Comments

    • Profile photo of John Moffat says

      I really do not know why you have posted this in the Paper F2 forum.

      If you have read the lecture notes for Paper F5, you will have seen in the first paragraph of the relevant chapter that you cannot be asked calculations on regression analysis in Paper F5. For that reason you are not given the formulae – you cannot be expected to use them!

  1. avatar says

    Sir if you don’t mind can i get some quizs that something look like ex2?

    because i read new formula from management accounting book sales in korea

    so i want to proof it new formula is work

    • Profile photo of John Moffat says

      Sorry, but I really do not know what you mean. If you have a book then surely the book will explain?
      Otherwise you should watch the lecture again.
      If the answers in your book do not make sense, then ask in the Ask the Tutor Forum for Paper F2,
      (and I do assume that you have tried our practice test for Paper F2?)

      • avatar says

        Sorry my Eng skill is really horrible x(

        I have found other formula to slove the example2 and I am wondering whether the formula works or not so if you don’t mind can I get some quizzes like that?

    • Profile photo of John Moffat says

      Wrong!

      For F5 this is assumed knowledge from Paper F2.

      If you are studying F5 then I assume you will have been watching our lectures without free lecture notes in front of you (otherwise there is no point in watching the lectures). In that case you will have read the introductory paragraph in chapter 12 – especially the part in bold letters!

      In future please do not ask about Paper F5 as a comment to a Paper F2 lecture.

  2. avatar says

    Dear John,

    I have the same doubt as Sashen and the same seems to have been missed by you. 100s would mean we had to move 2 decimal places which you moved just 1. is there a specific reason or it was missed inadvertently.

    Thanks
    Amit

  3. avatar says

    Hi

    Should the cost in 1000s on the 4th line in fact read 85 as opposed to 80? I am using the lecture notes from F5 but the above lecture from F2

    Also, the answer in the back of the lecture notes show the answer as

    y= 31.430 + 73.21x

    Should this in fact read y=31,430 + 73.21x ? as per your answer in the lecture? (allowing for the variance in numbers due to the different value of the 4th line?

    many thanks

    • Profile photo of John Moffat says

      The fourth line in the answer does read 85 and so your first question is puzzling me.

      As regards the 31.430 – yes, indeed it should read 31,430 (and comparison with the high low equation confirms that). It is just a typing error.

      Incidentally, if you are studying for Paper F5 then I do hope you read the first paragraph of the chapter. Calculations on regression analysis can no longer be asked – you can only be expected to be aware of the idea. It is only in F2 that calculations can be asked.

      • avatar says

        I was referring to your answer in the lecture…your 4th line reads as 80 in the lecture.

        Yes, I am aware of that…I was going through the example to gain a broad understanding of regression

        Many thanks for the quick reply…much appreciated

  4. avatar says

    Hi Sir

    I would like to know in the final Equation:
    y = 32857 + 67.86x

    I understand that 32.857 the decimal moved to the right because there was 3 zeros in the cost figure.

    I would like to know why did 6.7857 only moved one decimal place ?

Leave a Reply