| Course | C216 MBA Capstone |
|---|---|
| Task | Task 1 |
| Paper type | Capstone investor presentation |
| Length | About 1,200 words, 2 pages |
| Format | APA 7 |
| School | Western Governors University (WGU) |
| Program | MBA |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for C216 Task 1
Trailhead E-Bikes After Four Quarters: An Investor Presentation on Strategy, Simulation Results and the Case for a $6 Million Raise
Student Name
School of Business, Western Governors University
C216: MBA Capstone, Task 1
Course Instructor
Month Day, Year
Slide 1: Trailhead E-Bikes
Electric bicycles for commuters and weekend riders
Four quarters of operation in the capstone market simulation
Today: what we decided, what happened and why we are asking for $6 million
Speaker notes: Thank you for your time. Trailhead E-Bikes is a composite company created for the capstone simulation, which places competing teams in the same market for electric bicycles. We have now completed four quarters. I will show you the strategy we chose, the decisions behind it, the results those decisions produced, what we learned and how we would use new investment.
Slide 2: Mission and Strategy
Mission: make everyday cycling practical for people who drive today
Strategy: differentiation on reliability and service, not lowest price
Two target segments: urban commuters and recreational riders
Speaker notes: Our mission is to make cycling a practical daily choice for people who currently drive. We chose a differentiation strategy rather than cost leadership, because a strategy requires choosing what not to do, and we could not be both the cheapest and the most reliable (Porter, 1996). Our strategic thrusts are product reliability, a service network in our core cities and a brand built on trust. We targeted two segments: urban commuters, who value reliability and range, and recreational riders, who value comfort and design. We chose not to pursue the price-sensitive student segment.
Slide 3: Key Decisions by Function
Product: two models, the Commuter and the Weekender, built on one frame
Marketing: price $1,650 and $1,450; digital ads plus dealer demos
Operations: one plant, second shift added in quarter 3
People: service technicians hired ahead of demand in three cities
Speaker notes: Each function made decisions to support the strategy. In product, we designed two models on a shared frame to keep costs down while serving both segments, and we spent more than competitors on battery quality. In marketing, we priced above the market average, $1,650 for the Commuter and $1,450 for the Weekender, and focused advertising on reliability. In operations, we started with one shift and added a second in quarter three when demand passed capacity. In people, we hired service technicians in our three largest cities before sales justified it, because service is part of what we sell.
Slide 4: Results on the Balanced Scorecard
Financial: revenue $11.8 million cumulative; net loss narrowed to $0.3 million in quarter 4
Customer: 17% share in commuters, 11% in recreational; satisfaction highest in market
Internal: unit cost down 14% since quarter 1
Learning and growth: 42 service technicians trained; defect rate 1.2%
Speaker notes: We track performance on four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth, so that short-term profit does not crowd out the investments that create future value (Kaplan & Norton, 1992). Financially, cumulative revenue reached $11.8 million, and our quarterly loss narrowed from $2.1 million in quarter one to $0.3 million in quarter four. We hold 17% of the commuter segment and 11% of the recreational segment, and our customer satisfaction score is the highest in the market. Unit cost fell 14% as volume grew and the second shift improved plant utilization. Our defect rate of 1.2% is the lowest in the industry.
Slide 5: What Worked and What Did Not
Worked: premium price held because reliability scores led the market
Worked: early service hiring lifted satisfaction and repeat referrals
Did not work: Weekender underperformed; design scored below two rivals
Did not work: stockouts in quarter 2 cost an estimated 900 units
Speaker notes: Two decisions clearly worked. Our premium price held because our reliability scores led the market, which confirms the strategy. Early investment in service raised satisfaction and referrals. Two did not. The Weekender underperformed because its design scored below two competitors' models; recreational riders care more about looks than we assumed. And we underestimated demand in quarter two and ran out of stock, losing an estimated 900 units. That is why we added the second shift.
Slide 6: SWOT Analysis
Strengths: best reliability and satisfaction scores; service network; falling unit cost
Weaknesses: Weekender design; single plant; not yet profitable
Opportunities: two unserved cities with high commuter demand; fleet sales to employers
Threats: a rival cutting prices 12%; battery cost increases
Speaker notes: Our SWOT analysis draws on the simulation's data. Our strengths are the reliability and satisfaction scores, the service network and a cost position that is improving. Our weaknesses are the Weekender's design, dependence on a single plant and the fact that we are not yet profitable. The market reports show two cities with strong commuter demand where no competitor has a service presence, and a growing opportunity to sell fleets to employers who subsidize commuting. The threats are a competitor that cut prices by 12% last quarter and rising battery costs.
Slide 7: SMART Objectives for the Next Four Quarters
Reach quarterly net profit by quarter 6
Grow commuter share from 17% to 22% by quarter 8
Redesign the Weekender and lift its design score to the market's top two by quarter 6
Open service in two new cities by quarter 7
Speaker notes: Each of the four objectives names a number and a deadline and ties to our strategy, the tests the SMART format sets for management goals (Doran, 1981). We will reach quarterly profit by quarter six, grow commuter share to 22% by quarter eight, redesign the Weekender so its design score ranks in the top two by quarter six, and open service in two new cities by quarter seven. Each is tied to a finding on the previous slides.
