What is your educational goal (why are you in college) and what has led you to have this goal?
If you are transferring to a University, what are the major factors you are looking for in your transfer institution (i.e. major choice, location, size)?
Besides good grades, what will you be able to put on your transfer application to get you to stand out to other applicants (i.e. clubs, volunteer work, working while going to school)?
What are some of the things that draw you to the university you are looking to transfer to? If you have not yet decided on a university you want to transfer to, what is the major factors hindering you from making the decision?
What are your biggest concerns about preparing to transfer (your time at IVC)?
What are your biggest concerns about being at a university once you transfer?
How has this class helped you in your transfer planning process?
omparison of Goldman Sachs and Close Brothers Annual Report Distributed: 24th July, 2018 Last Edited: 24th July, 2018 Disclaimer: This article has been put together by an understudy. This isn't a case of the work composed by our expert article journalists. You can see tests of our expert work here. Any feelings, discoveries, conclusions or suggestions communicated in this material are those of the writers and don't really mirror the perspectives of UK Essays. Global Financial Accounting – Comparison of the Annual Reports 2005 of Goldman Sachs and Close Brothers Depiction of exercises and source and kind of incomes Goldman Sachs has three fundamental kinds of exercises Speculation managing an account. This spreads administrations like merger and procurement counsel, helping customers raise obligation. Exchanging and key speculations. This spreads exchanging and putting resources into settled salary and value items, monetary forms and products. This is the biggest division as far as net incomes and produced 66% of net incomes in 2005. Resource administration and security administrations. This division gives warning and money related arranging administrations including business and warning administrations to extensive variety of customers like annuity store and multifaceted investments. Table 1 demonstrates the net salary of the over three divisions in 2005. Table 1 – Goldman Sachs: Net salary in the year finished November 2005 Division Net incomes, $ billion Income as % of aggregate Venture keeping money 3.67 15% Exchanging and essential ventures 16.36 66% Resource administration and security administrations 4.75 19% Add up to 24.78 100% Close Brothers gives following principle exercises Venture managing an account. Close Brothers has three primary divisions under speculation keeping money: Resource administration. This division oversees resources of private customers, trust stores and seaward supports. Corporate back gives merger and procurement, budgetary rebuilding and obligation warning administrations to corporate customers. Market-production division spends significant time in giving liquidity to the London retail advertise making markets in UK and numerous global offers. Saving money division ordinary managing an account administrations like stores and remote trade offices to individual and expert customers. Table 2 demonstrates the dispersion of working wage, as a measure of incomes, of various divisions Table 2 – Close Brothers: Operating pay in the year finished 31 July 2005 Division Working pay as % of aggregate Resource administration 21% Corporate Finance 7% Market-production 24% Speculation managing an account 52% Managing an account 48% Add up to 100% Productivity of the two organizations from the organization and investors viewpoints The table 3 demonstrates the gainfulness of Goldman Sachs in the years finished November 2004 and 2005 Table 3 – Goldman Sachs: Profitability 2005 2004 % change Net incomes, $ billion 24.78 20.55 20.6% Pre-impose profit, $ billion 8.27 6.68 23.8% % of incomes 33.4% 32.5% Net income, $ billion 5.63 4.55 23.7% % of incomes 22.7% 22.1% Weakened income per basic offer, $ 11.21 8.92 25.7% Profit for normal basic investors value 21.80% 19.80% 10.1% Goldman Sachs expanded its net incomes by 20.6 % in 2005 while pre-impose profit expanded by 23.8 % in the relating time frame. This demonstrates the organization accomplished higher benefits in 2005 as well as expanded the productivity by restricting development in costs. This is bolstered by the way that pre-charge profit as a percent of net incomes were 33.4 % in 2005 contrasted with 32.5 % in 2004. Net profit likewise expanded by 23.7 % in the year 2005 in accordance with development in pre-assess income. The higher development in net income contrasted with net incomes demonstrates that higher deals were not accomplished to the detriment of lower edges. Gainfulness for investors is estimated as far as weakened profit per share. The development in weakened profit per share was 25.7 % in 2005. This was considerably higher than the development in net-income. Investors' benefit is likewise estimated as far as profit for investors value which is net income separated by the investors value. This expanded by 10% from 19.8 % in 2004 to 21.8 % in 2005. Higher return demonstrates Goldman Sachs is utilizing value to procure higher benefits. The table 4 