Angel Investing | My Assignment Tutor

Page 1 Kaplan Business School Assessment OutlineAssessment 3 Information Subject Code:MBA603Subject Name:New Venture Capital RaisingAssessment Title:Angel Investing (Equity Crowdfunding)Assessment Type:PresentationPresentation Length:10Minutes(+/-10%)Weighting:20 %Total Marks:100Submission:In Class; upload slide deck via MyKBSDue Date:Week 9 – Friday 11:59 am AEDT Your TaskTo analyse two different investment opportunities that are currently on equity crowdfunding / investmentplatforms and determine the company that you would invest in. The two companies to evaluate will besent to you in Week 8 via the Subject Announcements (portal).Assessment DescriptionLearning Outcome 1: Critically assess existing corporate ventures.Learning Outcome 4: Create recommendations arising from a comprehensive risk assessment.Assessment InstructionsIn week 9 (in class), your workshop facilitator will divide you into teams of 3 – 4 people. You areplaying the roles of being part of an angel group of investors who have AUD$50,000 to invest.Your team is required to create a 10- minute presentation on the pros and cons of each company froman investor point of view and then decide which one your team would invest in (NOTE: there is norequirement that you must invest in either of the companies). Give justification as to why you are /arenot interested in investing in the company (or companies). Understandably, you may not have all theinformation you want from a due diligence perspective, but based on the information you have beengiven, analyse each opportunity.Some of the aspects to take into consideration are, but not limited to:• The capability and motivation of the management team• Scalability of the company• Intellectual Property (e.g., is it defendable?)• Liability and litigation• Company has sufficient capital• Existing customers are able and willing to pay / market demand / competition.• Success ProbabilityEach person on the team will be expected to speak in the presentation.For this assessment, there is a minimum of six (6) references which can include journals, reputablewebsites, government papers, etc.Page 2 Kaplan Business School Assessment OutlineSubmission modeOnline StudentsYou will have 90 minutes in-class (via Zoom) to discuss the two investment opportunities and toprepare your 10-minute presentation. Be aware of the maximum presentation time as your workshopfacilitator will stop your presentation at the 10 minute mark whether you are finished or not.Important Study InformationAcademic Integrity PolicyKBS values academic integrity. All students must understand the meaning and consequencesof cheating, plagiarism and other academic offences under the Academic Integrity and ConductPolicy.What is academic integrity and misconduct?What are the penalties for academic misconduct?What are the late penalties?How can I appeal my grade?Click here for answers to these questions: Limits for Written AssessmentsSubmissions that exceed the word limit by more than 10% will cease to be marked from the pointat which that limit is exceeded.Study AssistanceStudents may seek study assistance from their local Academic Learning Advisor or refer to theresources on the MyKBS Academic Success Centre page. Click here for this information.Page 3 Kaplan Business School Assessment OutlineAssessment Marking Guide CriteriaF (Fail) 0%-49%P (Pass) 50%-64%CR (Credit) 65%-74%D (Distinction)75% – 84%HD (High Distinction)85%-100%TotalMarksAssessment Content [OUT OF 80 MARKS]IntroductionIntroduction was notincluded.Introduction was vague.Introduction gave a basicand sufficient overviewSound introduction with clearoverview.Excellent introduction withclear and thorough overview.10Company #1 EvaluationNo evaluation and duediligence of the company.Vague evaluation and duediligence of the company.Must be clearer.Basic evaluation and duediligence of the company.More depth needed.Thorough evaluation anddue diligence of thecompany.Excellent evaluation and duediligence of the company.Very clear analysis withjustifications.30Company #2 EvaluationNo evaluation and duediligence of the company.Vague evaluation and duediligence of the company.Must be clearer.Basic evaluation and duediligence of the company.More depth needed.Thorough evaluation anddue diligence of thecompany.Excellent evaluation and duediligence of the company.Very clear analysis withjustifications.30Recommendations /Justification / ConclusionRecommendations andconclusions were notaddressed / included.Recommendations andconclusions were includedbut vague.Recommendations andconclusions were sufficientlyaddressed.Recommendations andconclusions were clearthough could have had moredepth.Excellent and thoroughrecommendations andconclusions.10Structure Format and Presentation [OUT OF 20 MARKS]Answer clearly andlogically presentedWriting style is unclear; lackslogical flow and structureWriting style lacks someclarity; some flaws in logicalflow and structureWriting style is mostly clear;Generally logical flow andstructureAnswer presented mostlyclear and logicalAnswer presented noticeablyclear and logical.4Appropriate theory andresearch used to answerquestion posedInappropriate and outdatedtheory and research used.Adequate theory andresearch used; Someresearch dated. Metminimum standards.Sound theory and researchused. Current. Could havehad more in-depth research.Relevant in-depth theory andresearch used; current andthorough.Excellent and current theoryand research used; Depth ofresearch exceededexpectations4Correct academic writingstyle used, includingcorrect spelling, grammarand punctuationNon-academic writing style,lacks clarity and has no flow.No structure. Many spellingand grammatical errors.Writing style is nonacademic; minor flow andstructure issues. Spelling/grammatical errors.Academic writing style isclear; good flow, somestructure issues. Somespelling or grammaticalerrors.Clear academic writing stylewith very good flow andstructure. Minor spelling orgrammatical errors.Academic writing style isvery clear with excellent flowand structure. No spelling orgrammatical errors.4Format of answerconsistent with questionrequirements and KBSguidelinesFormat of answer does notfollow KBS guidelines of thequestion requirementsFormat of answer adequatelymeets questionrequirements; KBSguidelines inconsistentFormat of answer meetsquestion requirements andKBS guidelines; some errorsFormat of answer consistentwith question requirementsand KBS guidelines; acouple of errorsFormat of answer exceedsquestion requirements andKBS guidelines; no errors4In-text referencing andreference list followsHarvard style andconsistent with KBSguidelinesNone or very few sourcesare acknowledged. Does notfollow Harvard style nor KBSguidelines.Acknowledged few sourcesin text and reference list.Few citations and referencesfollow Harvard style.Acknowledged somesources in text and referencelist. Inconsistent use ofHarvard style.Acknowledged most sourcesin text and reference list.Most citations andreferences follow Harvardstyle.Acknowledged all sources intext and reference list. Allcitations and referencesfollow Harvard style.4100


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *