ACC91210

 Finance  for  Managers  (Online)  Study  Period  3,  2019  Assessment  3  

Due  date:  27  May  2019,  11PM  AEST  

This  assignment  has  a  50%  weighting  in  your  overall  mark  for  this  unit  and  focuses  on  content  from  
Week  3,4,5  and  6.  It  will  be  marked  out  of  80.  Marks  will  be  allocated  as  indicated  in  the  rubric  
below.  Your  total  assignment  submission  should  not  exceed  3,500  words,  excluding  cover  sheet  and  
reference  list.  

Overall,  the  assignment  requires  you  to  conduct  a  risk  and  return  analysis  using  historical  market  
data.  Prepare  your  data  prior  to  performing  the  risk  and  return  calculations:  

• Choose  one  company  from  Table  1  below.  This  company  will  be  your  case  company  for  this  
assessment  and  Task  2.  

Table  1:  Monthly  Data  for  Case  Companies  

Month   Boral  (BLD)   CSL  (CSL)   Cochlear  (COH)  JB  HiFi  (JBH)   Bega  Cheese  (BGA)  
Monthly  returns  Monthly  returns  Monthly  returns   Monthly  returns  Monthly  returns  
Oct-­‐18  
Nov-­‐18  -­‐9.09%   -­‐5.64%   -­‐4.67%   0.74%   -­‐0.67%  
Dec-­‐18   -­‐3.14%   4.37%   2.53%   -­‐4.45%   -­‐16.86%  
Jan-­‐19   0.20%   5.16%   11.44%   1.04%   2.84%  
Feb-­‐19   0.61%   -­‐0.49%   -­‐11.85%   1.07%   -­‐6.11%  
Mar-­‐19  -­‐5.22%   1.23%   2.54%   14.98%   -­‐2.84%  

Source:  Returns  calculated  from  historical  share  prices  and  dividends  from  Morningstar  DatAnalysis  Premium.  
• For  completion  of  the  assessment  tasks,  you  will  also  need  the  following  data  (see  Table  2  below):  

Table  2:  Monthly  Data  for  Reference  Company  and  Market  Index  

Month   Reference  Company  All  Ords  Total  Returns  

Monthly  returns   Month  Closing  Index  
Oct-­‐18   59483.09  
Nov-­‐18  14.00%   58149.20  
Dec-­‐18   8.00%   57887.91  
Jan-­‐19   1.00%   60199.50  
Feb-­‐19   -­‐2.00%   63843.82  
Mar-­‐19  3.00%   64292.24  

Source:  Hypothetical  reference  company  data.  All  Ordinaries  Accumulated  Index  data  from  S&P  
https://au.spindices.com/indices/equity/all-­‐ordinaries.  

• Note:  You  will  NOT  submit  a  spreadsheet,  but  a  written  analysis  (as  Word  file)  for  this  assessment.  

Assessment  3:  Case  Study  I  ACC91210  SP3  2019  

Task  1  –  1500  words  in  total.  

1.   a)    Using  the  data  above,  calculate:  

(1)  the  historical  monthly  rates  of  return  for  the  market  index  only  (monthly  rates  of  return  
for  the  companies  are  given);  and  

(2)  the  historical  average  rate  of  return  and  standard  deviation  of  returns  for:  i)  your  case  
company;  
ii)  the  reference  company;  
iii)  the  market  index;  and  

iv)  an  equally  weighted  portfolio  of  your  case  company  and  the  reference  company.  

(7.5  marks)  

2.   b)    Calculate  the  expected  returns  and  portfolio  beta  as  follows:  

(1)  Use  CAPM  to  estimate  the  expected  return  for  the  shares  of:  1)  your  case  company;  and  
2)  the  reference  company  as  at  17  May  2019.  To  do  this,  use  the  yield  to  maturity  on  that  
date  of  a  10-­‐year  Australian  Government  bond  as  a  proxy  for  the  risk-­‐free  rate,  assume  the  
market  risk  premium  is  6.5%  and  use  your  chosen  case  company’s  current  beta  (see  the  unit  
learning  resources  and  web  links  for  example  data  sources).  Assume  that  the  reference  
company  has  a  negative  beta  of  -­‐0.30.  

