A finished BUS-FPX4070 Assessment 2 project evaluation: the project judged against the firm's own rate, with the reversing assumption named. Searches like "bus fpx 4070 assessment 2 assignment example", "busfpx4070 assessment 2 sample" and "bus-fpx4070 assessment 2 example" land here.
What a finished BUS-FPX4070 Assessment 2 project evaluation looks like
The finished example uses the rate it built rather than a round number. Cash flows are set out by period with their basis, and the example is careful about what belongs in them: incremental amounts only, so existing costs that continue regardless stay out and the working capital tied up during the project stays in. Depreciation is handled as a tax effect rather than as a cash outflow, which is the technical point students most often miss. The measures are computed and compared, and where they disagree the paper explains why and says which governs. The sensitivity section names the assumption the answer depends on and the value at which it flips.
How a BUS-FPX4070 Assessment 2 example is structured
Flows, rate, measures, sensitivity, in that order. The opening fixes the project and the horizon it is judged over. A cash flow block lays out each period's incremental amounts with the basis for each, and states explicitly what was excluded and why. A rate block carries forward the figure from the first assessment, with any adjustment if this project differs in risk from the firm as a whole. A measures block computes what the assessment requires and presents them together for comparison. A disagreement block explains any conflict between them. A sensitivity block identifies the input the answer is most exposed to and computes the value at which the recommendation reverses. The closing states the recommendation plainly with the figure that decided it. Every flow carries its period and its source.
Incremental flows only
Costs that continue whether or not the project proceeds are excluded and the exclusion is stated, since including them sinks good projects.
Working capital included
Cash tied up during the project appears as an outflow and its release at the end as an inflow, which many evaluations omit entirely.
Depreciation as a tax effect
It is not a cash outflow, and treating it as one is the technical error this assessment most reliably catches.
The firm's own rate applied
The figure built in the first assessment is used, adjusted where this project carries different risk from the business as a whole.
The reversing value computed
The input the answer depends on most is identified and the level at which the recommendation flips is calculated rather than described.
Where marks go in BUS-FPX4070 Assessment 2
A discount rate that appears from nowhere is the first loss, particularly after an assessment spent deriving one. Second is depreciation deducted as a cash flow, which understates every project. Third is non incremental costs included, usually allocated overhead that would continue regardless. Fourth is measures reported without a recommendation, or with a conflict between them left unexplained. Strong versions compute the value at which the answer reverses. Where working capital is involved, the criteria expect both the outflow at the start and the release at the end, since including one without the other is a common and material asymmetry. Where the measures conflict, an unexplained conflict is treated as an incomplete analysis rather than as a presentational choice.
Get a BUS-FPX4070 Assessment 2 example written to your instructions
Send the Assessment 2 instructions and your BUS-FPX4070 scoring guide, along with the project data and the rate your first assessment produced. We write a custom example against those criteria and return it in 24 to 48 hours. The first custom sample is free, and computing the reversing value is what turns an evaluation into advice.
BUS-FPX4070 Assessment 2 questions, answered
Why do net present value and internal rate of return disagree?
Usually because of scale or because of what each assumes about reinvesting the cash that comes back. A rate of return implicitly assumes those amounts earn that same rate again, which is rarely available. Present value assumes they earn the firm's own cost of capital, which is the more defensible assumption and the reason to prefer it here.
How do I treat depreciation?
As a tax shield rather than a cash outflow. It reduces taxable income, so it reduces tax paid, and that tax saving is the cash effect. Deducting the depreciation itself from the cash flows is the single most common technical error in this assessment and it understates every project.
Should the project rate differ from the company rate?
If the project carries different risk, yes, and saying so earns credit. A stable company entering a volatile new line should not discount that venture at its own low rate. Where you adjust, explain the basis; where you do not, say why the project's risk resembles the firm's existing business.