微信客服：xiaoxionga100
微信客服：ITCS521
程序代写案例-MSIN0149
时间：2021-11-21
Published 20th October 2021
Coursework Assessment Brief
Module code/name Corporate Finance MSIN0149
Module leader name Alex Gorbenko
Academic year 2021/22
Term 1
Assessment title Coursework 3
Individual/group assessment Group
Return and status of marked assessments: Within 4 weeks from the date of submission as per UCL guidelines. The
module team will update you if there are delays through unforeseen circumstances (e.g. ill health). All results when
first published are provisional until confirmed by the Examination Board.
Copyright Note to students: Copyright of this assessment brief is with the module leader(s) named above. If this
brief draws upon work by third parties (e.g. Case Study publishers) such third parties also hold copyright. It must not
be copied, reproduced, transferred, distributed, leased, licensed or shared any other individual(s) and/or
organisations, including web-based organisations, without permission of the copyright holder(s).
Academic Misconduct: Academic Misconduct is defined as any action or attempted action that may result in a
student obtaining an unfair academic advantage. Academic misconduct includes plagiarism, obtaining help
from/sharing work with others be they individuals and/or organisations or any other form of cheating. Refer to
Academic Manual Section 9: Student Academic Misconduct Procedure - 9.2 Definitions.
Referencing: You must reference and provide full citation for ALL sources used, including articles, text books, lecture
slides and module materials. This includes any direct quotes and paraphrased text. If in doubt, reference it. If you
need further guidance on referencing please see UCL’s referencing tutorial for students here: https://library-
guides.ucl.ac.uk/referencing-plagiarism/welcome. Failure to cite references correctly may result in your work being
referred to the Academic Misconduct Panel.
Content of this assessment brief
Section Content
A Core information
B Coursework brief and requirements
C Module learning outcomes covered in this assessment
D Groupwork instructions (if applicable)
E How your work is assessed
F Additional information
Published 20th October 2021
Section A: Core information
Submission date 23/11/2021
Submission time 10 am UK time
Assessment is marked out of: 100
% weighting of this assessment
within total module mark
10%
Maximum word count/page
length/duration
Max 500 words
Footnotes, appendices, tables,
figures, diagrams, charts included
in/excluded from word count/page
length?
Excluded
Bibliographies, reference lists
included in/excluded from word
count/page length?
Excluded
Penalty for exceeding word
count/page length
Standard UCL penalties for exceeding (deduction of 10
percentage points, capped at 40% for Levels 4,5, 6, and 50% for
Level 7) Refer to Academic Manual Section 3: Module
Assessment - 3.13 Word Counts.
Penalty for late submission Standard UCL penalties apply. Students should refer to Refer to
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/academic-manual/chapters/chapter-4-
assessment-framework-taught-programmes/section-3-module-
assessment#3.12
Submitting your assessment The assignment MUST be submitted to the module
submission link located within this module’s Moodle
‘Submissions’ tab by the specified deadline. Where the
assessment is group work, each group should nominate
ONE (1) person to upload the submission on behalf of
their group. Do NOT submit more than one submission
per group.
Anonymity of identity. Normally, all
submissions are anonymous unless
the nature of the submission is such
that anonymity is not appropriate,
illustratively as in presentations or
where minutes of group meetings
are required as part of a group work
submission
The nature of this assessment is such that anonymity is not
required.
Published 20th October 2021
Section B: Assessment Brief and Requirements
See document attached at the end of this file
Published 20th October 2021
Section C: Module Learning Outcomes covered in this
Assessment
This assessment contributes towards the achievement of the following stated module Learning
Outcomes as highlighted below:
• Make capital budgeting decisions
• Understand advantages and disadvantages of different methods of valuing a
project
• Conduct sensitivity analyses of project valuations
Published 20th October 2021
Section D: Groupwork Instructions (where
relevant/appropriate)
This is a group work assessment and the following associated instructions apply:
• Groups for this coursework are in teams of three (3) or four (4).
• ALL members of the Team are responsible for ALL parts of the submission. It is your Team’s
responsibility to submit a coherent piece of work that ALL members can legitimately verify
as a group effort.
• Please briefly summarise the contribution of each team member at the end of your report.