(2)  Using  the  data  from  part  b(1),  calculate  the  portfolio  expected  return  and  beta,  again  
assuming  equal  weights  for  your  case  company  and  the  reference  company.  

(5.5  marks)  

3.   c)    Drawing  on  expectations  from  theory  and  incorporating  the  overall  context  of  your  
chosen  company,  discuss  the  risk  and  return  measures  you  have  calculated.  (12  marks)  

Note:  The  remaining  five  (5)  marks  are  allocated  to  presentation  and  written  expression  of  the  
analysis  (see  the  rubric  below).  

 
Task  2:  Capital  Structure  and  Payout  Policy  Analysis  (700  words)  

For  this  task,  you  are  required  to  describe  and  evaluate  the  capital  structure  and  payout  policies  of  
your  case  study  company  (chosen  for  Task  1).  

For  each  policy  area,  use  the  following  broad  approach:  

1.   Describe  the  policy  (which  may  or  may  not  be  explicit)  based  on  current  and  historical  data.    
2.   Evaluate  the  policy,  drawing  on  theory  and  practical  considerations  covered  in  the  unit  and    

applied  to  the  company’s  current  characteristics  and  situation.    

Your  analysis  will  be  mostly  qualitative  but  some  basic  quantitative  measures  should  be  used  in  
describing  the  company’s  policies.  

Marks  for  this  task  will  be  awarded  as  per  the  Task  1  rubric  (see  below).  

Task  3:  Capital  Budgeting  Task  (1300  words)    

Task  3  appendix  showing  cash  flow  details  and  an  assignment  reference  list

This  task  is  based  on  the  case  information  below.  The  company  and  financial  data  are  
fictional  but  the  background  context  is  not.  Companies  increasingly  face  challenges  and  
opportunities  to  run  more  environmentally  and  socially  responsible  whilst  growing  value  for  
shareholders.    
 
Case  Background  
 
OnePack  Limited  operates  in  the  packaged  food  industry,  selling  mainly  stocks,  sauces,  
snacks,  drink  powers  and  salad  dressing.  All  its  products  are  sold  in  plastic  packaging  and  a  
significant  proportion  in  small  multi-­‐layer  sachets  (or  pouches)  in  Asian  countries.    
 
Managers  at  OnePack  are  acutely  aware  of  the  increase  in  world  plastic  production  and  the  
environmental  impact  of  plastic  waste  ending  up  in  landfills,  rivers  and  oceans.  For  example,    
Researchers  estimate  that  8  milillon  metric  tons  of  plastic  entered  the  ocean  in  2010  and  
this  annual  amount  is  predicted  to  more  than  double  by  2025  with  major  increases  in  South  Asia.    

To  help  develop  a  closed-­‐loop  system  related  to  the  company’s  products,  OnePack  has  invested  $25  
million  in  soft  plastic  recycling  research,  development  and  pilot  testing.  The  outcome  is  a  new  and  
efficient  method  for  recycling  sachet  waste.  In  fact,  their  recycling  method  is  more  energy  efficient  
than  producing  virgin  sachet  plastic,  reducing  energy  usage  by  83%.  The  output  plastic  is  of  such  high  
quality  it  can  be  used  in  food  grade  packaging  applications.  Currently,  no  other  recycling  method  in  
the  market  can  achieve  this.  

The  company  now  faces  a  decision:  should  it  build  a  commercial  scale  plant  and  produce  recycled  
sachet  plastic  for  use  in  packaging  its  own  products?  The  CEO  has  asked  you  to  undertake  a  financial  
analysis  of  the  options  and  present  your  recommendations  in  a  memo.  

