ACC-260 · Topic 5

ACC-260 Topic 5 sunk cost discussion post example

Management Accounting Grand Canyon University Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

This page holds a complete ACC-260 Topic 5 sunk cost discussion post example, shown finished. Asked whether to replace a print shop's two-year-old press, the post says in its first line that the $18,000 still on the books should play no part, and separates that figure from the resale value, which should. ACC 260 raises relevance as a discussion because the irrelevant cost is usually the loudest one.

What this page holds

A finished ACC-260 Topic 5 sunk cost discussion post example, arguing that book value is irrelevant to a replacement decision while resale value and future operating savings belong in it. Searches like "acc 260 topic 5 assignment example", "acc260 topic 5 sample" and "acc-260 topic 5 example" land here.

What a finished ACC-260 Topic 5 sunk cost discussion post looks like

The finished post takes a side before it explains anything. Its opening sentence says the old press's remaining book value should be ignored, and its second says what should be counted instead. The body works one illustrative comparison in a few lines: the new press costs $40,000, the old one would sell for $6,000 today, and the new one saves $9,000 a year in ink, maintenance and labor over a five-year life. Each figure is labeled relevant or not, with its reason given in a single clause. The post acknowledges why the owner wants to count the $18,000, since writing it off feels like admitting a mistake, and it names that as a behavioral pull rather than an accounting argument. A reply to a classmate follows, pressing on one cost the classmate treated as relevant.

How an ACC-260 Topic 5 example is structured

The post is built in the order a classmate reads a thread. Its first sentence states the position on book value outright. A second passage lists the costs and inflows in the scenario, marked relevant because they differ between keeping and replacing, or irrelevant because they do not. A third passage totals only the relevant ones, showing replacement coming out ahead by $11,000 across the new press's life before any discounting. A fourth passage names why people still count book value, the discomfort of booking a loss, and shows that the $18,000 is expensed under both choices, as depreciation if the press stays and as a loss if it goes. A short close says what fact would reverse the position. The reply to a classmate is shorter still and asks one specific question about a figure they included.

Position stated in line one

The post opens by saying the book value should be ignored, so the thread learns what is being defended before any figure is offered.

Every figure labeled relevant or not

Purchase price, resale value, annual savings and remaining book value each carry a short reason tied to whether the amount differs between keeping and replacing.

The $18,000 expensed either way

Book value becomes depreciation if the press stays and a loss if it goes, which is the plainest demonstration that the choice cannot change it.

A behavioral pull named honestly

The post concedes that writing off an asset feels like admitting a mistake and treats that feeling as real, while declining to count it as cost.

A reply that presses on one figure

The response to a classmate asks about a single amount they counted, rather than agreeing in general, so the thread moves forward on substance.

Where marks go in ACC-260 Topic 5

Discussion posts in this topic tend to lose marks for agreeing with the principle and then breaking it. A response stating that sunk costs are irrelevant, followed by a comparison that subtracts the remaining book value anyway, has recited the rule and failed to apply it. Posts discarding every past figure go wrong in the other direction, since resale value is available now and belongs in the decision even though it relates to the old press. Treating depreciation on the old machine as a saving from replacement double counts the sunk amount. Opening with a definition of relevant cost delays the position until a classmate has stopped reading. Replies that say they agree and add nothing earn little, because the rubric in most sections looks for an exchange that tests a figure somebody actually used.

Get an ACC-260 Topic 5 example written to your instructions

Send the ACC-260 Topic 5 DQ prompt exactly as posted, the discussion rubric and any figures in the scenario. The custom example comes back written to them, with the position in the first line, every figure labeled relevant or not, the sunk amount handled correctly and a reply that tests a classmate's number, ready in 24 to 48 hours. The first sample is free.

ACC-260 Topic 5 questions, answered

Is resale value a sunk cost too?

No. It relates to an asset bought in the past, but it is an amount the company can receive now and will forgo if it keeps the machine, so it differs between the options. That makes it relevant. The purchase price and the book value are the sunk figures, because nothing decided today can change what was paid or what has been recorded.

Should the post use present value?

Only if the course has introduced it or the prompt asks. At this level a comparison of undiscounted totals is normal, provided the post says it has not discounted and names the direction the adjustment would push. Savings arriving over five years are worth less than the price paid today, so discounting narrows the advantage, and saying so shows judgment without adding a calculation.

Why do managers keep counting sunk costs?

Partly because performance is often measured on the statements, and a loss on disposal lands in the year a manager replaces the asset. Partly because nobody likes to record that a purchase aged badly. A strong post names that incentive, since it explains the behavior the DQ is describing, and then shows that the relevant comparison is unaffected by it.