BSBCUS501 – Manage Customer Service

Guide to
Writing a Report
(delete this page when you have started your
report/assessment)
Date: …/…/….
Qualification / Course ID: (e.g. BSB61015 – Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management)
Student Name: (e.g. John Citizen)
Student ID: (e.g. AIBL180290)
Unit ID and Name: (e.g. BSBCUS501 – Manage Customer Service)
Assessment Task No.: (e.g. Task 2)
Executive Summary: – (this starts in a new page)
An executive summary is quite different from an introduction and should be written after you have
completed your report.
It is a summary of the report in which you include sentence/s for every main section of your report.
For example, you can include:

      

overview of subject matter methods of analysis the context of the research the purpose of the report the major findings (you may need several sentences here) the conclusions the main recommendations.

Table of Contents: – (this starts in a new page)
Creating a “Table of Contents”: (delete these instructions after you have generated the “Table of
Contents” on this page)
An up-to-date word processing packages can generate a “Table of Contents” for you.
Make sure the correct page numbers are shown opposite the contents.
Your table of contents should contain:
• a heading that says “Contents” or “Table of contents”
• the same topics that you have used as sub headings through the report.
• list of numbered sections in the report and the page numbers where all this information
can be found (ensure they are correct).
MS Word Instructions on how to create a “Table of Contents”:
• Make Page numbers by going to Insert and Page numbers
• Go to References on the top tabs
• Select Table of Contents
• Select Insert Table of Contents
• Edit the Table of contents so it contains the same information as your report
An example of what a “Table of Contents” looks is below in section: AN EXAMPLE OF A REPORT
Introduction: – (this starts in a new page)
Your introduction should give enough background information to provide a context for the report.
It should:

  

outline the purpose of the report clarify key terms and indicate the scope of the report (i.e. what the report will cover). outline terms of reference and the report’s structure

Body:
– This is the main area of your assessment tasks. Here you include the Assessment Task number,
then Part A or B etc. (as required) or the question you are answering.
The content of the report body would usually include the following:

	Information organised under appropriate topics/headings with sub-headings which reflect the contents of each section. Analysis/discussion of the sources you are reporting. Literature review – describes literature relevant to your topic Method – summarises what you did and why using past tense, includes information on method of data collection (if applicable), Findings or results – describes what you discovered, and observed in your observations and experiments and is written in the past tense. Discussion on the findings of your report and discussion of findings in light of theory Discussion – discusses and explains your findings and relates them to previous research.
  

 

Conclusion:
Your conclusion sums up the main points of the report and should not include new information. It
states the major inferences that can be drawn from the discussion
Recommendations:
Make recommendations – these are suggestions for future action. They must be logically derived
from the body of your report.
References: – (this starts in a new page)
A list of references must be included. It is a list of reference material consulted during research for
your report.
Appendix: – (this starts in a new page)
An appendix contains material which is too detailed, technical, or complex to include in the body of
the report (for example, long tables, surveys etc.), but which is referred to in the report. Appendices
are put at the very end of the report. Each appendix should contain different material and should be
numbered clearly.
It is also information that supports your analysis but is not essential to its explanation
______________________________________________________
Presentation of the report:
The following can be used as a general guideline for the formatting of your report. Be sure to check
your course documents and ask your lecturer for further information.
In general, your report should:

     	use Heading and sub-headings Use APA referencing Use ‘’Google Scholar’’ in conjunction with Google search for peer reviewed articles Allow spacing between the elements of your report Use dot points/numbers/letters to articulate these elements Use clearly labelled and referenced tables and figures to support your report. For example, Figure 1 shows that the population of Bandung has increased dramatically since 1890, or The population of Bandung has increased dramatically since 1890 (see Figure 1) Number each page noting that the Letter of Transmittal and Title page do not have page numbers Use Roman numerals for: Table of contents, List of abbreviations and/or glossary, and the Executive summary/abstract Use consistent and appropriate formatting Use formal language and avoid overly descriptive words.


