 11.2309 8.82427 23.264 19.253 1632.5 2077.72 2285.5 10329.3 9973.0788 26298.0589 199410.4387
19 2036 99.90048748 199.801 279.721 479.522 559.4427299 84.2317 18.531 11.7924 9.26548 24.4272 20.2156 1851.25 2356.14 2591.75 11713.4 11309.471 29821.99879 229232.4375
20 2037 107.8925265 215.785 302.099 517.884 604.1981483 88.4433 19.4575 12.3821 9.72876 25.6485 21.2264 2099.32 2671.86 2939.05 13283 12824.94 33818.14663 263050.5842
21 2038 116.5239286 233.048 326.267 559.315 652.5340001 92.8654 20.4304 13.0012 10.2152 26.931 22.2877 2380.63 3029.89 3332.88 15062.9 14543.483 38349.77828 301400.3624
22 2039 125.8458429 251.692 352.368 604.06 704.7367202 97.5087 21.4519 13.6512 10.726 28.2775 23.4021 2699.63 3435.9 3779.49 17081.3 16492.309 43488.64857 344889.011
23 2040 135.9135103 271.827 380.558 652.385 761.1156578 102.384 22.5245 14.3338 11.2623 29.6914 24.5722 3061.38 3896.31 4285.94 19370.2 18702.279 49316.12747 394205.1385
24 2041 146.7865911 293.573 411.002 704.576 822.0049104 107.503 23.6507 15.0505 11.8254 31.176 25.8008 3471.61 4418.41 4860.25 21965.8 21208.384 55924.48856 450129.627
25 2042 158.5295184 317.059 443.883 760.942 887.7653032 112.878 24.8333 15.803 12.4166 32.7348 27.0908 3936.81 5010.48 5511.53 24909.2 24050.307 63418.37002 513547.997
26 2043 171.2118799 342.424 479.393 821.817 958.7865275 118.522 26.0749 16.5931 13.0375 34.3715 28.4454 4464.34 5681.89 6250.07 28247.1 27273.049 71916.4316 585464.4287
27 2044 184.9088303 369.818 517.745 887.562 1035.48945 124.449 27.3787 17.4228 13.6893 36.0901 29.8677 5062.56 6443.26 7087.58 32032.2 30927.637 81553.23344 667017.6621
5.1. DETAILS OF THE CASE STUDY
The case of a BOT road project has been adopted. The details of the case are given below. The user
fee for the BOT road project is assumed to increase by 8% every year from 2018. The initial user
fee (first year) amount was taken according to the NHAI norms. The projections are as follows:
5.2. NET PRESENT VALUE (NPV)
In finance, the net present value (NPV) or net present worth (NPW) is defined as the sum of the
present values (PVs) of incoming and outgoing cash flows over a period of time. Incoming and
outgoing cash flows can also be described as benefit and cost cash flows, respectively.
5.3. INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN (IRR)
The syntax for IRR on Excel is =IRR (values, [guess])
The IRR function syntax has the following arguments:
• Values Required. An array or a reference to cells that contain numbers for which you want to
calculate the internal rate of return.
• Guess Optional. A number that you guess is close to the result of IRR.
• The IRR hence calculated is found to be 15%.
5.4. PAYBACK AND DISCOUNTED PAYBACK
In capital budgeting refers to the period of time required to recoup the funds expended in an
investment, or to reach the break-even point. The time value of money is not taken into account.
8. Financial Viability of Bot Road Projects In India
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 389 editor@iaeme.com
Payback period intuitively measures how long something takes to "pay for itself." All else being
equal, shorter payback periods are preferable to longer payback periods. The discounted payback
period is the amount of time that it takes to cover the cost of a project, by adding positive
discounted cash flow coming from the profits of the project. The advantage of using the
discounted payback period over the payback period is that it takes into account time value of
money6.
5.5. MODIFIED INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN (MIRR)
While the internal rate of return (IRR) assumes the cash flows from a project are reinvested at the
IRR, the modified IRR assumes that positive cash flows are reinvested at the film’s cost of capital,
and the initial outlays are financed at the firm’s financing cost. Therefore MIRR more accurately
reflects the cost and profitability of a project[6].
• Values must contain at least one positive value and one negative value to calculate the modified
internal rate of return.
• Finance_rate Required. The interest rate you pay on the money used in the cash flows which is
assumed as 7.6% in this Case.
• Reinvest_rate Required. The interest rate you receive on the cash flows as you reinvest them is
assumed as 15% in this case.
The MIRR thus calculated is 15%
6. CONCLUSION
The financial viability of the BOT road project is thus determined by various tools. The following
results were obtained
RESULTS OF FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Net present value >0 Project is accepted
IRR 15%
Payback period May 2016
Discounted payback period September 2020
MIRR 15%
REFERENCES
[1] Chakraborty S S, Krishna M. Highway privatization financing strategies and policy issues.
Procedings Seminar on PrivateParticipation in High way level. Indian Roads Congress,
NewDelhi. 1995; 2, 25-39.
[2] Dias A, Ioannou P G. Debt capacity and optimal capital structure for privately financed
infrastructure projects. J.Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt. 1995; 121(4), 404–414.
[3] Dias A, Ioannou P G. Company and project evaluation model for privately promoted
infrastructure projects. J.Constr.Hertz. 1996; 42(1), 90–106.
[4] Lam W H K, Tam M L. Risk analysis of traffic and revenue forecasts for road investment
projects. J. Infrastruct. Sys. 1998; 4(1), 19–27.
[5] Malini E. Evaluation of policy parameters, uncertainties and risks in build, operate and transfer
(BOT) projects for transport infrastructure development, PhD thesis, Indian Institute of Science,
Bangalore, India 1996.
[6] Malini, E. Evaluation of financial viability of BOT transports infrastructure projects. J. Indian
Rd. Congr. 1997; 58(1), 87–123.