• If there are issues within the group you MUST inform your module leader as early as
possible during the coursework preparation, to enable any required interventions to be
made.
• Once the coursework has been submitted, if no prior notification of group/team challenges
involving non-contributors has been made, complaints after submission will not normally
be entertained.
Published 20th October 2021
Section E: How your work is assessed
Within each section of this assessment you may be assessed on the following aspects, as applicable and
appropriate to this assessment, and should thus consider these aspects when fulfilling the requirements of
each section:
• The accuracy of any calculations required.
• The strengths and quality of your overall analysis and evaluation;
• Appropriate use of relevant theoretical models, concepts and frameworks;
• The rationale and evidence that you provide in support of your arguments;
• The credibility and viability of the evidenced conclusions/recommendations/plans of action
you put forward;
• Structure and coherence of your considerations and reports;
• Appropriate and relevant use of, as and where relevant and appropriate, real world examples,
academic materials and referenced sources. Any references should use either the Harvard OR
Vancouver referencing system (see References, Citations and Avoiding Plagiarism)
• Academic judgement regarding the blend of scope, thrust and communication of ideas,
contentions, evidence, knowledge, arguments, conclusions.
• Each assessment requirement(s) has allocated marks/weightings.
Student submissions are reviewed/scrutinised by and internal assessor and are available to an External
Examiner for further review/scrutiny before consideration by the relevant Examination Board.
It is not uncommon for some students to feel that their submissions deserve higher marks (irrespective of
whether they actually deserve higher marks). To help you assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of
your submission please refer to UCL Assessment Criteria Guidelines, located at
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/sites/teaching-learning/files/migrated-
files/UCL_Assessment_Criteria_Guide.pdf
The above is an important link as it specifies the criteria for attaining 85% +, 70% to 84%, 60% to 69%, 50%
to 59%, 40% to 49%, below 40%.
You are strongly advised to not compare your mark with marks of other submissions from your student
colleagues. Each submission has its own range of characteristics which differ from others in terms of
breadth, scope, depth, insights, and subtleties and nuances. On the surface one submission may appear to
be similar to another but invariably, digging beneath the surface reveals a range of differing
characteristics.
Published 20th October 2021
Section F: Additional information from module leader
(as appropriate)
N/A
PALO ALTO MICRO-BREWING CO.1
It is November 2020. Kasim Nasser, an entrepreneur in the Silicon Valley, has just
founded Palo Alto Micro-Brewing Co. (PAMBCo), a very fancy high-quality micro-
brewery in the Bay Area, California. He is the sole owner and CEO of the company.
PAMBCo is considering acquiring at the end of 2020 a $4 million Brauhaus 1000A, a
large microbrewery system.
This investment has an economic life of eight years. In the U.S., it falls into the 7-year
property class for depreciation purposes under the modified accelerated cost recovery
system (MACRS). As a result, the schedule permits depreciation of 14.29% in the first
year, 24.49% in the second year, 17.49% in the third year, 12.49% in the fourth year,
8.93% in the fifth year, 8.92% in the sixth year, 8.93% in the seventh year, and 4.46%
in the eighth year.
PAMBCo plans to keep the new microbrewery system for five years, until the end of
2025. At this point, Kasim believes he will be able to sell the system to another beer
enthusiast for $1 million. He plans to close down shop in 2026.
A pre-market estimate shows that in 2021, PAMBCo will be able to sell 400,000 bottles
of beer at a price of $5/bottle. In 2021-2026, the demand for the company’s product
is expected to increase by 50,000 bottles annually. The cost of production is expected
to remain constant at $1/bottle. All sales are attributable to PAMBCo’s new
microbrewery system.
PAMBCo’s combined marketing and overhead cost in 2020 is expected to be $200,000.
In 2021-2025, this cost is expected to be $375,000. In 2026, there will be no marketing
and overhead cost.
PAMBCo’s product will not go on sale until 2021, but in 2020 the plan is to produce
100,000 bottles prior to the initial 2021 launch. In 2021-2025, the plan is to keep end-
of-year inventories equal to 25% of the next year’s anticipated demand. In 2026, the
plan is to simply sell the remaining inventory, thus only satisfying 25% of the annual
demand.