 

– Here is an example of how a report is written:
Date: 18/03/2019
Qualification / Course ID: BSB61015 – Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management
Student Name: John Citizen
Student ID: AIBL180290
Unit ID and Name: BSBCUS501 – Manage Customer Service
Assessment Task No.: Task 2
Executive Summary
The goal of this paper is to analyse and evaluate the financial performance of CSR Limited by
applying five industry ratios; profitability, efficiency, short-term solvency, long term
solvency and market based ratios. The performance figures are compared with Boral
Limited, who is a similar player in the building industry segment. Benchmarking CSR against
Boral aims to determine parallels in an effort to highlight CSR’s standing within its
representative sector. The annual reports and financial statements are utilised for
structuring arguments and critical reviews based on the five aspects above.
The result will show that CSR is financially healthy, excluding the ‘significant item’ Viridian
Glass. The recommendations and suggestions to support improvements to CSR’s
performance are based on Viridians restructuring program currently underway and, it has
highlighted the need to take measures to offset Viridians performance.
Table of Contents
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8
1. Profitability……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..9
1.1. Gross profit margin ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….9
1.2. Net profit margin ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..10
1.3. Asset turnover margin …………………………………………………………………………………………………10
1.4. Summary of profitability ………………………………………………………………………………………………11
2. Efficiency ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11
2.1. Debtor’s turnover ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….11
2.2. Average day’s sales uncollected ……………………………………………………………………………………11
3.1. Current ratio……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….12
3.2. Quick ratio………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….12
3.3. Cash flow from operations to current liabilities ………………………………………………………………13
4. Long-term solvency ratios……………………………………………………………………………………….13
4.1. Debt to equity ratio……………………………………………………………………………………………………..13
4.2. Debt to total assets……………………………………………………………………………………………………..14
5. Market-based ratios……………………………………………………………………………………………….14
5. 1. Price/Earnings (P/E) ratio…………………………………………………………………………………………….14
Recommendations …………………………………………………………………………………………………….15
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..15
References ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17
Appendix 1 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19
Table 1 Figures from financial statements…………………………………………………………………………….19
Table 2 Profitability ratios and charts…………………………………………………………………………………..20
Table 3 Efficiency ratios and charts ……………………………………………………………………………………..22
Table 4 Short-term solvency ratios and charts ………………………………………………………………………23
Table 5 Long-term solvency ratios and charts ……………………………………………………………………….25
Table 6 Market-based ratios and charts ……………………………………………………………………………….27
Introduction
When considering the information needs of management to make prudent and tactical
business decisions, it is important to understand the financial statements, their use and
their analysis. Focusing on management as the user group and recognising the difficulty of
assessing their requirements, it is highly conceivable that they require a number of
information inputs to perform their role appropriately, such as preference shareholders,
investors and lenders requirements, employee, analysts and auditors interests. Bazley and
Hancock (2013) states that ‘[t]hey require detailed information on the performance of the
business as a whole, and on its parts, to enable them to manage the business on a day-today basis’, including profitability, efficiency, short and long term solvency, and market based
ratios.
Measuring these common information needs and their performance lays the ground work
for effective management judgement. It is important to comprehend and examine the
powerful influence these financial ratios or information has on applying to business needs.
‘Financial ratios are valuable tools in understanding and monitoring a company’s position
and performance’ Erdogan (2013). ‘It is the interpretation, rather than the calculation, that
makes financial ratios a useful tool for business managers’ Najjar (2013).
The following examinations attempt to review and critically analyse the data in the annual
reports of CSR Limited against Boral Limited. Both companies are positioned in the building
industry and compete in similar market segments. Analysing CSR Limited’s data internally
and comparatively to Boral Limited will provide the benchmark for the measurements
relative importance.
The underlying requirement for business health is its ability to sustain profitability. To obtain
this information the profitability ratios are applied. ‘Profitability ratios provide information
on the success of a firm in generating profits’ Erdogan (2013). Some examples include
percentage of gross profit, net profit of sales, and asset turnover. The efficiency ratios are
used to test and determine the company’s ability to manage its assets, as suggested by
Erdogan (2013). Examples include debtors turnover period and inventory turnover period.
Short-term and long-term liquidity ratios explain business resources ability to pay its bills
within the next 12 months and beyond, and how much debt the company is in respectively.
The market-based ratios show the company’s earnings position and potential to investors
and the share market. It includes ratios such as price per earnings and earning yield.
The figures presented in this paper of the financial statements have been rounded and
negative numbers are in parenthesis to assist with the ease of layout, readability and
interpretation. Refer to Appendix 1 for actual numbers and calculations used throughout
this document.
1. Profitability
Profitability of any firm is its primary objective of ‘going concern’ to continue operating into
the foreseeable future and providing maintainable financial strength. Some analysis of firms
is conducted to find out how successful they are at generating the business profits.
Moving our focus on the profitability of CSR Limited, we use three common ratios to
determine its profit sustainability. First we will consider gross profit margin, then net profit
margin and asset turnover.
It is worth noting at this early stage of this paper that CSR treats one of its divisions (Viridian
Glass) as a ‘significant item’. The implications are that Viridian’s underperformance over
several years is undergoing major restructuring. Accordingly, in the annual reports there is a
sense of two differing financial reporting outcomes. For example in the 2013 Annual Report,
