GF599 Unit 6 Capstone Seminar Progress Update Example

Course	GF599 Graduate Capstone in Finance
Unit	Unit 6
Paper type	Seminar progress update
Length	About 840 words, 6 pages double-spaced
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Purdue University Global
Program	MS in Finance
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for GF599 Unit 6

Three Questions for the Room: A Unit 6 Seminar Progress Update on the Tollbrook Capstone

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

GF599: Graduate Capstone in Finance

Unit 6 Seminar Progress Update

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

Tollbrook Tire and Service, its figures and the classmates are composite; the sources cited are real.

What this part is doingStating the project's status and the three outcomes in the lead tells the reader this is an advising session, not a presentation.

Where the Project Stood

1. Project proposal. Complete in Unit 1.

2. Feasibility memo. Complete in Unit 2.

3. Industry review. Complete in Unit 3.

4. Methodology defense. Complete in Unit 4.

5. Base model. Complete. It prices the investor's route at 7.57 percent once taxes are counted, against 5.18 percent for the mortgage.

6. Broker's workpapers. Declined. Replaced by the published cap-rate survey, code S7.

7. Sensitivity testing. Late by one unit. Only the end-value break-even has been run.

I said at the start that I was behind on sensitivity, and I think that helped. The room spent its time on decisions instead of on whether I was on schedule.

Question 1: Should the Two Weakest Sites Be a Separate Project?

Two of the seven owned buildings sit in towns where the stores' sales have been flat for three years. While building the model I had begun to wonder whether Tollbrook should sell those two and keep the other five. I asked whether that deserved its own analysis.

The instructor's answer was no, at least not as a separate question. A classmate who works in commercial lending added that the investor's offer is for all seven, and the investor may not want two weak sites alone, or may price them at a much higher cap rate. The advice was to treat the two-site sale as a sensitivity case in Unit 8 and say clearly that it would need its own offer before anyone acted on it.

I agreed. Splitting the project would have doubled the work and blurred the question the owner asked.

What this part is doingRecording why the writer accepted the advice, not only what it was, shows judgment rather than compliance.

Question 2: Is a Non-Binding Letter Evidence of Price?

My model uses $11,200,000, the price in the letter of intent. A classmate asked how much weight a non-binding letter can bear. The investor could lower the price after due diligence, and letters of intent often open high.

The instructor suggested showing the letter as the top of a band rather than a point. Using the survey range for single-tenant auto service buildings, cap rates of 6.5 to 7.5 percent imply prices from about $11,630,000 down to $10,080,000 for the same rent. The model should report the after-tax cost of selling across that band. If the answer holds even at the most generous price, the recommendation is stronger; if it flips within the band, the owner needs to know.

I ran the band that evening. At 6.5 percent the sale-leaseback costs 7.24 percent after tax, and at 7.5 percent it costs 8.47 percent. Both are well above the 5.18 percent mortgage, so the answer does not depend on which price the investor finally offers.

Turning the investor's single figure into a band was the most useful change of the session, because it showed the recommendation survives even the price the investor is least likely to keep.

Question 3: Before Tax or After Tax?

My exhibits report after-tax rates, which is correct for the comparison, since the rent, the lost depreciation and the gain on sale all have tax effects (Myers et al., 1976). But the owner-president thinks in pre-tax terms, and she compared the investor's 6.75 percent with the bank's 6.90 percent the day the letter arrived.

The advice was to keep the analysis after tax and add a pre-tax equivalent for her. Dividing by one minus the 25 percent tax rate, the sale-leaseback's 7.57 percent after tax is about 10.1 percent before tax, against the mortgage's 6.90 percent. That one translation answers the comparison she made in her head. Textbook treatments of lease analysis make the same point: present the decision in the terms the decision maker uses, while computing it in the terms that are correct (Brealey et al., 2023).

What I Learned About Reporting Uncertainty

I came in thinking sensitivity testing was a box to check after the real answer. The session changed that. Every question the room asked was about which inputs could change the answer and by how much. Results that are reported without showing how they move when the assumptions move are hard for a reader to trust (Leamer, 1983). For this project, the band on price and the break-even on end value are as important as the base result.

What this part is doingConnecting the advice to a broader principle about reporting shows what the writer will carry beyond this project.

Changes Made After the Session

1. The two weakest sites become a sensitivity case in Unit 8, labeled as needing a separate offer.

2. Every exhibit that uses the price will show the 6.5 to 7.5 percent band.

3. The executive summary will carry a pre-tax equivalent beside each after-tax rate.

What Remains

The rest of the sensitivity work, the tax rate and the mortgage rate, will be finished before the interim findings in Unit 7, which brings the project back on schedule.