Financial  projections  for  recycling  sachet  waste  

Moving  to  full  recycling  production  requires  an  upfront  investment  in  plant  and  equipment  of  $30  
million,  which  will  be  depreciated  to  a  zero  book  value  on  a  straight-­‐line  basis  over  6  years.  Financing  
for  the  plant  and  equipment  will  be  via  a  new  debt  issue,  resulting  in  interest  costs  of  $1.2  million  
payable  at  the  end  of  each  year.  The  plant  will  provide  sufficient  capacity  to  meet  the  company’s  
forecast  plastic  packaging  needs  over  the  period  of  its  life.  After  this,  it  is  expected  that  the  plant  will  
be  updated  using  new  technology  but  some  of  the  older  equipment  will  be  sold  to  metal  recyclers  
for  $1.5  million.  

The  plan  is  to  replace  use  of  virgin  plastic  in  packaging  with  the  new  recycling  plant’s  output.  The  
upcoming  year  forecast  of  total  variable  plastic  packaging  costs  based  on  virgin  plastic  is  $27  million  
and  this  is  expected  to  grow  by  2%  per  year  after  that.  Replacing  externally-­‐sourced  virgin  plastic  
with  internally-­‐produced  recycled  plastic  is  expected  to  result  in  some  reduced  variable  packaging  
costs.  First,  the  energy  efficiency  of  the  recycling  method  will  reduce  costs  compared  to  virgin  plastic  
production  and  this  is  estimated  to  decrease  the  company’s  annual  forecast  packaging  costs  by  10%.  
Second,  a  virgin  plastic  supplier  margin  equivalent  to  8%  of  annual  forecast  packaging  costs  will  be  
avoided  but  this  benefit  is  expected  to  be  offset  by  a  new  cost  associated  with  paying  a  partner  to  
supply  plastic  waste  raw  material  for  recycling.  

In  addition  to  benefits  related  to  cost  savings,  the  company’s  sales  and  marketing  executives  have  
argued  that  sales  revenue  of  the  company’s  products  will  increase  due  to  consumer  demand  for  
environmentally  responsible  products.  Excluding  this  potential  benefit,  the  company’s  forecast  sales  
revenue  for  the  coming  year  is  $440  million  and  this  is  expected  to  grow  by  2%  each  year  after  that.  
The  executives  have  estimated  that  with  an  additional  $13  million  in  marketing  costs  in  the  first  year  
of  the  project  to  inform  the  public  of  the  company’s  recycled  packaging,  annual  sales  revenue  will  be  
2.5%  higher  than  existing  forecasts  for  the  life  of  the  project.  

An  additional  $4  million  annually  in  administrative  and  general  expenses  directly  related  to  the  
project  (excluding  depreciation)  will  be  incurred.  Furthermore,  an  upfront  additional  investment  will  
be  required  in  net  working  capital.  This  will  be  equal  to  1%  of  the  total  first  year  sales  revenue  
forecast  under  the  project  assumptions  and  will  be  fully  recovered  in  the  last  year  of  the  project.  
Apart  from  these  changes,  the  general  consensus  of  the  champions  of  the  project  is  that  all  other  
costs  will  be  equivalent  to  existing  forecasts.  

Other  case  information:  

OnePack  has  a  9%  weighted  average  cost  of  capital  and  is  subject  to  a  30%  tax  rate  on  its  income.  

Required:  

Prepare  a  financial  analysis  of  the  proposed  project  and  present  it  to  OnePack’s  CEO  in  the  form  of  a  
memo.  

In  the  memo,  briefly  explain  and  justify  your  chosen  methods,  inputs  and  any  assumptions  made,  
summarise  your  findings  and  present  recommendations  on  the  proposed  project.  Ensure  you  not  
only  address  base  case  cash  flows  but  also  analyse  potential  uncertainty.  Recommendations  should  
address  the  decision  to  be  made,  along  with  any  further  follow  up  or  other  matters  the  company  
should  consider  prior  to  making  a  final  decision.  

