Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ryanroks1)
    Original gearing
    [700/(700+1000] x 100 = 41.18%

    New gearing
    [1000/(1000+1000)] x 100 = 50%
    But it was -700? Not +700
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubbles26)
    Just realised on the front of the aqa answer booklets i forgot to pit how many booklets i used. I only used one bit will it matter?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So did I!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I hope I get GAN and GAP as well. I think the exam was a bit overwhelming because the case study was really long and there was too much information to take in, overall I think it went well, but business studies is a theoretical exam and there is a wide range of answers that can be expected so I don't really know what to expect, but hey we did our best let's hope for the best and pray for low grade boundaries 😆🙏
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by De Re Publica)
    But it was -700? Not +700
    The minus represented it was an amount owed. You cannot have a negative value owed to someone - in that case it would be owed to you. If you did the calculation as a negative, I believe the answer was around -233% which is obviously not right. I think AQA was very sneaky with the use of brackets there though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by De Re Publica)
    But it was -700? Not +700
    doesn't matter, you still add it
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ryanroks1)
    The minus represented it was an amount owed. You cannot have a negative value owed to someone - in that case it would be owed to you. If you did the calculation as a negative, I believe the answer was around -233% which is obviously not right. I think AQA was very sneaky with the use of brackets there though.
    *******s that's what I got, thought it was way off.
    Can I get any marks for it? If I applied it with working out and a line of logical analysis??
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JoshFlySon)
    did anyone manage to use Ansoff's matrix?
    Yeah as part of my 34 mark evaluation I said how I can be considered a risky strategy as its market development therefore extensive research will be required to meet the needs and wants of the business l
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by De Re Publica)
    *******s that's what I got, thought it was way off.
    Can I get any marks for it? If I applied it with working out and a line of logical analysis??
    It depends what you were analysing and the strength of the argument put forward. What was your initial point and how did you interpret that gearing figure?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ryanroks1)
    It depends what you were analysing and the strength of the argument put forward. What was your initial point and how did you interpret that gearing figure?
    It was an argument for borrowing (q3) as obviously the gearing percentage is so low, and equity high over that of current debt it would make sense to go forward with the borrowing idea, as proposed by the FD.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by De Re Publica)
    It was an argument for borrowing (q3) as obviously the gearing percentage is so low, and equity high over that of current debt it would make sense to go forward with the borrowing idea, as proposed by the FD.
    You could still gain credit for that line of analysis because it could even be argued that 50% was low, although not really 'so low'. Providing you formed a decent argument that wasn't solely focused on that -233% figure, you don't need to be too concerned. You have your other paragraph to help your recover. You wouldn't be credited with application marks for the calculation though, although it's quite possible you could be given reasonable for recognition of the finance director's role (even more so if you linked equity to the idea that the shareholders are wanting significant profit growth).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What did people put for the 1st question? Talked about how it enables them to differentiate their product wasn't sure if I was going off topic or not
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ryanroks1)
    You could still gain credit for that line of analysis because it could even be argued that 50% was low, although not really 'so low'. Providing you formed a decent argument that wasn't solely focused on that -233% figure, you don't need to be too concerned. You have your other paragraph to help your recover. You wouldn't be credited with application marks for the calculation though, although it's quite possible you could be given reasonable for recognition of the finance director's role (even more so if you linked equity to the idea that the shareholders are wanting significant profit growth).
    Okay, thanks for the help!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Awful, awful, awful exam. Timings were ridiculously tight I had about 10 minutes for the 34 marker (stupid I know). Think I managed to scrape together about 10 marks for the 34 but did alright on the 10,18,18. Hopefully low grade boundaries though they're already quite low. Oh well, onto BUSS4 which is considerably easier i think.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So guys, heres what I put for all the answers
    1.Table 5 showed that they spent more on training than industry average that meant they could offer a good customer service which led them to win awards, this gained them a good reputation and helped them differentiate which is a winning strategy according to Porter, this meant they had inelastic PED which meant they could charge 1450 instead of 1000 industry average which meant higher revenue and sales so performance objectives good.
    Then talked about how they set an objective for having 70% of their resorts full compared to industry average of 60%, said this meant they were working their assets harder and spreading their fixed costs over more output which meant that their unit costs were kept as low as they could be which meant they had higher profit margins and so this increased profits and o because of this performance objective was good

    Backed both points up with GAP, what do you guys think?
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by De Re Publica)
    So did I!
    Do you think it will matter?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    the answers to calcs:
    payback= 3 years 1 month, 3 years 0.91 months and 3 years 4 weeks
    ARofR= 15.16(reacuring)%, 15.17%, 15.2%
    gearing before borrowing £300m= 41.18%, 41.2%
    gearing after borrowing £300m= 50%
    gearing after raising £300m through selling shares= 35% (pretty much no one got this)
    ROCE= 3.2%
    current ratio= 0.3:1

    i think thats all of them
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Could have also calculated profit based on the profit margins and revenue given.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    2. I said on one hand marketing activities was good, linked this again to focusing on differentiation through better service which meant inelastic demand -0.7 which allowed them to increase their prices even in tough times of declining market growth and so this shows its very successful.
    On other hand the fact that they continued in a declining market meant that they had less potential for sales because their was less customers in the market, this led to declining sales revenue from £750m in 2013 to £680m. (Expanded it more obviously)
    Overall I said that although the marketing activities were perhaps wrong because they failed to move out of a declining market, the fact that they could increase their prices and still benefit from increasing profits effectively shows how successful their marketing activities were
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    3. very capable question
    FOR: Gearing 50% with the loan, very healthy figure which indicates that they wont have a problem paying back the interest repayment, also briefly mentioned how it would mean that Xenton the new investors would be able to keep control of the business which they would probably want baring in mind that they've just bought it
    AGAINST: Current ratio 0.38:1 indicates V bad cash flow which indicates that they would not be able to pay back loan repayments
    OVERALL: SHOULD NOT TAKE OUT 300M LOAN
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone know how to work out what grade they would need (or marks based on last years grade boundaries or whatever) to get a certain grade?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: October 16, 2016

University open days

  1. University of Bradford
    University-wide Postgraduate
    Wed, 25 Jul '18
  2. University of Buckingham
    Psychology Taster Tutorial Undergraduate
    Wed, 25 Jul '18
  3. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Campus Visit Undergraduate
    Wed, 1 Aug '18
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.