Focus On The A200 180 7b179 160 6 C159 140 5 D139 120 4 F119

A200 180 7b179 160 6 C159 140 5 D139 120 4 F119 0 3focu

A200 180 7b179 160 6 C159 140 5 D139 120 4 F119 0 3focu

A/) B/) C/) D/) F/) Focus Subject well-defined; thesis clear and strong; thoughtful, with some insight and originality; unified, with effective opening and closing Subject fairly well defined; opening and closing consistent Subject fairly well defined; opening and closing consistent Subject less than exact; thesis vague or commonplace Subject ill-defined; thesis uncertain or trivial Organization Plan evident and major points signaled by paragraph divisions and clear transitions Plan clear, with many major points signaled by paragraph divisions and transitions, with perhaps some minor digressions or gaps Plan clear, but perhaps incomplete; some major points signaled by paragraph divisions and transitions; most points logically related; a few minor digressions Plan noticeable but incomplete or must be inferred by the reader; not all major points signaled by paragraph divisions and transitions; some points logically related; some digressions Plan attempted but difficult to infer; haphazard relationships; with transitions often lacking Development Thesis well developed in four or more paragraphs, with appropriate details and examples Thesis adequately explained and fairly well developed in four or more paragraphs, with appropriate details and examples Thesis fairly well explained and developed in three or more paragraphs; some unsupported generalizations or irrelevant details Thesis poorly explained, with frequent unsupported generalizations and redundant expressions or ideas; perhaps some irrelevant details Little development of thesis, with infrequent or irrelevant details; restatement often used Vocabulary Precise, appropriate word choice; perhaps use of figurative language Clear language, usually appropriate word choice; perhaps some figurative language Generally appropriate vocabulary but at times oversimplified Some clear, appropriate word choice, but some confused or inappropriate language or faulty idiom Vague, confused, or inappropriate word choice; clichéd or informal language Sentence Structure Strong control of syntax, with effective use of complex structures Good control of syntax, with occasional errors in complex structures Clear expressions; a few major errors, but overall command of basic sentence structure Some errors in sentence boundaries; narrow range of syntactical choices Tangled or unclear syntax; frequent uncertain sentence boundaries Grammar, Spelling, and Punctuation Correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation; shows evidence of editing With few exceptions, correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation; shows evidence of editing Usually correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation; shows evidence of editing Some misspellings; recurrent grammar and/or punctuation problems Frequent errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation To receive a particular score, an essay must meet or exceed the requirements for each of the six categories.

To receive this score, the essay may not fall below the requirements of any category.

Paper For Above instruction

The process of determining whether a project should be undertaken within an organization's budget framework necessitates a comprehensive financial analysis. One of the most effective and widely accepted methods for such analysis is calculating the Net Present Value (NPV). This metric provides a clear financial indicator of an investment’s profitability by discounting future cash flows to their present value and subtracting the initial investment. In this paper, I will demonstrate how to calculate the NPV for a specific project with given cost and projected payouts over four years, and I will provide a recommendation on whether to proceed based on the result.

The initial step in evaluating the project is understanding its financial parameters. The project requires an upfront investment of $420,000. The annual interest rate, representing the discount rate, is 10%. The expected payouts from the project over four years are as follows: Year 1 - $110,000; Year 2 - $121,000; Year 3 - $133,100; Year 4 - $146,410. These cash flows are to be discounted back to their present value using the formula for NPV:

NPV = (Cash flow in Year t) / (1 + r)^t - Initial Investment

where r is the discount rate (10%, or 0.10), and t is the year.

Applying the formula, we calculate the present value (PV) of each year’s payout:

- Year 1: $110,000 / (1 + 0.10)^1 = $100,000

- Year 2: $121,000 / (1 + 0.10)^2 = $100,000

- Year 3: $133,100 / (1 + 0.10)^3 ≈ $99,000

- Year 4: $146,410 / (1 + 0.10)^4 ≈ $99,690

The total present value of the payouts is the sum of these discounted cash flows:

$100,000 + $100,000 + $99,000 + $99,690 = $398,690

To find the NPV, subtract the initial project cost from this total PV:

NPV = $398,690 - $420,000 = -$21,310

Since the NPV is negative, this indicates the project would reduce value relative to its cost when considering the 10% discount rate. Based on the NPV rule, accepting projects with a positive NPV enhances value, while those with a negative NPV should generally be rejected.

Therefore, the recommendation, given the current financial parameters and projections, is that the project should not be undertaken. Instead, the organization might consider investing resources into other endeavors that offer a higher expected return or a more positive NPV. It is also worth noting that the calculation assumes the provided cash flows are accurate and the discount rate remains constant over the four-year period. Further sensitivity analysis could be employed to examine the effect of varying interest rates or cash flow estimates, but based on the current assessment, the project does not appear financially viable.

References

  • Brealey, R. A., Myers, S. C., & Allen, F. (2019). Principles of Corporate Finance (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Ehrhardt, M. C., & Brigham, E. F. (2018). Corporate Finance: A Focused Approach. Cengage Learning.

  • Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment Valuation: Tools and Techniques for Determining the Value of Any Asset. Wiley.
  • Sullivan, W. G., Sheffrin, S. M., & Wicksell, K. (2015). Finance: Planning and Control. Pearson.
  • Brigham, E. F., & Houston, J. F. (2019). Fundamentals of Financial Management. Cengage Learning.
  • Ross, S., & Westerfield, R. (2020). Corporate Finance. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Harvard Business Review. (2017). Financial Metrics: How to Evaluate Investment Projects. Harvard Business Publishing.
  • Investopedia. (2023). Net Present Value - NPV. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/npv.asp

Related Assignments