Include  an  appendix  to  the  memo  that  includes  details  of  your  base  case  figures.  Within  the  memo  
body,  you  may  provide  tables  and  figures  that  assist  decision  makers  understand  your  methods,  
findings  and  their  implications  for  decision  making  but  ensure  the  tables  and  figures  are  discussed  
and/or  explained.  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Marking  Rubrics  
 
Marking  criteria  for  calculations  TOTAL:  13  marks  
MARKING  CRITERIA  –  
Excellent   Very  Good   Good   Satisfactory   Poor  
Task  1  
Correct  input  
Accurate  calculation  
data  used.   Mostly  correct   Correct  input   Mostly  correct  
of  historical  returns   Mostly  
Technique  and   input  data.   data.  Mostly   input  data.  Mostly  
and  standard   incorrect  data  
all  final   Correct   correct   correct  
deviation  for  two   and  
calculated   techniques  and   techniques  and   techniques  and  
companies,  index   techniques.  (0  
figures  are   calculations.  (6   calculations.  (5   calculations.  (4  
and  portfolio  (7.5   to  3  marks)  
correct  (7.5   marks)   marks).   marks).  
marks)  
marks)  
Correct  input  
Accurate  calculation  
data  used.   Mostly  correct   Correct  input   Mostly  correct  
of  expected  returns   Mostly  
Technique  and   input  data.   data.  Mostly   input  data.  Mostly  
for  two  companies   incorrect  data  
all  final   Correct   correct   correct  
and  portfolio  and   and  
calculated   techniques  and   techniques  and   techniques  and  
accurate  calculation   techniques.  (0  
figures  are   calculations.  (4.5   calculations.  (3.5   calculations.  (3  
of  portfolio  beta  (5.5   to  2  marks)  
correct  (5.5   marks)   marks).   marks).  
marks)  
marks)  
Marking  criteria  for  discussion  &  structural  component  TOTAL:  17  marks  
MARKING  
CRITERIA  –   Excellent   Very  Good   Good   Satisfactory   Poor  
Task  1
Accurately  and   Accurately   Accurately  
Accurately  
comprehensively   interprets  nearly   interprets  most  
interprets  most  
interprets  all   all  calculated  risk   calculated  risk  
calculated  risk  
calculated  risk  and   and  return   and  return   While  an  
and  return  
return  measures.   measures.   measures.   explanation  of  
measures.  
Correctly  compares   Correctly   Correctly   technical  terms  
Correctly  
appropriate   compares   compares   may  have  been  
compares  some  
Insightful  and   measures  and   appropriate   appropriate   attempted,  there  
appropriate  
relevant   explains  differences,   measures  and   measures  and   is  little  or  no  
measures  and  
discussion  of   drawing  on  relevant   explains   explains  some   accurate  
explains  some  
risk  and  return   theory.  Accurately   differences,   differences,   interpretation  or  
differences.  
demonstrated   weaves  relevant   drawing  on   drawing  on   comparison  of  
Tables  or  graphs,  
in  the   context  (e.g.   relevant  theory.   relevant  theory.   risk  and  return  
if  used,  may  not  
quantitative   company  industry,   Weaves  relevant   Incorporates   measures.  
be  effective  or  
analysis  (12   market  conditions)   context  into   some  relevant   Context,  theory  
explained.  Uses  
marks)   into  explanations.   explanations.   context.  Uses   and  explanations  
and  explains  
Uses  tables  or   Uses  tables  or   tables  or  graphs   are  limited,  
some  technical  
graphs  effectively  to   graphs  effectively   but  may  not  be   incorrect  or  
terms.  Context  
enhance  the   to  enhance  the   effective  or   absent.  (0  to  5  
and  theory  are  
discussion.  Uses  and   discussion.  Uses   explained.  Uses   marks)  
limited  or  
explains  relevant   and  explains  most  and  explains  
incorrect  (6  
technical  terms.  (12   relevant  technical   some  technical  
marks)  
marks)   terms.  (10  marks)   terms.  (8  marks)  