the chairman of CSR, Jeremy Sutcliffe reports a net profit after tax of AU$32.7 million before
‘significant items’, and net loss of AU$146.9 after tax and after ‘significant items’ attributed
to Viridians’ performance. Jeremy Sutcliffe points to the AU$196.2 million of asset write
downs and impairment to the carrying value of Viridian has resulted in the net loss.
1.1. Gross profit margin
Gross profit margin has the ability to elucidate the efficiency of turning over of goods into
profit. It is measured by deducting the cost of goods sold from net sales to obtain a gross
margin. Referring to Appendix 1, Table 2, and obtaining the components and calculations,
we observe that CSR Limited has a fairly steady gross margin through 2009 to 2013, peaking
at thirty one percent in 2010 and 2011. The same can be deduced of Boral Limited, although
there is a decline from thirty three percent in 2009 to twenty seven percent in 2013.
The overall result should convince investors and other external interested groups that both
companies have fairly healthy margins and are comparatively similar.
1.2. Net profit margin
The net profit margin clarifies the profit returned by each dollar of sales after payments of
interest and is another significant indicator of the health of the business. Dividing the net
profit by the sales revenue gives us this margin. CSR Limited’s net profit margin for 2012 and
2013 illustrates a major change, going from positive territory of just over four percent to a
dramatic slide to negative eight point seven percent. Similarly, this trend is confronted by
Boral Limited as well, who displayed nearly four percent margin in 2012 and dipping to a
negative four percent margin in 2013. CSR did however enjoy a twenty six percent margin in
2011. As a result, net profit margin graph in Appendix 1 shows the above picture more
visually.
Interestingly, in their 2013 Annual Report, CSR and Boral justified their individual slump.
CSR’s Managing director, Rob Sindel, pointing to weakness in construction and the statutory
net lass after tax was attributed to a ‘significant item charge for restructuring costs and
impairment charges to reduce the carrying value of Viridian Glass operations’. While, Boral’s
CEO and Managing Director, Mike Kane, stressed he has seen ‘fair share of cyclical
downturns’ and in his experience the upturn will come.
1.3. Asset turnover margin
The asset turnover is calculated by dividing sales with average total assets (average of
previous two years total assets) and reveals the efficient use of assets to generate sales. In
2012 and 2013 both CSR and Boral were consistent with around eighty percent. However,
Boral was more consistent over the last four years, averaging over eighty percent, while CSR
was much weaker in 2010 and 2011 with around fifty and sixty percent respectively.
The result of this analysis shows Boral has been periodically more efficient generating sales,
whilst CSR has been inefficient leading up to 2012 and performing steadily in 2013.
1.4. Summary of profitability
Delineating both company’s profitability performance indicates that Boral has a more
consistent profitability performance. CSR’s restructuring and continual underperformance
of Viridian Glass has influenced their profit reporting and decision making. Viridian is being
treated as ‘significant items’ on the annual reports, almost as a separate entity as a result of
its poor performance. This ‘significant items’ status of Viridian is a head-ache for CSR and is
doing what it can to turn it around as evidenced by their restructuring programs. Time will
tell if their patience will be rewarded.
2. Efficiency
With efficiency, we look at the firm’s ability to effectively collect account receivables in a
timely manner. Two ratios that help decode the analysis are debtor’s turnover, and average
day’s sales uncollected.
2.1. Debtor’s turnover
This ratio will help make sense of the effectiveness of the company’s collection of debtors’
accounts. The formula is depicted by dividing net sales with average debtors. Average
debtors are the average of previous two years from the balance sheet.
CSR has become more efficient with its debtors than Boral moving from four to nine, and
Boral is steady around six. This is due to the accounts receivables reducing yearly for CSR
from 2009 to 2013, as observed in Appendix 1 and Table 3.
2.2. Average day’s sales uncollected
Time or days taken to collect debtor’s accounts is the function of this ratio. Complementary
to the debtor’s turnover in that the opposite trend is a sign of reduction in the amount of
time it takes to recover amounts due. Tables 1 and Table 3 depict this scenario and
illustrates how CSR has become much more efficient than Boral with their debtors. The
balance sheets in the annual reports of both companies reveal this to be true.
3. Short-term solvency ratios
This ratio examination starts to makes sense of the risk assessment facing companies and
tries to answers some vital questions about their short-term decisions. Some of the
questions asked may involve the entities ability to repay its immediate and short-term
loans. To begin answering the questions, there are three ratios that decipher and deliver
logical solutions.
3.1. Current ratio
The first of these ratios is the current ratio which translates the short-term debt-paying
ability, and ‘is an excellent diagnostic tool, because it measures whether or not your
business has enough resources to pay its bills over the next 12 months’ Najjar (2013). From
the calculations from Table 1 and Table 4, including the charts, the results indicate that both
CSR and Boral’s ratio are around the one and a half time in 2013. Although in the last three
years both companies are marginally coming down, they are exposed to minor risk. The
2013 figure is confirmed in the IBISWorld (2013) company report on CSR Limited and is
marginally higher than industry average of one point two nine.
3.2. Quick ratio
This ratio reveals the company’s immediate ability to satisfy current debts in the face of
more risk. The equation is quick assets/current liabilities, which is current assets minus
inventory (quick assets) divided by current liabilities.
In 2013 both company’s ratios were less than one, meaning they would not be able to repay
their current debts immediately if they were required to do so. CSR is in more trouble as its
ratio is point seventy eight to one; whereas Boral is just under one to one with point ninety
nine. However, from 2009 to 2012, Boral had healthy trending ratios over one and CSR
recorded ratios of less than one in 2010 and 2012. The results show that Boral is more
capable of repaying its immediate debts.
3.3. Cash flow from operations to current liabilities
Examining the ratio of cash flow from operations to current liabilities will determine another
interpretation of a company’s capacity to repay its short-term debts. This ratio is seen to be