References

Brealey, R. A., Myers, S. C., & Allen, F. (2023). Principles of corporate finance (14th ed.). McGraw Hill.

Leamer, E. E. (1983). Let's take the con out of econometrics. American Economic Review, 73(1), 31-43.

Myers, S. C., Dill, D. A., & Bautista, A. J. (1976). Valuation of financial lease contracts. The Journal of Finance, 31(3), 799-819. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1976.tb01924.x

Reading the GF 599 Unit 6 instructions

GF599's sixth unit asks you to bring unfinished work to the seminar and report what you learned. Open with an honest status list showing which tasks are complete, which are late and why. Choose questions that need a decision, not reassurance, and state each one clearly with the context a listener needs. For each, record the advice, who gave it, and what you decided, including your reasons if you declined a suggestion. Where the advice led to a quick test, report the result. Reflect on what the session taught you about the project beyond the specific answers, such as how uncertainty should be reported. List the changes you made afterward and what remains before the next unit. Write in first person and keep the tone factual. Cite the finance sources that support the changes, and any work on reporting uncertainty, in APA 7.

How the GF 599 Unit 6 example is put together

A seven-item status list opens the update, marking five tasks complete, the broker's workpapers declined and sensitivity testing late. The first question asks whether the two weakest sites deserve their own project; the instructor and a commercial lender in the class advise a sensitivity case instead, and the writer explains agreeing. The second asks how much weight a non-binding letter carries, and the advice to show a cap-rate band leads to an evening run: 7.24 percent at 6.5 and 8.47 percent at 7.5. The highlighted sentence calls that change the session's most useful. The third asks about before-tax reporting, citing Myers, Dill and Bautista for the after-tax analysis and Brealey, Myers and Allen for translating it. A reflection on reporting uncertainty draws on Leamer. Three changes and the remaining work close the update.

GF599 Unit 6 rubric: what earns full points

Points on this GF599 update go to candor, decision-making and follow-through. Instructors reward a status list that admits what is late, since hiding a delay reads as a project management problem. Questions earn credit when they require a decision and are framed so the room can help. Recording advice is not enough; the update should state what was decided and why, including any advice declined. A quick test run after the session, with its result, is strong evidence that the seminar changed the work. The reflective section is graded on whether it draws a lesson the student will carry forward, such as treating sensitivity as part of the answer. Concrete changes and a plan for what remains show the project is back on track. Sources on lease analysis and on reporting results under uncertainty, in APA 7, support the decisions recorded.

Common GF599 Unit 6 mistakes, and how to avoid them

GF599 Unit 6 updates often read like presentations of finished results rather than records of advice. Others list questions without the answers or decisions that followed, which leaves the seminar's value unclear. Some writers hide that a task is late, then present it as complete in the next unit. Many accept every suggestion, even ones that would widen the project beyond its scope, without saying why. The reflection is frequently a sentence of thanks instead of an insight. A common gap is failing to test advice; if a classmate suggests a range, run it and report what it shows. Keep the status list honest, ask questions that need decisions, write down who advised what and what you decided, report any quick tests, and finish with the specific changes and remaining tasks that will carry the project to the next unit.

Get a GF599 Unit 6 example written to your instructions

Bring your current status, the questions you took to seminar or plan to take, and the Unit 6 prompt and rubric. Your update is built around a status table and a short block for each question: what you asked, the advice, and what changed. A first sample is free and typically ready inside 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.

More GF599 papers and MS in Finance samples

GF599 Unit 6 questions, answered

What if I completed the written alternative instead of attending?

The update still works. The questions go to the instructor in writing, and the answers become the advice the paper records. Some sections pair the written alternative with a discussion thread, which supplies peer responses. Either way the structure holds: status, the questions asked, the advice and the change each one produced.

Where can I find a free GF599 Unit 6 sample paper?

This page carries a full GF599 Unit 6 seminar progress update on a sale-leaseback capstone, with a status list, three questions, the advice and decisions on each, a price-band test and APA 7 references.

Why show the investor's price as the top of a band?

A non-binding letter may open high and fall after due diligence. Testing cap rates from 6.5 to 7.5 percent showed the sale-leaseback costing 7.24 to 8.47 percent after tax, always above the mortgage, so the recommendation does not depend on the final price.

What is the pre-tax equivalent of the sale-leaseback's cost?

Dividing the 7.57 percent after-tax cost by one minus the 25 percent tax rate gives about 10.1 percent before tax, which the owner-president can set directly beside the bank's 6.90 percent mortgage rate.

Should the two weakest sites become a separate project?

The seminar advised against it. The investor's offer covers all seven buildings, and a buyer might price two weak sites very differently, so the partial sale became a sensitivity case labeled as needing its own offer.