This mini-case is written by Professor Alexander S. Gorbenko for use in classroom discussion.
To value investment in Brauhaus 1000A, Kasim must make several assumptions. First,
he assumes that all numbers are year-end figures. Second, he assumes that 2020
payments are made at year-end (and to make discounting easier he values the project
on December 31, 2020). Third, even though the equipment is put into use in 2020 to
produce the initial inventory, Kasim assumes that first depreciation expense is only
taken in 2021. This is because there is too little of 2020 left to
risk conflict with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. Fourth, he assumes that the project
will entail no accounts receivable and accounts payable. Finally, he assumes that
PAMBCo can use the tax carry forward provision in the U.S. tax code to decrease its tax
in 2021, offsetting the firm’s loss in 2020. As an aside, there is no tax carry back allowed
in the U.S. since 2018.
PAMBCo’s additional base-case assumptions: the corporate tax rate is 21%; the risk-
free rate is 2%; companies with risk similar to PAMBCo have a 12% required return.
Questions:
a. What are PAMBCo’s annual free-cash flows in years 2020-2026?
b. What is the NPV of PAMBCo’s investment in Brauhaus 1000A?
c. What is the payback period and IRR of the investment? If PAMBCo’s patience
level is 4 years, does the payback rule coincide with the NPV rule? Does the IRR
rule coincide with the NPV rule?
d. Kasim’s friend and former MBA classmate believes that PAMBCo can afford an
annual price increase of $0.5/bottle while keeping its initial demand of 400,000
bottles unchanged in 2020-2026. Should Kasim listen to his friend? Explain
intuitively why or why not.
e. You are hired by PAMBCo as an independent financial adviser. You decide to
dig deeper into the price-demand link. You study comparable micro-breweries
and realize that an annual $0.1/bottle price increase corresponds to a 10,000
bottle drop in annual demand growth. As an example, no price increase results
in the annual demand increase of 50,000 bottles, as per Kasim’s initial analysis.
As another example, an annual $0.5/bottle price increase results in an
unchanged annual demand, confirming Kasim’s friend’s belief. What annual
price increase delivers the highest NPV? What is the largest price increase that
leaves the project barely financially viable?
学霸联盟
Coursework Assessment Brief
Module code/name Corporate Finance MSIN0149
Module leader name Alex Gorbenko
Academic year 2021/22
Term 1
Assessment title Coursework 3
Individual/group assessment Group
Return and status of marked assessments: Within 4 weeks from the date of submission as per UCL guidelines. The
module team will update you if there are delays through unforeseen circumstances (e.g. ill health). All results when
first published are provisional until confirmed by the Examination Board.
Copyright Note to students: Copyright of this assessment brief is with the module leader(s) named above. If this
brief draws upon work by third parties (e.g. Case Study publishers) such third parties also hold copyright. It must not
be copied, reproduced, transferred, distributed, leased, licensed or shared any other individual(s) and/or
organisations, including web-based organisations, without permission of the copyright holder(s).
Academic Misconduct: Academic Misconduct is defined as any action or attempted action that may result in a
student obtaining an unfair academic advantage. Academic misconduct includes plagiarism, obtaining help
from/sharing work with others be they individuals and/or organisations or any other form of cheating. Refer to
Academic Manual Section 9: Student Academic Misconduct Procedure - 9.2 Definitions.
Referencing: You must reference and provide full citation for ALL sources used, including articles, text books, lecture
slides and module materials. This includes any direct quotes and paraphrased text. If in doubt, reference it. If you
need further guidance on referencing please see UCL’s referencing tutorial for students here: https://library-
guides.ucl.ac.uk/referencing-plagiarism/welcome. Failure to cite references correctly may result in your work being
referred to the Academic Misconduct Panel.
Content of this assessment brief
Section Content
A Core information
B Coursework brief and requirements
C Module learning outcomes covered in this assessment
D Groupwork instructions (if applicable)
E How your work is assessed
F Additional information
Published 20th October 2021
Section A: Core information
Submission date 23/11/2021
Submission time 10 am UK time
Assessment is marked out of: 100
% weighting of this assessment
within total module mark
10%
Maximum word count/page
length/duration
Max 500 words
Footnotes, appendices, tables,
figures, diagrams, charts included
in/excluded from word count/page
length?
