This site is very co-operative. The expert did awesome job here for my online assignment. I was very much tensed about this assignment and finally got the experts help to complete my task. It was good to discuss with the expert and he replied on all of my queries perfectly on time. thanks I have gained confidence in you guys.

Research Weighting 20% No authoritative sources, no evidence of research or not relevant for the task. Very limited understanding. The research has not been linked to the main text. Less than 2 authoritative sources or sources are not relevant for the task. Limited understanding. Little evidence of meaningful integration of the research with the main text. 2-3 scholarly sources. Some sources lack relevance or authority but are still appropriate for the task. Adequate understanding. The research could be incorporated with the main text more consistently. 3-4 scholarly sources. Sources are mostly well-chosen, authoritative and appropriate for the task. Good understanding. The research is integrated with the main text. 4-5 scholarly sources. Sources are well- chosen, authoritative and are appropriate for the task. Excellent understanding. The research is very well integrated with the main text.

Writing Weighting 5% No consideration for presentation. Muddled writing that is very difficult to follow. Numerous grammatical errors. Multiple spelling errors. Acceptable presentation. Long winded and some clear writing presentation. Some grammatical errors. Multiple spelling errors. Tidy presentation. Mostly clear writing but at times long winded. Writing style lacks consideration. Few issues around grammar. Less than 5 spelling errors. Professional presentation. Clear writing mainly to the point. Considered writing style. Excellent grammar with only minor oversights. Less than 3 spelling errors. Polished presentation. Clear and concise writing. Mature and appropriate writing style. Excellent grammar, correct in all aspects. No spelling errors.

Organisation/ logic Weighting 5% No flow. No argument. Poorly organised and difficult to read. Does not flow logically from one part to another. The argument is not clear. Generally well organised although the flow of the argument is not always logical. Argument is clear and mostly sound. Coherently organised and logical formation of sound argument. Exceptionally well structured. Logic is easy to follow. Arguments are sound and convincing.

Discussion of Political and economic factors Weighting 25% Both factors are not discussed with any clarity. The significance and relevance of political and economic factors in these markets is unclear. No link is drawn between this factors and international marketing opportunities. There is some discussion about both factors in both markets. At least one factor in one market is flawed, not clear or covered superficially. There is no adequate link to the discussion of these factors and international marketing opportunities. Political and economic factors are assessed and discussed appropriately. Only one factor in one market is flawed, not clear or covered superficially. There is a vague link between the discussion of these factors and international marketing opportunities. Good insight into political and economic factors in all three markets and good discussion. Maybe one factor in one market is unclear or could have been elaborated on. Relevant link between the discussion of these factors and international marketing opportunities. Justification is excellent.

Criteria E (0-39) D (40-49) C (50-64) B (65-79) A (80-100) Selection of suitable markets Weighting 15% Markets are not very good examples and/ or the justification is highly flawed. Flawed choice of markets, not generally regarded as internationally significant and/ or the justification lacks insight and is not very credible. Reasonable choice of markets, generally regarded as internationally significant or the student justifies the choice in the discussion, albeit somewhat flawed or superficial. Good choice of markets, generally regarded as internationally significant or the student justifies the choice in the discussion. Justification of two is convincing and credible. The markets are very well chosen and are generally regarded as internationally significant or the student justifies the choice in the discussion. Justification is highly credible and convincing.

Criteria E (0-39) D (40-49) C (50-64) B (65-79) A (80-100) Selection of suitable markets Weighting 15% Markets are not very good examples and/ or the justification is highly flawed. Flawed choice of markets, not generally regarded as internationally significant and/ or the justification lacks insight and is not very credible. Reasonable choice of markets, generally regarded as internationally significant or the student justifies the choice in the discussion, albeit somewhat flawed or superficial. Good choice of markets, generally regarded as internationally significant or the student justifies the choice in the discussion. Justification of two is convincing and credible. The markets are very well chosen and are generally regarded as internationally significant or the student justifies the choice in the discussion. Justification is highly credible and convincing.