This module is designed to provide a critical understanding about the foundations of corporate finance. There will be an emphasis on applications vital for corporate managers. Students will examine how individuals and organisations make financial decisions, and how those decisions might deviate from those predicted by traditional financial or economic theory. It will critically evaluate the concepts and tools of financial decision making and financial management and the application of financial analysis skills in the facilitation of strategic decision making. Students will evaluate business information and be able to analyse how investment and financial decisions interact to affect the value of the organisation.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

On successful completion of the module, students will be able to:

1. critically evaluate the concepts and tools of financial decision-making and corporate financial management;

2. evaluate business information and critically analyse how investment and financial decisions interact to affect the value of the organisation;

3. apply financial analysis skills in the facilitation of creative strategic decision making.

INDICATIVE CONTENT / AREAS OF STUDY

The concepts and tools of financial decision making and financial management and the application of financial analysis skills in the facilitation of strategic decision making:

Time Value and Cash Flows
Cash Flows
Bond and Stock Valuation,
Risk and return
Cost of capital
A Capital Budgeting
Market efficiency

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

The course is designed so that it addresses different student learning needs, therefore a variety of methodologies are used which require the students to think critically, speak up and articulate their positions both verbally and in writing. Learning techniques include formal lecture-style topic delivery, case studies, videos and online class activities. Example methods and exercises from both the academic and practitioner worlds will be used to emphasize delivery and application. Practical exercises are intended to build the student’s proficiency in by delivering knowledge and skills through practical application of hospitality managerial accounting and finance in ‘real world’ problems.

A combination of below activity types will be used as the core teaching methods of the module:

Scheduled Learning and Teaching Activities	25%
Guided Independent Study	75%
Placement Learning	0%

Experiential

Learning

Opportunity

Activity Outline

Skills and Graduate Attributes

Developed

Tutorials

In-class exercises and case studies will provide applied illustrations

Problem solving, critically thinking, team working, build student proficiency.

Formative Assessment:

In-class exercises with applied illustrations
Case studies with applied illustrations.
Pair Group project: 100%

COURSEWORK (CW1), 100%

Summary of Assessment Method: Pair Group project

The pair group project (equivalent to 4000 words) will apply key financial management principles, through the analysis of financial data sources, to develop strategic business options for a corporate business allocated by the tutor.

No make-up activities for pair group project can be planned. It is students’ responsibility to submit the group project electronically to UoD platform on timely basis before the due date. No emailed submissions will be accepted.

In order to ensure a steady progression on your pair group project and to avoid you spending little time in the beginning of the term and too much time at the end of the term to work on your group project, the following milestones have been put into place and have to be adhered to:

– Week 3: electronic submission of firm selection and business description (400 words)

– Week 5: electronic submission of analytical report proposal for your pair group project (1200 words)

– Week 11: electronic submission of your pair group project (4000 words)

Submissions for week 3 and 5 will become integral parts of your pair group project. The overall mark will be allocated as described above. This will ensure your continuous advancement towards your final goal (pair group project) and will allow for monitoring of your progression.

Weighting: 100%

REGULATIONS

This module conforms fully to the relevant PG regulatory framework. Full details of the University of Derby Academic Regulations (3Rs) can be found at:

http://www.derby.ac.uk/academic-regulations

TEACHING TEAM

Name	Email	Tel
Dr. Haitao Zhang	hzhang@cesarritzcolleges.edu	+41 (0)27 9220404

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

Lecture

W / C

Lecture

Tutorial

Pre and post session

activities/reading

Introduction

• Introduction Corporate finance of finance

• Accounting Statements and cash flow

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Ross et al.

Chapter 1,2

Interest rates and Valuing Cash flows

• Time Value of Money

• Valuing cash Flow streams

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Berk et al,

Chapters 3,4,5

Turnitin Submission Deadline For

Firm Selection and Business Description Part Of Your Pair Group Project

Financial Markets (1)

• Introduction

• Bonds Valuation

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Berk et al,

Chapter 6,

Financial Markets (2)

• Valuing Stocks, Preferred and Common Stock

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Berk et al,

Chapter 7

Turnitin Submission Deadline For

Analytical Report Proposal For Your Pair Group Project

Risk & Return (1)

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Berk et al,

Chapter 11,12

• Capital Market theory: An overview

• Return and Risk: The capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM)

Cost of Capital and the Financing Mix

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Berk et al,

Chapter 13

Risk & Return(1)

• Estimating Cash Flows on Capital Budgeting Projects

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Berk et al,

chapter 12

Risk & Return(1)

• Capital Budgeting Investment Evaluation Criteria

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Berk et al,

Chapter 6

• Corporate-Financing Decisions

• Efficient Capital Markets

In-class exercises and case studies related to the covered chapter.