Overall  presentation   Overall   Overall   Overall   Overall  
is  well  organised   presentation  is   presentation  is   presentation  is   presentation  is  
Presentation  
and  looks   mostly  well-­‐ mostly  well-­‐ fairly  neat  and   generally  
and  written  
professional.  All   organised  and   organised  and   organised.  Not  all   unprofessional.  
expression  
data  sources  and   professional.  All   neat.  All   necessary  data   Not  all  necessary  
(5  marks)  
other  references  are   necessary  data   necessary  data   sources  are   data  sources  are  
provided  where   sources  and  other  sources  and   provided  or  most   provided  or  most  
 needed  in   references  are   other  references   are  not  in   are  not  in  
appropriate  format   provided,  mostly   are  provided,   appropriate   appropriate  
and  detail.  Use  of   in  appropriate   mostly  in   positions,  format   positions,  format  
language  makes   positions,  format   appropriate   and  detail.  Use  of   and  detail.  Use  of  
meaning   and  detail.  Use  of   positions,  format   language  mostly   language  often  
consistently  clear.   language  makes   and  detail.  Use   makes  meaning   makes  meaning  
There  are  no  or  very   meaning   of  language   clear.  There  are   unclear.  There  
few  grammar,   consistently  clear.  mostly  makes   several  grammar,   may  be  many  
syntax  and  spelling   There  are  very   meaning  clear.   syntax  and   grammar,  syntax  
errors.  (5  marks)   few  grammar,   There  may  be   spelling  errors.   and  spelling  
syntax  and   several  grammar,  (2.5  marks)   errors.  (0  to  2  
spelling  errors.  (4   syntax  and   marks)  
marks)   spelling  errors.  
(3.5  marks)  
TASK  2  
MARKING   Excellent   Very  Good   Good   Satisfactory   Poor  
CRITERIA  
The  company’s  
The  company’s  
The  company’s   capital  structure  
capital  structure  
capital  structure  and   The  company’s   and  payout  
and  payout  
payout  policies  are   capital  structure  
policies  are  
policies  are  well  
succinctly  and  well   and  payout   described,  payout  
described,  payout  
described,  payout   policies  are   policy  in  terms  of  
policy  in  terms  of  
policy  in  terms  of   described,   one  of  level,  form  
level,  form  and  
level,  form  and   payout  policy  in  
and  stability,  
stability.  The   The  description  is  
stability.  The   terms  of  at  least  
supported  by  
description  is   missing  or  
description  is   two  of  level,  some  relevant  
mostly  supported   extremely  limited  
Description  of   directly  supported   form  and   qualitative  
by  relevant   or  unsupported  
capital   by  relevant  current   stability.  The   information  and  
current  and   by  relevant  and  
structure  and   and  historical   description  is   quantitative  
historical   accurate  data  or  
payout  policies  qualitative   supported  by   measures  that  are  
qualitative   contains  mostly  
(7  marks)   information  (e.g.   some  relevant   mostly  correctly  
information  and   incorrect  
quotes  from   qualitative   interpreted.  If  
quantitative   interpretations.  (0  
company  sources)   information  and   more  than  one  
measures  that  are   to  3  marks)  
and  quantitative   quantitative   aspect  of  payout  
clearly  and  
measures  that  are   measures  that   policy  is  
concisely  
clearly  and  concisely   are  mostly   described,  it  is  
presented  (tables,  
presented  (tables,   correctly   mostly  incorrectly  
charts)  and  
charts)  and  correctly   interpreted.  (5   interpreted  or  
correctly  
interpreted.  (7   marks)   without  adequate  
interpreted.  (6  
marks)   supporting  data  
marks)  
(4  marks)  
Several  relevant   Several  relevant   At  least  two   One  relevant  
factors  in  setting  a   factors  in  setting   relevant  factors   factor  in  setting  a   Some  relevant  
