A finished BUS-317 Topic 7 investment timing comparison example, discounting two upgrades with equal total savings and showing how timing changes which one clears its cost. Searches like "bus 317 topic 7 assignment example", "bus317 topic 7 sample" and "bus-317 topic 7 example" land here.
What a finished BUS-317 Topic 7 investment timing comparison looks like
The finished comparison opens with the puzzle that makes timing matter. In labeled illustrative figures, each upgrade costs 100,000 and saves 120,000 in total over three years, so a simple sum calls them equal. Option A saves 40,000 every year; Option B saves 10,000, then 30,000, then 80,000 as a new process settles. Discounted at the 8 percent rate the finance team supplies, A is worth about 103,100 today and clears its cost, while B is worth about 98,500 and falls short. The example explains the reversal in plain terms and adds the manager's second concern: savings promised for year three are less certain than savings arriving next year, so B carries more risk as well as less value.
How a BUS-317 Topic 7 example is structured
The comparison is laid out so a manager could present it at a planning meeting. It begins with the choice, the two options and the money each requires up front. A timeline for each option follows, showing when every saving arrives, since the whole argument depends on position in time. The next passage adds the undiscounted totals and shows them tying, which sets up why a sum cannot settle the choice. Discounting comes after that, with the rate attributed to the finance team and a sentence on what it represents to the business. The discounted values are then compared, and the reversal is explained without formulas. A passage on uncertainty argues that distant savings deserve extra doubt. The recommendation closes the example, along with the evidence that would make Option B worth revisiting.
Equal totals set up on purpose
Both options save the same undiscounted amount, which isolates the effect of timing instead of mixing it with a difference in size.
A timeline for each option
Every saving is placed in the year it arrives, so a reader sees before any calculation that one option pays early and the other late.
The rate attributed, not invented
The discount rate comes from the finance team, and a sentence explains what it stands for instead of presenting it as the manager's own estimate.
The reversal explained in words
Money saved in year one can be put to work sooner, and a paragraph without formulas explains why that outweighs the larger saving later.
Distant savings doubted a little more
Savings promised for year three depend on a process change working as planned, so the late-paying option carries added risk beyond its lower value.
Where marks go in BUS-317 Topic 7
Adding up the savings and stopping is the most expensive slip in this topic, because it declares two options equal when their timing makes them anything but. A rate chosen by the writer with no source attached draws the next deduction, since the conclusion moves with the rate and a reader needs to know whose number it is. Papers that discount correctly and never say which option to pick have done the finance and skipped the management. Ignoring the lower certainty of distant savings treats a forecast for year three as though it were as solid as next year. Relying on payback alone misses savings that arrive after recovery. Explanations written only in formulas lose the audience the course has in mind, a manager who has to repeat the argument to others.
Get a BUS-317 Topic 7 example written to your instructions
Send the BUS-317 Topic 7 instructions and the rubric listed in your classroom, with the options or case figures your section provided. We write a custom example to those instructions and that rubric, with each option's savings placed on a timeline, the discount rate attributed, the ranking explained in plain words and a recommendation made, in 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free.
BUS-317 Topic 7 questions, answered
Why does timing change the answer when the totals are equal?
Because money received sooner can be used sooner, whether to pay down a loan, fund another project or simply earn interest. A saving of 40,000 next year is therefore worth more today than the same amount three years out. When two options return the same total, the one returning it earlier creates more value, and discounting is the arithmetic that measures how much more.
Where does a manager get the discount rate?
Usually from the finance function, which sets a required return for projects of normal risk. A manager is not expected to derive it, and the example does not try. What the manager should do is ask whether the project is riskier than the business's usual work, because a riskier proposal deserves a higher rate, and state in the paper which rate was used.
What does payback add to the comparison?
A sense of how long the money is exposed, which matters when cash is tight. Option A recovers its cost in about two and a half years and Option B in nearly three, and a manager short of cash would weigh that gap. Payback says nothing about when savings arrive inside that period or what follows it, so the example reports it as context and decides on discounted value.