Ross et al,

Chapter 13

Review session

Turnitin Submission Deadline for

Your Pair Group project

Projects feedback

Finance Project: A Pair Group Case Study of no more than 4000 words (excluding attachments) critically analysing two comparable publicly quoted hospitality or tourism companies, reviewing their financial health and profitability, and making an investment recommendation for one or the other of the companies based on sound financial, and overall market condition arguments.

The written report should consist of and will be evaluated accordingly:

Prepare a cover page containing the name and student number of each member of the group. Summarize the specific role, duties and contribution of each member in the project. Prepare an executive summary of the project. The grade for this section will be awarded on the basis of completeness of the information and a well-structured executive summary, with emphasis on the summary. (5%)

Provide an overview of the history, principal activities, as well as a stock performance chart of the past five years for both companies, compare the changes in value of the stock price to the average of the industry and give the main reasons of these changes. (10%)
Using two methods of valuation of their common/preferred stocks, and comparing the results to their most recent stock quotation. Then, critically assess the valuation methods used, and explain why you would or would not agree with the results of your valuations. A key portion of the grade in this section will be based on the critical assessment of chosen evaluation methods. (15%)

Considering the current geopolitical and/or economic market environment, comment on the short to medium term prospects of the industry, which your companies are a part of. Grading for this section will be based on the extent of your research, and your critical assessment of researched material. (25%)

Comment on the financing mix of your companies (latest balance sheets), and discuss the advantages/disadvantages of debt and equity financing. Then compare the two companies and determine your preferred company purely based on their balance sheets. Grading will be based on accurate and critical argumentation made for the preferred company. (20%)

Make your final argument for selecting the appropriate company to invest in based on all above sections, your detailed calculations, as well as making a sound and critical argument for why market conditions will favour and reward your company of choice. Grading will

depend on substance, and critical presentation of the final conclusions, clearly indicating overall understanding of the methods used along the way. (20%)

What is your reflection on this project? – Grading will depend on substance and good presentation of the group’s reflection. (5%)

Plagiarism

All assignments will be submitted to Turnitin. Cheating and plagiarism are totally unacceptable and will be qualified as an academic offence.

Plagiarism is addressed in the University’s academic regulations.

Full details of the University of Derby Academic Regulations (3Rs) can be found at:

http://www.derby.ac.uk/academic-regulations

http://www.derby.ac.uk/files/part_j_academic_offences.pdf

Higher grades will be awarded as follows:

The appropriate content in consideration is covered in depth;
High level of critical analysis and debate;
Sources are cited when specific statements are made;
Accurate grammar, spelling and appropriate structure;
Links to theoretical frameworks;
Application of theory to practice;
Calculation Accuracy;
All needed citations were included in the report;
References matched the citations, and all were encoded in format;

Pass grades will be awarded as follows:

There is a basic flow from one section to the next, but not all sections or paragraphs following a natural or logical order.
All major sections of the pertinent content are included, but not covered in as much depth, or as explicit, as expected.
Accurate grammar, spelling and appropriate structure;
The author provides concluding remarks that show an analysis and synthesis of ideas occurred. Some of the conclusions, however, were not supported in the body of the report.
Calculation Accuracy;
All needed citations were included in the report;
References matched the citations, and all were encoded in format;

% Mark

Grade Descriptors

90-

100%

Excellent

Meets all criteria in 80-89% range below, plus demonstrates exceptional ability and insight, indicating the highest level of technical competence; work is virtually flawless and has potential to influence the forefront of the subject and may be of publishable/exhibitable quality. Relevant generic skills are demonstrated at the highest possible standard.

Exceptional achievement distinguishable even amongst the best quality work and deserving of the highest possible marks within the Distinction grade.

80-

89%

Excellent

High to very high standard work with most of the following features: authoritative subject knowledge; a high level of critical analysis and evaluation; incisive original

thinking; commendable originality; exceptionally well researched, with a very high level of technical competence; high quality presentation; impressive clarity of ideas; excellent coherence and logic. Work is close to the forefront of the subject and may be close to publishable or exhibitable quality. Relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a very high level. Referencing is consistently used, complete and accurate. Only trivial or very minor errors.

Very high quality work worthy of a high Distinction grade mark.