target  capital   a  target  capital   in  setting  a   target  capital   factors  in  setting  
structure  have  been   structure  have   target  capital   structure  has   a  target  capital  
correctly  applied  to   been  correctly   structure  have   been  correctly   structure  may  
Evaluation  of  
the  company's   applied  to  the   been  correctly   applied  to  the   have  been  noted  
capital  
current   company's   applied  to  the   company's   but  application  to  
structure  
characteristics  and   current   company's   current   the  company's  
policy  (6.5  
situation  to  make   characteristics   current   characteristics   context  is  lacking,  
marks)  
appropriate  and   and  situation  to   characteristics   and  situation  to   not  clearly  
well  explained   make  appropriate   and  situation  to   make  an   explained  or  
judgements  on  its   and  well   make   appropriate   incorrect.  (0  to  
capital  structure.   explained   appropriate  and   judgement  on  its   2.5  marks)  
You  have   judgements  on  its   well  explained   capital  structure.  
 synthesised  all  your   capital  structure.   judgements  on   Some  other  
judgements  to  make   You  have   its  capital   relevant  factors  
an  overall   synthesised  all   structure  and  an   have  been  noted  
evaluation  of  the   your  judgements   overall   but  not  correctly  
policy.  It  is  clear  that  to  make  an   evaluation  is   applied  or  
you  recognise  the   overall  evaluation   attempted.  (4.5   explained  in  the  
complexities  and   of  the  policy.  (5.5   marks)   context  of  the  
uncertainties  in  this   marks)   company.  (3.5  
evaluation  task.  (6.5   marks)  
marks)  
You  have  evaluated   You  have   You  have  
level,  form  and   evaluated  the   evaluated  the  
You  have  
stability  of  the   company's  payout   company's  payout  
evaluated  the  
company's  payout   policy  in  terms  of   policy  in  terms  of  
company's  
policy.  Several   at  least  two  of   at  least  one  of  
payout  policy  in  
relevant  factors  in   level,  form  and   level,  form  and  
terms  of  at  least  
setting  payout  policy  stability.  Several   stability.  One  
two  of  level,  
have  been  correctly   relevant  factors  in   relevant  factor  in   Some  relevant  
form  and  
applied  to  the   setting  payout   setting  payout   factors  in  setting  
stability.  At  least  
company's  current   policy  have  been   policy  has  been   a  payout  policy  
two  relevant  
characteristics  and   correctly  applied   correctly  applied   may  have  been  
factors  in  setting  
situation  to  make   to  the  company's   to  the  company's   noted  but  
Evaluation  of   payout  policy  
appropriate  and   current   current   application  to  the  
payout  policy   have  been  
well  explained   characteristics   characteristics   company's  
(6.5  marks)   correctly  applied  
judgements  on  its   and  situation  to   and  situation  to   context  is  lacking,  
to  the  company's  
policy.  You  have   make  appropriate   make  appropriate   not  clearly  
current  
synthesised  all  your   and  well   judgement  on  its   explained  or  
characteristics  
judgements  to  make   explained   policy.  Some   incorrect.  (0  to  
and  situation  to  
an  overall   judgements  on  its   other  relevant   2.5  marks)  
make  
evaluation  of  the   policy.  You  have   factors  have  been  
appropriate  and  
policy.  It  is  clear  that  synthesised  all   noted  but  not  
well  explained  
you  recognise  the   your  judgements   correctly  applied  
judgements  on  
complexities  and   to  make  an   or  explained  in  
its  policy.  (4.5  
uncertainties  in  this   overall  evaluation   the  context  of  the  
marks)  
evaluation  task.  (6.5   of  the  policy.  (5.5   company.  (3.5  
marks)   marks)   marks)  

