case study finance 220

Please find attached a word file with guidelines.

CASE STUDY

Academics and practitioners agree that stock prices change in response to changes in macroeconomic factors (inflation, unemployment rates, and interest rates), industry-level factors (position in this industry), and firm specific factors (size, business plan, financial statements, management).

TOPIC

You are my personal investment banker and I am asking you to choose ONE share for my portfolio.

Using

all

available information, convince me, why I should invest in this company. I need a professional analysis with all the important details/data (fundamental analysis, technical analysis, stock valuation, industry analysis, financial ratios, etc.) one would require in order to make the transaction.

The paper is due the 6th Week.

Instructions

Students need to understand the basic questions emanating from the essay topics. Based on this they should read and understand the key concepts from a variety of relevant academic papers. Upon this, they should review the said relevant papers and produce a literature review structured in a way that addresses the key questions of the topics.

The essay should contain arguments that are properly referenced. An argument should be properly justified or referenced in order to have value inside the essay. Avoid using the same source many times. When tables/charts/data are presented, these should be numbered and titled accordingly while their source should be also presented. There should be a flow of content throughout the essay that takes the reader from one argument to the next seamlessly without any logical gaps. The essay should contain the following indicative structure:

Indicative structure:

· Title Page

· Abstract

· Table of Contents

· Introduction
(here you introduce the reader to the topic and you outline what you are going to present)

· Main Part
(Can contain logical sub-sections)

· Conclusion
(here you re-cap what you have presented/found, you present any conclusions you have and you can provide suggestions for future research in the topic)

· References (DO NOT USE “CASUAL” REFERENCES!)

Statistics/Data/Charts etc. should be in well structured tables and not copied in a sloppy way directly from the Internet. All tables/data etc should be titled and numbered so that the reader can get all the information he/she needs by reading the title and looking at the chart.

Submission

· This is an individual assignment

· Assignments should be 1500 words long (excluding abstract, table of contents, references, tables and graphs) with 12-size font and double-spacing between lines.

· A maximum of +-10% deviation from the word limit is acceptable. Above this you lose 5% for every extra 10% deviation. (if you are 30% above the limit, you lose 10%, 33% you lose 15% etc…)

·
Essay must be typed and submitted electronically on the day they are due by sending them via email. In the email that you send, title the file accordingly.

· Where coursework is submitted late and there are no accepted extenuating circumstances it will be penalized in line with the following tariff:

· Submission within 6 working days: a 10% reduction for each working day late down to the 40% pass mark and no further.

Submission that is late by 7 or more working days: submission refused, mark of 0.

You are reminded of the consequences of plagiarism. The content of your paper will be evaluated on the basis of clarity, good grammar and specificity.

General referencing rules

· References must comply with the Harvard system (you can consult the ACT library if you are uncertain).

· Your essay must comply with rules governing academic integrity.

· You should avoid plagiarism by citing all the papers that you have used.

· If you quote what others have said, you should place these within quotation marks (“ ”) and cite the source and page number. Do not lift sentences from original sources and insert them into your writing without enclosing them in double-quotation marks. Doing so is tantamount to plagiarism, and your essay will be liable to penalties.

· Use direct quotes very sparingly, if at all, only when it is necessary. In most cases, essays in economics/finance do not need direct quotes, since we are mostly referring to information such as facts, figures, theories, etc. (i.e., you are not referring to artistic or literary works, famous historical remarks or speeches, etc.). This means that you must paraphrase original sentences, rather than depending on direct quotes (paraphrased sentences must be accompanied by parenthetical in-text references).

· Do not cite / refer to “lectures” (this module or otherwise). Refer instead to available sources (academic journal articles – professional articles etc…) that contain the relevant information.

· Please note that any form of cheating will not be tolerated. The module leader reserves the right to ask you to provide evidence that the essay submitted is your own work. This may require that you attend a viva (oral exam) on the coursework. In particular, you are strongly advised not to copy material from papers, which are available on the internet and present this as your own work. This can be easily detected, and appropriate disciplinary action will be taken.

Marking criteria

A: 70-100 Excellent

1. Demonstrates a superior understanding of the concepts, the relationship between risk and return, fundamental analysis and financial ratios, the dividend dilemma, the valuation theory including both a high level of analysis and evaluation;

1. Presents material at a professional standard;

1.

Demonstrates analytical and critical-thinking skills necessary to make sound business and personal decisions;

1. Draws exceptionally recognizable and relevant conclusions supported by very well researched evidence.

B: 60-69 Very Good

1. Demonstrates a high level of understanding of the relationship between risk and return, fundamental analysis and financial ratios, the dividend dilemma, the valuation theory.

1. Refers to underpinning theory and/or models, using an appropriate referencing convention; and

1.

Draws highly recognizable and highly relevant conclusions that are supported by well-researched evidence.

C: 50-59 Good

1.

Demonstrates a clear understanding of the relationship between risk and return, fundamental analysis and financial ratios, the dividend dilemma, the valuation theory.

1.

Provides a coherent, organized analysis of the relevant sector with clear expression of ideas;

1.

Draws recognizable and relevant conclusions supported by researched evidence; and

1. Refers to a certain extent to underpinning theory and/or models, using adequate referencing convention.

D: 40-49 Acceptable

1.

A response which demonstrates a limited but adequate understanding the relationship between risk and return, fundamental analysis and financial ratios, the dividend dilemma, the valuation theory.

1.

Demonstrates an adequate awareness of the decision making process, and the differences between goals and objectives;

1. Contains some irrelevant material;

1. Has some errors in language usage, but these do not significantly interfere with the reader’s understanding;

1. Draws some recognizable and some relevant conclusions supported by researched evidence; and

1.

Refers to a limited extent to underpinning theory and/or models using limited referencing convention.

E: 35-39 Marginal Fail

1. Demonstrates some signs of understanding the relationship between risk and return, fundamental analysis and financial ratios, the dividend dilemma, the valuation theory, though in most places weak;

1. Analyses issues adequately in some instances but usually provides confused, limited and/or erroneous information;

1. Indicates some relevant knowledge of the objectives but presentation is usually poor;

1. Provides an answer that is poorly organized and limited in scope;

1. Draws very few recognizable and relevant conclusions supported by researched evidence; and

1. Refers to a very limited extent to underpinning theory and/or models, using very limited adequate referencing convention.

F: 0-34 Clear Fail

1. Submitted late;

1. Provides material that, in most respects, is almost totally irrelevant and shows an insufficient grasp and organization of material;

1. Demonstrates that the task was not understood and was inappropriately addressed. Only a few points are relevant and these at a superficial level;

1. Fails to provide analysis that addresses to any significant degree the learning objectives;

1. Draws unrecognizable and irrelevant conclusions, and few if any of these are supported by researched evidence; and

1. Does not refer to theory and/or models.