PG Masters that is, and I'd want to ask PhD students because they have experienced doing one (but Masters students are welcomed as well :) )

PG Masters are expensive, I think everyone could appreciate that. What would be your advice to students that are doing a Masters but are heading towards a failed Masters or a poor performing Masters? Would you advice them to continue on or end their Masters?

I'm not so sure what employees would say about poor performing Masters really, would that effect the students negatively? Say for example the student has a good 2:1 degree but a barely pass Masters degree, would that effect their chances of securing a job related to the field or a research work?

And say for example the student has a First but their Masters is heading for a poor performing graduate degree, wouldn't it be better to just get out of the Masters and apply straight for a PhD if that's the reason why they are doing the PG in the first place (to get a place for a PhD)? - although one could argue that a Masters could strengthen the knowledge needed to do a certain field, but sometimes the Uni's way of dealing with the modules is difficult or the Uni made it unnecessarily difficult for the students to grasp the knowledge within that duration, hence why they are performing poorly.

Finally, would the ROI (Return of Investment) be poor if one gets a poor performing Masters - I mentioned this because some folks would say, "A Masters is a Masters" - is it?

*Bump*

Perhaps the decision would vary depending on how far through the masters you are - it would be a shame to quit at a late stage I think.

Hopefully someone in the know will give their opinion.

It depends what you want to do. Given that most masters are pass or fail (with merit/distinction in some) then generally employers don't care. As long as you pass it, then you'll have it. Employers generally don't give two hoots if you passed a masters scraped through or got full marks. They just see it as a masters degree.

For a PhD it is seen quite differently as they'll often ask about specific parts of the masters and may even use it as entrance requirements for the PhD. However, rather perversely, it isn't always necessary to even have a masters these days to get onto a PhD (standards slipping? cynical, moi?). But if you didn't declare it then you may need to justify what you've been doing since finishing your undergrad degree.

Ultimately I would say if you're going to at least pass it, even if just to scrape through, you've invested the time and effort until now and it will then be there for you to say you have done and can move on from.

So "a masters is a masters" - largely yes.