more representative of the ability to pay current liabilities as it focuses on ‘using a figure in
the numerator which is not based on year-end figures’ Bazley and Hancock (2013).
From Table 4 we decode the numbers which illustrate that CSR’s progressive decline from
2010 to 2013 is a concern. It signifies that CSR’s operations generated cash flows have
plummeted from fifty one percent in 201 to just fifteen percent in 2013. Comparatively,
Boral’s results show a similar trend, from fifty percent in 2009 to twelve percent in 2012,
but the figure rose to twenty five percent in 2013 which shows signs of debt repayment
recovery.
4. Long-term solvency ratios
Additionally, we need to also answer CSR’s long term loan repayment ability and its capacity
to survive over a longer period, referred to as a ‘going concern’. Viewing the various ways of
the company’s use of debt in the long-term to represent leverage or ‘gearing’, we employ
two ratios, namely, debt to equity and debt to total assets.
4.1. Debt to equity ratio
This ratio is used to compare total liabilities against equity in the same year, that is, the
relationship between debt financing and equity financing.
The trends clarify that CSR has increased its reliance on total debt from 2012 to 2013.
However, there is clearly a significant decrease in reliance from 2009 and 2010 which shows
low reliance. Boral indicates a decreased reliance on total debt, down from 2012 and
progressive decrease from 2009.
Note that, CSR’s debt is considerably lower than Boral’s, as shown on their annual reports
from 2009 through to 2013.
4.2. Debt to total assets
Showing another view of the amount of leverage for a company, the use of debt to total
assets show the proportion of total assets financed by debt, as suggested in the textbook.
Benchmarking once again to Boral, we can decipher if CSR is heavily reliant on debt.
As noted above, the debt amounts of both companies are considerably different, with CSR
hovering around mid thirties AU$ million and Boral over one and a half AU$ billion. CSR’s
total assets have decreased from over four AU$ billion in 2009 to just over two AU$ billion
in 2013. Boral has the opposite, increasing from five AU$ billion to six AU$ billion.
Therefore, although we can still test their reliance on debt, the considerable difference in
debt may have little relevance. The trend, as shown on Table 5, is both CSR and Boral are
reducing their reliance.
5. Market-based ratios
Market-based ratios help investors analyse and forecast when determining their buying and
selling strategies. ‘Investors can diversify their investments by examining the present value
and estimating future value of their companies’ Zeytinoglu, Akarim and Celik (2012).
One market-based ratio that elucidate investor analysis is the price/earning ratio. It helps to
determine the intrinsic value or what the shares of a company are worth in a vibrant and
liquid stock market.
5. 1. Price/Earnings (P/E) ratio
Furthermore, the price/earnings ratio can be utilised to compare other companies. ‘A higher
than normal P/E ratio could mean that either the price is too high or, as is more likely in an
efficient market, the market is expecting an increase in earnings per share (EPS) in the
future and is adjusting the share price to reflect this’ Bazley and Hancock (2013),
The result interprets the monetary amount the stock market or an investor is willing pay for
AU$ one dollar in an effort for some profit gain. The formula and calculations are provided
in Table 6.
The results convey the volatility of both of these companies, with Boral depicting more
fluctuations.
Recommendations
Clearly, CSR’s Viridian Glass division is underperforming in all areas of the financial
statements, as reported in CSR’s past annual reports. Whilst the restructuring of Viridian
Glass is underway, it has sent positive messages to investors. It must be noted that CSR paid
over five hundred and eighty AU$ million in 2008 for Pilkington Glass and DMS Glass to form
Viridian. It is worth considering off-loading this subsidiary whilst the restructuring program
of it is under way and write off past losses.
The stock market has reacted positively to the Viridian restructure and is reflected in its
upward trend in their share price. To maintain profitability and efficiency, CSR needs to
continue to safeguard its financial position from Viridian. IBISworld (2013) shows both profit
as percentage of revenue and assets at negative ten percent for Viridian, whilst the other
divisions are healthy.
Conclusion
In summary, this paper has illustrated the claims of tough times in the building industry of
which CSR one of the major player. As prescribed in the textbook with considerations for
several financial ratios, an interpretation of CSR’s financial performance was conducted.
From these it was determined that CSR financial health was undermined with its Viridian
division, which is treated as a special item. The ratios are an exceptional tool for
performance analysis and to assist management and other user groups with their decision
making processes.
References
Bazley, M & Hancock, P 2013, Contemporary Accounting, 8th edn, Cenage Learning Australia
Boral Limited 2013, ‘Boral Limited 2013 Annual Report (to Shareholders)’, viewed 16th May
2014, http://www.asx.com.au/
Boral Limited 2012, ‘Boral Limited 2012 Annual Report (to Shareholders)’, viewed 16th May
2014, http://www.asx.com.au/
Boral Limited 2011, ‘Boral Limited 2011 Annual Report (to Shareholders)’, viewed 16th May
2014, http://www.asx.com.au/
Boral Limited 2010, ‘Boral Limited 2010 Annual Report (to Shareholders)’, viewed 16th May
2014, http://www.asx.com.au/
CSR Limited 2013, ‘CSR Limited 2013 Annual Report to shareholders’, viewed 15th May 2014,
http://www.asx.com.au/
CSR Limited 2012, ‘CSR Limited 2012 Annual Report to shareholders’, viewed 15th May 2014,
http://www.asx.com.au/
CSR Limited 2011, ‘CSR Limited 2011 Annual Report to shareholders’, viewed 15th May 2014,
http://www.asx.com.au/
CSR Limited 2010, ‘CSR Limited 2010 Annual Report to shareholders’, viewed 15th May 2014,
http://www.asx.com.au/
Erdogan, AI 2013, ‘Applying Factor Analysis on the Financial Ratios of Turkey’s Top 500
Industrial Enterprises’, International Journal of Business & Management, vol. 8, iss. 9,
pp.134-139
IBISWorld 2013, ‘IBISWorld Company Report, CSR Limited, Premium Report, Balance Date:
31 March 2013’, viewed 17th May 2014, http://www.ibisworld.com.au
Najjar, N 2013, ‘Can Financial Ratios Reliably Measure the Performance of Banks in
Bahrain?’, International Journal of Economics & Finance, vol. 5, iss. 3, pp.152-163
Zeytinoglu, E, Akarim, YD & Celik, S 2012, ‘The impact of Market-Based Ratios on Stock
Returns: The Evidence From Insurance Sector in Turkey’, viewed 19th May 2014,
http://www.academia.edu/1404391
Appendix 1
Table 1 Figures from financial statements

