Calculate and provide an interpretation of the financial results of an organisation

FORMATREPORT: Table of Content, number pageWord Limit:2,500 words (with 10% plus or minus leeway). This must bestrictly adhered to, 10% marks will be lost if not adhered to.Deadline date forsubmission:Friday 25 March 2016Learning outcomes tobe examined in thisassessmentCalculate and provide an interpretation of the financial resultsof an organisation listed on the FTSE 100 using ratio analysis.Percentage of marksawarded for module:This assignment is worth 50% of the total marks for the moduleAssessment criteriaExplanatory comments on the assessmentcriteriaConstructive criticalanalysis. Accuratecalculation ofapplicable ratio’s.Referencing StyleMaximummarks for eachsectionRelevant, accurate content, demonstrating 70%research, as required by the assessmenttask.Coherent and clear discussion of theissues facing the business.Clear comparison between each of theperiods and comparison between theindustry average.Correct calculation of financial ratio’s.Full in-text referencing using the Harvard 10%citation style.Structured reference list or bibliographyusing the Harvard referencing methodContent, style,relevance, originalityClear demonstration of rigorous researchfrom recognised authoritative sources.Audience focus; report format.5%Introduction,conclusion andrecommendation15%Coherent and concise introduction,conclusion and clear recommendations1Assignment Task:Choose two of the UK’S Top three Telecoms companies from the list provided (Vodafone, BTGroup & BSKYB) and download the companies’ annual reports from the following links:BT Group PLCBSkyBVodafone PLCProduce the 2013, 2014 and 2015 ratio table for the companies you have chosen from thelist above (Profitability, Liquidity and Efficiency ratios as performed in class.) Based on theseratios and any other additional information available from the annual reports, compile areport comparing the performance of the companies selected.Total marks for assignment: 1002What is expected within students’ answersPlease write up your comments in no more than 2500 words (Times New Roman, 11 font,single spaced). All work in excess of 2500 words will be penalised.Demonstrate the ability to relate theory to the real world.Marks awardedIntroduction5Analysis/comparison of the performance of the two companies40Calculation of ratios (Profitability, Liquidity and Efficiency)30Conclusion and Recommendation10Content, style, relevance, originality5Format, referencing, bibliography10TOTAL MARKS1003Standard marking system for use when marking coursework assignments forall programmes at GSM.Indicative GradeDistinctionUK% marks70%+Characteristics.Very high standard of critical analysis usingappropriate conceptual frameworks.Excellent understanding and exposition ofrelevant issues.Clearly structured and logically developedarguments.Good awareness of nuances andcomplexities.Substantial evidence of well-executedindependent research.Excellent evaluation and synthesis ofsource material.Merit60-69%Relevant data and examples, all properlyreferenced.High standard of critical analysis usingappropriate conceptual frameworks.Clear awareness and exposition of relevantissues.Clearly structure and logically developedargument.Awareness of nuances and complexities.Evidence of independent research.Good evaluation and synthesis of sourcematerial.Pass50-59%Relevant data and examples, all properlyreferenced.Uses appropriate conceptual frameworks.Attempts analysis but includes some errorsand / or omissions.Shows awareness of issues but no morethan to be expected room attendance atclasses.4Arguments reasonably clear butunderdeveloped.Insufficient evidence of independentresearch.Insufficient evaluation of source material.Pass40-49%Some good use of relevant data andexamples but incompletely referenced.Adequate understanding of appropriateconceptual frameworks.Answer too descriptive and or any attemptat analysis is superficial containing errorsand omission.Shows limited awareness of issues but alsosome confusion.Arguments not particularly clear.Limited evidence of independent researchand reliance on a superficial repeat of classnotes.Relatively superficial use of relevant datasources and examples poorly referenced.5