Excluded
Bibliographies, reference lists
included in/excluded from word
count/page length?
Excluded
Penalty for exceeding word
count/page length
Standard UCL penalties for exceeding (deduction of 10
percentage points, capped at 40% for Levels 4,5, 6, and 50% for
Level 7) Refer to Academic Manual Section 3: Module
Assessment - 3.13 Word Counts.
Penalty for late submission Standard UCL penalties apply. Students should refer to Refer to
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/academic-manual/chapters/chapter-4-
assessment-framework-taught-programmes/section-3-module-
assessment#3.12
Submitting your assessment The assignment MUST be submitted to the module
submission link located within this module’s Moodle
‘Submissions’ tab by the specified deadline. Where the
assessment is group work, each group should nominate
ONE (1) person to upload the submission on behalf of
their group. Do NOT submit more than one submission
per group.
Anonymity of identity. Normally, all
submissions are anonymous unless
the nature of the submission is such
that anonymity is not appropriate,
illustratively as in presentations or
where minutes of group meetings
are required as part of a group work
submission
The nature of this assessment is such that anonymity is not
required.
Published 20th October 2021
Section B: Assessment Brief and Requirements
See document attached at the end of this file
Published 20th October 2021
Section C: Module Learning Outcomes covered in this
Assessment
This assessment contributes towards the achievement of the following stated module Learning
Outcomes as highlighted below:
• Make capital budgeting decisions
• Understand advantages and disadvantages of different methods of valuing a
project
• Conduct sensitivity analyses of project valuations
Published 20th October 2021
Section D: Groupwork Instructions (where
relevant/appropriate)
This is a group work assessment and the following associated instructions apply:
• Groups for this coursework are in teams of three (3) or four (4).
• ALL members of the Team are responsible for ALL parts of the submission. It is your Team’s
responsibility to submit a coherent piece of work that ALL members can legitimately verify
as a group effort.
• Please briefly summarise the contribution of each team member at the end of your report.
• If there are issues within the group you MUST inform your module leader as early as
possible during the coursework preparation, to enable any required interventions to be
made.
• Once the coursework has been submitted, if no prior notification of group/team challenges
involving non-contributors has been made, complaints after submission will not normally
be entertained.
Published 20th October 2021
Section E: How your work is assessed
Within each section of this assessment you may be assessed on the following aspects, as applicable and
appropriate to this assessment, and should thus consider these aspects when fulfilling the requirements of
each section:
• The accuracy of any calculations required.
• The strengths and quality of your overall analysis and evaluation;
• Appropriate use of relevant theoretical models, concepts and frameworks;
• The rationale and evidence that you provide in support of your arguments;
• The credibility and viability of the evidenced conclusions/recommendations/plans of action
you put forward;
• Structure and coherence of your considerations and reports;
• Appropriate and relevant use of, as and where relevant and appropriate, real world examples,
academic materials and referenced sources. Any references should use either the Harvard OR
Vancouver referencing system (see References, Citations and Avoiding Plagiarism)
• Academic judgement regarding the blend of scope, thrust and communication of ideas,
contentions, evidence, knowledge, arguments, conclusions.
• Each assessment requirement(s) has allocated marks/weightings.
Student submissions are reviewed/scrutinised by and internal assessor and are available to an External
Examiner for further review/scrutiny before consideration by the relevant Examination Board.
It is not uncommon for some students to feel that their submissions deserve higher marks (irrespective of
whether they actually deserve higher marks). To help you assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of
your submission please refer to UCL Assessment Criteria Guidelines, located at
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/sites/teaching-learning/files/migrated-
files/UCL_Assessment_Criteria_Guide.pdf
The above is an important link as it specifies the criteria for attaining 85% +, 70% to 84%, 60% to 69%, 50%
to 59%, 40% to 49%, below 40%.
You are strongly advised to not compare your mark with marks of other submissions from your student
colleagues. Each submission has its own range of characteristics which differ from others in terms of
breadth, scope, depth, insights, and subtleties and nuances. On the surface one submission may appear to
be similar to another but invariably, digging beneath the surface reveals a range of differing
characteristics.