CSR Limited	31/3/2013	31/3/2012	31/3/2011	31/3/2010	31/3/2009
Days in the year Sales	365 1,682,400	366 1,801,900	365 1,913,600	365 1,936,300	3,492,800
Net profit	(146,900)	76,300	503,400	(111,700)	(326,500)
Cost of goods sold	1,229,600	1,278,800	1,323,000	1,341,800	2,679,000
Inventory Current assets	315,000 638,000	309,500 693,100	281,900 762,300	455,900 1,149,500	418,100 1,182,900
Non current assets	1,394,700	1,552,400	1,495,900	2,725,100	3,005,500
Total assets	2,032,700	2,245,500	2,258,200	3,874,600	4,188,400
Current liabilities	413,200	417,100	430,600	737,700	766,700
Non current liabilities	532,900	549,700	546,300	1,318,700	1,835,200
Total liabilities	946,100	966,800	976,900	2,056,400	2,601,900
Operating cash flow	63,600	103,300	185,300	378,200	213,900
Debtors	193,000	196,200	215,300	428,300	474,400
Equity	1,086,600	1,278,700	1,281,300	1,818,200	1,586,500
Earnings per share	(29.0)	15.1	99.6	(24.5)	(29.7)
Market price per ordinary share	2.1	1.8	3.3	3.4	2.4