70-

79%

Excellent

Authoritative, current subject knowledge; excellent critical analysis and evaluation – including dealing with ambiguity in the data; significant originality; well researched with a high level of technical competence – work is accurate and extensively supported by appropriate evidence; excellent presentation; commendable clarity of ideas; thoughtful and effective presentation; very strong sense of coherence and logic; relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a high level; referencing is excellent– consistently used, complete and accurate; a small number of misunderstandings/minor errors only.

High quality work deserving of a Distinction grade.

60-

69%

Very good

Work is well-developed and coherent; demonstrates sound, current subject knowledge; a very good level of critical analysis and evaluation; some evidence of original thinking or originality; well researched; no significant errors in the application of concepts or appropriate techniques; a very good standard of presentation; ideas generally clear and coherent; relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a very good level; referencing is very good; minor errors and misunderstandings only, possibly with some deficiencies in presentation.

Well above pass standard and worthy of a Merit grade.

50-59%

Good/Satisfactory

Has achieved intended learning outcomes as evidenced by the following features. Satisfactory subject knowledge; a fair level of critical analysis and evaluation; the work is generally sound but tends towards the factual or derivative, and there may be minimal evidence of original thinking or originality; adequately researched; a sound standard of presentation; ideas fairly clear and coherent; some significant errors and misunderstandings, possibly shown by conceptual gaps or limited use of appropriate techniques; relevant generic skills are generally at a satisfactory level; referencing is generally accurate; some weakness in style or presentation.

Satisfactory overall – a clear pass

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

40-49%

Unsatisfactory

Has narrowly failed to achieve intended learning outcomes as evidenced by the following features. Satisfactory subject knowledge to some extent; some sound aspects but some of the following weaknesses are evident: factual errors; conceptual gaps; inadequate critical analysis and evaluation; little evidence of originality; not well researched – limited use of appropriate techniques; presentation does not meet the standard required; ideas unclear and/or incoherent; some significant errors and misunderstandings; relevant generic skills unsatisfactory to some extent; referencing may be inadequate.

Work is unsatisfactory but shows potential for achieving learning outcomes if feedback is addressed – Marginal fail

Very Poor

Has failed to achieve intended learning outcomes in several critical respects. Will have some or all of the following features to varying extent: inadequate subject knowledge; factual errors; conceptual gaps; minimal/no awareness of relevant issues and theory; limited/no use of appropriate techniques; standard of presentation unacceptable; ideas confused and/or incoherent – work lacks sound development; a poor critical analysis and evaluation; no evidence of originality; inadequately researched; some serious misunderstandings and errors; quality of relevant generic skills does not meet the requirements of the task.

A clear fail well short of the pass standard

5-39%

Nothing of Merit

Nothing of value is contained in the submitted work. The work presents information that is irrelevant and unconnected to the task; no evident awareness of appropriate principles, theories, evidence or techniques

1-4%

Non-submission

No work has been submitted

Academic offence notation

Applies to proven instances of academic offence

Late submissions are evaluated according to the UoD policy.

Full details of the University of Derby Academic Regulations (3Rs) can be found at:

http://www.derby.ac.uk/academic-regulations

Coursework (Pair Group project):

Submission Deadline Week 3: firm selection business description

Submission Deadline Week 5: analytical report proposal

Submission Deadline Week 11: final pair group project

Online support for e-submission can be found athttp://www.derby.ac.uk/esub

Applied Pair Group Case Study Return Date to Students: Results to be communicated to students as per academic calendar.

Berk, DeMarzo, and Harford, (2017). Fundamentals of Corporate Finance, 4th ed., Pearson. Brealey, R., Myers, S., and Marcus, A., (2017). Fundamentals of Corporate Finance, 6th ed., Mcgraw-Hill.

Cornett, M., Adai, T., Nofsinger, J., (2012). Finance: application and theory, 3rd ed., Mcgraw-

Hill.

Hillier, D., Grinblatt, M., and Titman, S., (2012). Financial Markets and Corporate Strategy, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill.

Myint, S., and Famery, F., (2012). The Handbook of Corporate Financial Risk Management,

Risk Books.

Ross, S., Westerfield, R., and Jaffe, J., (2019). Corporate Finance, 12th ed., McGraw-Hill.

Journals

Journal of Corporate Finance
Journal of Finance
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance
Journal of Banking and Finance

Financial decision-making and corporate financial management

Financial decision-making and corporate financial management

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Our Experts can help. Use the coupon code SAVE30 to get your first order at 30% off!

Legal

Other

How Our Service is Used: