Write a reply with thoughtful and substantive responses to my classmate Brad's post answers below and reflect on additional research with sources of information identified as these are particularly valued and enrich our online learning: I feel like applying a single WACC to all divisions fails to recognize that each division likely operates in different industries and probable have varying levels of risk. According to portfolio theory, risk and return must be carefully balanced, and each division has its own risk-return profile. Using a uniform WACC can misprice projects, leading to the acceptance of riskier projects that appear to meet the hurdle rate but actually exceed the company's risk tolerance. It also risks rejecting lower-risk projects that could add stable, long-term value. This one-size-fits-all approach does not account for the varying market betas and industry risks that each division faces, and as a result, it could lead to inefficient capital allocation. These are the potential long-term risks. Increased Risk of Accepting High-Risk Projects: If they continue using the same WACC across all divisions, they could approve riskier projects simply because they meet the 12% hurdle rate. In reality, these projects could carry a much higher risk than the company can