demonstrates the productivity of Close Brothers for the years finished July 2004 and 2005 Table 4 – Close Brothers: Profitability 2005 2004 % change Working wage, £ m 448 401.2 11.7% Pre-charge benefit, £ m 108.62 101.34 7.2% % of working pay 24.2% 25.3% Benefit after expense, £ m 70.75 67.42 4.9% % of working pay 15.8% 16.8% Weakened income per regular offer, £ 0.47 0.45 4.4% Benefit owing to investors, £ m 68.58 65.21 Investors value, £ m 540.32 509.26 Profit for normal basic investors value 12.69% 12.80% - 0.9% Close Brothers expanded its working pay by 11.7 % in 2005 while pre-assess income expanded by 7.2 % just in the comparing time frame. This demonstrates the expansion in pre-assess benefits was countered by a considerably higher increment in costs. The working edge dropped by 1% from 25.3 % in 2004 to 24.2 % in 2005. Working edges of Close Brother were around 9 % lower than that of Goldman Sachs showing that Close Brothers works in a more aggressive condition. Correspondingly benefit after assessment as a percent of incomes were 7 % bring down in the event of Close Brothers – 15.8 % for Close Brothers contrasted with 22.7 % for Goldman Sachs. The development in weakened income per share was just 4.4 % in 2005. This is much lower than the development in Goldman Sachs winning per share. The arrival on regular investor value was just 12.70 % in the event of Close Brother which implies that from investors perspective return in Goldman Sachs is higher than Close Brothers. Long haul money related structure of two organizations Table 5 demonstrates the budgetary structure of Goldman Sachs taking a gander at its short and long haul borrowings alongside investors value. Table 5 – Financial structure of Goldman Sachs 2005 2004 $ billion % $ billion % Here and now borrowings 55.22 36% 54.96 41% Long haul borrowings Anchored 15.67 10% 12.09 9% Unsecured 84.34 54% 68.61 51% 100.01 64% 80.7 59% Add up to borrowings 155.23 100% 135.66 100% Money and money identical 10.26 4.36 Net obligation 144.97 131.30 Investors value 28.00 25.08 Long haul obligation to value 78% 76% Net obligation/(net obligation + value) 84% 84% The % of long haul borrowings has expanded from 59 % to 64 % in the year 2005. This has for the most part originated from the expansion in unsecured long haul borrowings. The organization is very adapted and its net obligation to add up to capital proportion is 84 %. As of November 2005, 84 % of Goldman Sachs was financed through net obligation, i.e., out of each $1 of its capital, 84 pennies originated from obligation. The table 6 demonstrates the monetary structure of Close Brothers. Table 6 – Financial Structure of Close Brothers 2005 2004 £ m % £ m % Here and now borrowings 132.22 15% 287.36 40% Long haul borrowings 729.28 85% 434.00 60% Add up to borrowings 861.5 100% 721.36 100% Money and money equal 1.25 0.85 Net obligation 860.25 720.51 Investors value 540.32 509.26 Long haul obligation to value 57% 46% Net obligation/(net obligation + value) 61% 59% Organization's long haul borrowings have expanded essentially from 60 % to 85 % in the year 2005. Close Brothers equipping are more on long haul borrowings when contrasted with Goldman Sachs. The net obligation to add up to capital proportion is 61 % which implies that Close Brothers is less equipped contrasted with Goldman Sachs. Due to higher value percent in Close Brothers, the long haul obligation to value proportion of Close Brothers is just 57 % in 2005 when contrasted with 78 % of Goldman Sachs. Investigation of distinction in income from benefit Money streams contrast from benefits as a result of the accompanying significant things: Consideration of non-money things like deterioration and amortization in net benefits Trade inflow and surge out buy and offer of property and organizations. If there should arise an occurrence of procurement, no effect is on benefit and misfortune. If there should arise an occurrence of a deal, just benefit or misfortune over the cost is incorporated into the benefits and not everything of offer. Money inflow or surge from the financing exercises like raising or resigning credit, issue of value. This effects income yet is excluded in the benefit and misfortune explanation. We currently take a gander at the above wellsprings of distinction for both Goldman Sachs and Close Brothers. Table 7 demonstrates the income figuring from net benefits of Goldman Sachs for the year 2005. Table 7 – Comparison of income and benefits of Goldman Sachs $ bln Net benefits 5.63 Income Net benefits 5.63 Non-trade things out net income 2.16 Trade utilized out resources and liabilities - 20.203 Trade utilized out working exercises - 12.413 Money from contributing exercises - 1.06 Money from financing exercises 19.37 Change in real money 5.90 Goldman utilized $12.4 billion of trade out working exercises in 2005 and this incorporates $20.20 billion of trade utilized out resources and liabilities. Working exercises likewise incorporate $2.16 billion of non-money things like deterioration and amortization, conceded pay assessment and investment opportunities. Another $ 1 billion of trade was utilized out buy of organizations, property and leases. The money surge from working exercises was remunerated with money inflow from f>GET ANSWER