Boral Limited	30/6/2013	30/6/2012	30/6/2011	30/6/2010	30/6/2009
Days in the year Sales	365 5,209,400	366 4,716,200	365 4,681,700	365 4,493,800	4,727,700
Net profit	(205,700)	177,700	165,400	(89,300)	142,200
Cost of goods sold	3,806,400	3,425,400	3,358,200	3,153,800	3,144,100
Inventory Current assets	680,000 1,842,700	656,100 1,803,500	596,100 2,027,000	548,500 1,612,000	632,600 1,577,000
Non current assets	4,473,700	4,695,600	3,633,500	3,597,400	3,914,200
Total assets	6,316,400	6,499,100	5,668,000	5,209,400	5,491,200
Current liabilities	1,174,300	1,142,800	1,216,100	1,004,600	844,300
Non current liabilities	1,748,600	1,952,900	1,295,500	1,578,700	1,893,300
Total liabilities	2,922,900	3,095,700	2,511,600	2,583,300	2,737,600
Operating cash flow	294,000	133,300	350,700	459,100	418,800
Debtors	887,800	809,600	784,100	783,700	776,900
Equity	3,393,500	3,403,400	3,156,400	2,626,100	2,753,600
Share price	(27.7)	23.8	23.3	(15.2)	24.1
Cost of shares	4.2	3.0	4.4	4.3	3.7