Published 20th October 2021
Section F: Additional information from module leader
(as appropriate)
N/A
PALO ALTO MICRO-BREWING CO.1
It is November 2020. Kasim Nasser, an entrepreneur in the Silicon Valley, has just
founded Palo Alto Micro-Brewing Co. (PAMBCo), a very fancy high-quality micro-
brewery in the Bay Area, California. He is the sole owner and CEO of the company.
PAMBCo is considering acquiring at the end of 2020 a $4 million Brauhaus 1000A, a
large microbrewery system.
This investment has an economic life of eight years. In the U.S., it falls into the 7-year
property class for depreciation purposes under the modified accelerated cost recovery
system (MACRS). As a result, the schedule permits depreciation of 14.29% in the first
year, 24.49% in the second year, 17.49% in the third year, 12.49% in the fourth year,
8.93% in the fifth year, 8.92% in the sixth year, 8.93% in the seventh year, and 4.46%
in the eighth year.
PAMBCo plans to keep the new microbrewery system for five years, until the end of
2025. At this point, Kasim believes he will be able to sell the system to another beer
enthusiast for $1 million. He plans to close down shop in 2026.
A pre-market estimate shows that in 2021, PAMBCo will be able to sell 400,000 bottles
of beer at a price of $5/bottle. In 2021-2026, the demand for the company’s product
is expected to increase by 50,000 bottles annually. The cost of production is expected
to remain constant at $1/bottle. All sales are attributable to PAMBCo’s new
microbrewery system.
PAMBCo’s combined marketing and overhead cost in 2020 is expected to be $200,000.
In 2021-2025, this cost is expected to be $375,000. In 2026, there will be no marketing
and overhead cost.
PAMBCo’s product will not go on sale until 2021, but in 2020 the plan is to produce
100,000 bottles prior to the initial 2021 launch. In 2021-2025, the plan is to keep end-
of-year inventories equal to 25% of the next year’s anticipated demand. In 2026, the
plan is to simply sell the remaining inventory, thus only satisfying 25% of the annual
demand.
This mini-case is written by Professor Alexander S. Gorbenko for use in classroom discussion.
To value investment in Brauhaus 1000A, Kasim must make several assumptions. First,
he assumes that all numbers are year-end figures. Second, he assumes that 2020
payments are made at year-end (and to make discounting easier he values the project
on December 31, 2020). Third, even though the equipment is put into use in 2020 to
produce the initial inventory, Kasim assumes that first depreciation expense is only
taken in 2021. This is because there is too little of 2020 left to
risk conflict with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. Fourth, he assumes that the project
will entail no accounts receivable and accounts payable. Finally, he assumes that
PAMBCo can use the tax carry forward provision in the U.S. tax code to decrease its tax
in 2021, offsetting the firm’s loss in 2020. As an aside, there is no tax carry back allowed
in the U.S. since 2018.
PAMBCo’s additional base-case assumptions: the corporate tax rate is 21%; the risk-
free rate is 2%; companies with risk similar to PAMBCo have a 12% required return.
Questions:
a. What are PAMBCo’s annual free-cash flows in years 2020-2026?
b. What is the NPV of PAMBCo’s investment in Brauhaus 1000A?
c. What is the payback period and IRR of the investment? If PAMBCo’s patience
level is 4 years, does the payback rule coincide with the NPV rule? Does the IRR
rule coincide with the NPV rule?
d. Kasim’s friend and former MBA classmate believes that PAMBCo can afford an
annual price increase of $0.5/bottle while keeping its initial demand of 400,000
bottles unchanged in 2020-2026. Should Kasim listen to his friend? Explain
intuitively why or why not.
e. You are hired by PAMBCo as an independent financial adviser. You decide to
dig deeper into the price-demand link. You study comparable micro-breweries
and realize that an annual $0.1/bottle price increase corresponds to a 10,000
bottle drop in annual demand growth. As an example, no price increase results
in the annual demand increase of 50,000 bottles, as per Kasim’s initial analysis.
As another example, an annual $0.5/bottle price increase results in an
unchanged annual demand, confirming Kasim’s friend’s belief. What annual
price increase delivers the highest NPV? What is the largest price increase that
leaves the project barely financially viable?
学霸联盟