Slide 8: The Capital Request
Raise: $6 million
Use: $2.5 million second plant line; $1.5 million two-city expansion; $1.2 million Weekender redesign; $0.8 million working capital
Expected: profit by quarter 6; cumulative net income of $4.1 million by quarter 8
Speaker notes: We are asking for $6 million. Of this, $2.5 million adds a second production line, which removes the stockout risk and lowers unit cost further; $1.5 million opens service and sales in two new cities; $1.2 million funds the Weekender redesign; and $0.8 million supports working capital as sales grow. Our projections, based on the simulation's demand forecasts and our current margins, show quarterly profit by quarter six and cumulative net income of $4.1 million by quarter eight. The main risk is a price war led by our low-cost competitor; we will not match its price, but we will use our service advantage and fleet sales to protect volume.
Slide 9: Why Invest in Trailhead
A clear strategy that the results support
Leading reliability and customer satisfaction
A specific plan for the capital and measurable objectives
Speaker notes: To summarize: our strategy is working where it matters most, in the segment we chose to lead. We have the most reliable product and the most satisfied customers in the market, our costs are falling and we have learned from our mistakes. With this investment, we have a specific plan to reach profit and grow. We would be glad to take your questions.
References
Doran, G. T. (1981). There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives. Management Review, 70(11), 35-36.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71-79.
Porter, M. E. (1996). What is strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74(6), 61-78.
What the C216 Task 1 instructions ask
The first C216 task asks you to present your simulated company to investors. You will usually describe the company, mission and strategy, key decisions, results on a balanced scorecard, lessons learned, a SWOT analysis, objectives for the next period and a capital request. Figures come from your own simulation. Evaluators look for a strategy that explains the decisions made, results reported honestly across all four scorecard perspectives, lessons drawn from what did not work as well as what did, objectives that are measurable and a capital request with clear uses and expected returns. A presentation that reports only good news, or requests capital without explaining its use, rarely clears the presentation aspects.
How this C216 Task 1 example is built
The deck opens with the company and its products, then states the mission and strategy in a few words each. A slide lists key decisions by function, showing how production, marketing and finance supported the strategy. The results slide reports financial, customer, process and learning measures. A slide on what worked and what did not shows honest reflection. The SWOT analysis is specific to the simulation market. Objectives for the next four quarters are SMART. The capital request states the amount, uses and expected returns. Speaker notes explain each slide's figures and reasoning. Figures on each slide match the simulation reports. The final slide restates the request in one line.
Where the C216 Task 1 rubric puts the marks
C216 Task 1 aspects are rated competent, approaching competence or not evident. A strategy aspect asks for mission and strategy explained. A decisions aspect rewards choices linked to strategy. A results aspect looks for balanced scorecard measures reported accurately. A reflection aspect wants lessons from successes and setbacks. SWOT and objectives aspects ask for specific analysis and measurable targets. A capital request aspect looks for amount, uses and returns. Evaluators check figures against simulation reports and notice honest reflection. Slides should be readable and notes complete. Clear slides with one idea each and complete notes make the presentation easy to follow. Objectives with numbers and dates can be checked in Task 2. A capital request tied to specific uses shows investors how their money will work.
C216 Task 1 help: what sends it back
C216 presentations lose marks when results are selective. Report weak measures as well as strong ones and explain them. Decisions may be listed without links to strategy, so say how each served it. The SWOT analysis can be generic; use the simulation's market and competitors. Objectives often lack measures or dates, so add them. The capital request may lack uses, so explain where the money goes and what it will return. Last, keep slides uncluttered and put detail in the notes, since investors read slides quickly. Explain the strategy in one sentence before listing decisions. Show how the balanced scorecard measures relate to each other, such as how reliability supported premium pricing. Rehearse the timing if you present live, and keep notes detailed enough to stand alone if the deck is read without narration.
Get a C216 Task 1 example written to your instructions
Send the Task 1 instructions and rubric from your C216 course of study, plus your simulation reports and decisions. We write a custom investor presentation, slides and notes, to those exact aspects and return it in 24-48h. The first custom sample is free.
More C216 papers
Other MBA sample papers
- C200 Task 2 Organization and Leadership Evaluation
- D433 Task 1 Talent Pipeline and Onboarding
- C205 Task 1 Team Design and Structure
- C210 Task 1 Capstone Annotated Bibliography
C216 Task 1 questions, answered
Are the C216 figures real?
They are illustrative figures from a composite simulation company. Your presentation must use the figures from your own simulation reports. Check every number against your reports before you submit.
What is a balanced scorecard in C216?
A framework that reports performance across financial, customer, internal process and learning and growth perspectives, so financial results are read alongside other measures. The sample reports all four perspectives.
Should C216 Task 1 report weak results?
Yes. Investors and evaluators expect honesty. The sample includes a slide on what did not work and explains how the company will respond. Reflection on setbacks is part of what evaluators score.
How much should the C216 capital request be?
An amount justified by your plans and simulation results. The sample requests $6 million and explains each use, such as a second production line, with expected returns.
Where can I find a free C216 Task 1 sample paper?
The e-bike investor deck and its speaker notes are published above with comments. Send your simulation results from the first four quarters, and your first custom C216 presentation is free.