TASK  3  MARKING  
Excellent   Very  Good   Good   Satisfactory   Poor  
CRITERIA  
About  half  the   Less  than  half  the  
All  relevant  base   Most  relevant   relevant  base   relevant  base  
Nearly  all  relevant  
case  cash  flows   base  case  cash   case  cash  flows   case  cash  flows  
base  case  cash  
Accurate   have  been   flows  have  been   have  been   have  been  
flows  have  been  
estimation  of   accurately   accurately   accurately   accurately  
accurately  
relevant  base   incorporated  into   incorporated  into   incorporated   incorporated  into  
incorporated  into  
case  cash  flows   the  analysis  and   the  analysis  and   into  the  analysis   the  analysis  and  
the  analysis  and  
and  decision   net  cash  flows   decision  criteria   and  decision   decision  criteria  
decision  criteria  
criteria  (13   and  decision   are  mostly  correct  criteria  are   may  be  mostly  
are  correct  based  
marks)   criteria  are   based  on  your  net   mostly  correct   incorrect  based  
on  your  net  cash  
correct.  (13   cash  flows.  (9   based  on  your   on  your  net  cash  
flows  (11  marks)  
marks)   marks)   net  cash  flows.  (7  flows.  (0  to  6  
marks)   marks)  
 You  have  not  
analysed  project  
You  have  
You  have   uncertainty  using  
accurately   You  have   You  have  
accurately   appropriate  
analysed  project   analysed  project   analysed  project  
analysed  project   techniques  or  
uncertainty  using   uncertainty  using   uncertainty  using  
uncertainty  using   have  attempted  
appropriate   appropriate   at  least  one  
appropriate   to  use  at  least  
Accurate  and   techniques.  You   techniques  and   appropriate  
techniques  and   one  appropriate  
appropriate   have  shown   mostly  judicious   technique.  Input  
judicious  input   technique  but  
analysis  of   insight  by   input  choices  that   choices  lack  
choices  that  are   with  no  
uncertainty  (7   judicious  input   are  mostly  well-­‐ justification,  are  
mostly  well-­‐ demonstrated  
marks)   choices  that  are   articulated  and   unreasonable  or  
articulated  and   consideration  of  
well-­‐articulated   linked  to  case   the  analysis  is  
linked  to  case   input  choices  in  a  
and  linked  to  case   facts.  The  analysis   not  easy  to  
facts.  The  analysis   hard  to  follow  
facts.  The  analysis   is  easy  to  follow.   follow.  (3.5  
is  easy  to  follow.   analysis  or  there  
is  easy  to  follow.   (4.5  marks)   marks)  
(5.5  marks)   are  major  
(7  marks)  
inaccuracies.  (0  
to  3  marks)  
You  have  
accurately  
interpreted  the  
results  of  your   You  have  
financial  analysis   accurately  
and  made   interpreted  the  
appropriate  and   results  of  your  
You  have  
insightful   financial  analysis   You  have  not  
accurately  
recommendations  and  made   correctly  
interpreted  most  
with  the  basis  of   appropriate   You  have   interpreted  most  
of  the  results  of  
those   recommendations accurately   results  from  your  
your  financial  
recommendations  .   interpreted  some  financial  analysis  
analysis  and  made  
clearly  and   Recommendation of  the  results  of   or  no  
some  appropriate  
concisely   s  go  further  than   your  financial   recommendation
Appropriate   recommendations
explained.   simply  accepting   analysis  and   s  have  been  
interpretation   .  Subtleties  of  
Recommendation or  rejecting  the   made  at  least   made  or  
and   project  analysis  
s  go  further  than   project  by   one  appropriate   recommendation
recommendation and  decision  
simply  accepting   recognising  some   recommendation s  do  not  follow  
s  based  on  the   making  have  
or  rejecting  the   subtleties  of   .  Use  of  language   from  the  results  
project  analysis   generally  not  
project  by   project  decision   mostly  makes   or  interpretation.  
(10  marks)   been  recognised.  
recognising  the   making  and/or   meaning  clear;   Use  of  language  
Use  of  language  
subtleties  of   needed  additional   several  grammar,  mostly  makes  
mostly  makes  
project  decision   analysis  or   syntax  and   meaning  unclear;  
meaning  clear;  
making  and   considerations.   spelling  errors.  (5  many  grammar,  
several  grammar,  
needed  additional  Use  of  language   marks)   syntax  and  
syntax  and  
analysis  or   mostly  makes   spelling  errors.  (0  
spelling  errors.  
considerations.   meaning  clear;  no   to  4  marks)  
(6.5  marks)  
Use  of  language   or  very  few  
makes  meaning   grammar,  syntax  
consistently  clear;   and  spelling  
no  or  very  few   errors.  (8  marks)  
grammar,  syntax  
and  spelling  
errors.  (10  marks)