Victoria Chemicals PLC $($B$)$

$$ These two cases present the capital$-$investment decisions under consideration by executives of a large chemicals firm in January $2008.$

$$ The B case reviews the same project but from one level higher, where the executive faces an either$/$or investment decision between two mutually exclusive projects.

$$ The objective of the two cases is to expose students to a wide range of capital$-$budgeting issues

The B case: an either$/$or decision $-$ The relevance of cash flows from assets that may be separable from the core project $-$ The classic crossover problem, in which project rankings disagree on the basis of net present value $($NPV$)$ and internal rate of return $($IRR$)-$ The assessment of real option value latent in managerial flexibility to change operating technologies $-$ The identification of some classic games or types of human behavior that can be counterproductive in the resource$-$allocation process

$1.$ Is it possible to quantify the value of potentially adding the Japanese technology to the Merseyside project? How, if at all, does this flexibility affect the economic attractiveness of the project?What are the differences in the ways Elizabeth Eustace and

$2.$ Lucy Morris have advocated their respective projects? How might those differences in style have affected the outcome of the decision?