Table 2 Profitability ratios and charts
CSR profitability ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Net profit margin	net profit/sales	(9.3%)	(5.8%)	26.3%	4.2%	(8.7%)
Gross profit margin	net sales-cost of goods sold/net sales	23%	31%	31%	29%	27%
Asset turnover	sales/average total assets	48%	62%	85%	79%

Boral profitability ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Net profit margin	net profit/sales	3.0%	(2.0%)	3.5%	3.8%	(3.9%)
Gross profit margin	net sales-cost of goods sold/net sales	33%	30%	28%	27%	27%
Asset turnover	sales/average total assets	84%	86%	77%	81%

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	3.0%	-2.0%	3.5%	3.8%	-3.9%
CSR	-9.3%	-5.8%	26.3%	4.2%	-8.7%

Net Profit Margin
Boral
CSR

2009	2010	2011	2012
Boral	84%	86%	77%	81%
CSR	48%	62%	85%	79%

Asset Turnover
Boral
CSR

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	33%	30%	28%	27%	27%
CSR	23%	31%	31%	29%	27%

Gross Profit Margin
Boral
CSR
Table 3 Efficiency ratios and charts
CSR efficiency ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Debtors turnover	net sales/average debtors	68.54	68.22	45.39	29.78
Average days sales	days in year/debtor turnover	5.33	5.35	8.06	12.26

uncollected
Boral efficiency ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Debtors turnover	net sales/average debtors	5.76	5.97	5.92	6.14
Average days sales	days in year/debtor turnover	63.3 8	61.1 2	61.8 4	59.4 6

Uncollected

2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	5.76	5.97	5.92	6.14
CSR	4.29	5.95	8.76	8.65

Debtors Turnover
Boral
CSR
Table 4 Short-term solvency ratios and charts
CSR short-term solvency ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
current ratio	current assets/current liabilities	1.54	1.56	1.77	1.66	1.54
quick ratio	quick assets/current liabilities	1.00	.94	1.12	.92	.78
Cash flow from operations to current	operating cash flows/	0.28	0.51	0.43	0.25	0.15
liabilities	current liabilities

Boral short-term solvency ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
current ratio	current assets/current liabilities	1.87	1.60	1.67	1.58	1.57
quick ratio	quick assets/current liabilities	1.12	1.06	1.18	1.00	.99
Cash flow from	operating cash flows/	0.50	0.46	0.29	0.12	0.25
operations to	current liabilities
current liabilities

2009	2010	2011	2012
Boral	63.38	61.12	61.84	59.46
CSR	85.08	61.38	41.79	42.22

Average Days Sale Uncollected
Boral
CSR

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	1.87	1.60	1.67	1.58	1.57
CSR	1.54	1.56	1.77	1.66	1.54

Current Ratio
Boral
CSR

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	1.12	1.06	1.18	1.00	0.99
CSR	1.00	0.94	1.12	0.92	0.78

Quick Ratio
Boral
CSR
Table 5 Long-term solvency ratios and charts
CSR long-term solvency ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Debt to equity	total liabilities/equity	164%	113%	76%	76%	87%
Debt to total assets	total liabilities/total assets	62%	53%	43%	43%	47%

Boral long-term solvency ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Debt to equity	total liabilities/equity	99%	98%	80%	91%	86%
Debt to total assets	total liabilities/total assets	50%	50%	44%	48%	46%

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	0.50	0.46	0.29	0.12	0.25
CSR	0.28	0.51	0.43	0.25	0.15

Cash Flow From Operations To Current Liabilities
Boral
CSR

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	99%	98%	80%	91%	86%
CSR	164%	113%	76%	76%	87%

Debt To Equity
Boral
CSR

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	50%	50%	44%	48%	46%
CSR	62%	53%	43%	43%	47%

Debt To Total Assets
Boral
CSR
Table 6 Market-based ratios and charts
CSR market-based ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
price/earnings	Market price per ordinary share /	(8.22)	(14.04)	3.29	11.92	(7.10)
Earnings per share
(P/E)

Boral market-based ratios:

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Price/Earnings (P/E)	Market price per ordinary share /	15.19	(28.49)	18.88	12.39	(15.20)
Earnings per share

2009	2010	2011	2012	2013
Boral	15.19%	-28.49%	18.88%	12.39%	-15.20%
CSR	-8.22%	-14.04%	3.29%	11.92%	-7.10%

Price/Earnings
Boral
CSR