In example 2, to calculate the average receivables after discount, why didn’t we take into account the discount as well? I mean, instead of $20m*54/365, why is it not $20m*99%*54/365?

In example 1, for calculating the discount (1% X 60% X 20M) = 120K, why did you then not use the 15% overdraft? I am confused as to why the 15% overdraft is only used when calculating benefits and not costs.

Sir,
Can you please explain in example 5, when rate of effective cost is greater than rate of interest on overdraft, why is it beneficial to the company?

Delaying payment would save us overdraft interest, but would lose us the discount.
Losing the discount costs more than the saved interest therefore it is better to pay early.

Or, the other way of looking at it is that paying early gains us the discount, but means paying more overdraft interest. Again, it is better to pay early if we save more than we lose.

Dear John,
I don’t understand the workings provided in the back of the notes to examples 1 and 4. It’s different to how you taught in the lecture. I get the arithmetic but could you please clarify in your earliest convenience as am sitting September session. Still got a lot to do.
Kind regards
Shahz
p.s your lectures are great as always

yes, I watched the first lecture and I understand how you arrived at it. I checked the answer in the back, it is presented different. I understand the arithmetic but I want to know which way is acceptable in the Exam? Thanks
p.s i downloaded the notes once more to double check

I don’t understand. Both the lecture and the answer at the end of the lecture notes end up with an effective annual cost of 27.75%.

The workings are effectively the same (although how you do your workings is not relevant – simple discounts will only be asked as an MCQ and there nobody looks at your workings)

Hi sir John
Just a slight correction. In eg 2 where u made the recommendation to offer the discount, you really should’ve said used the factor because the question ask about factoring of receivables

When looking at factoring, how would you handle bad debts that existed before the factoring? In addition if the factor is only offering 80% on invoice rates at an interest rate?

Irrecoverable debts existing before using factoring would be ignored. We are looking to see if factoring would be worthwhile as a long term policy for the future. Existing bad debts would be the same whether or not we decided to factor.

The situation where the factor charges interest on advances is dealt with in the revision lectures – I go through an example that it in the free revision notes.

There are no videos for those two examples because the technique is identical to that of simple discounts to receivables.
You can test yourself on them (and, of course, the answers are at the back of the Lecture Notes).

Thank you so much sir !!!.for such a quick reply
one more thing that I want to know..the questions given in Kaplan’s complete text book are sufficient for practice .?

You cannot force the customers to take a discount. However, you will offer one if it costs less that the interest we would otherwise paying – and then we would hope that everyone would take advantage of it

Thank you for your grateful lectures.
I have one question.
In the example 2, when interest saved on lower receivables is calculated, new level of receivables is calculated as 20 million * 54 days/365 days.
1% of discount was offered. 60% of customers are taking the discount. So new level of receivables is 20,000,000 – 120,000 after discount.
Why is new level of receivables calculated as above, and not as follows?
(20,000,000 – 120,000discount) *54days/365 days?.

Certainly you can subtract the discount. In some answers the examiner has subtracted the discount and in other answers he has not – he gives full marks for either.

Sir, why do we not minus the $20k of credit control staff? and do we not need to include overdraft under cost of new policy but under benefits instead?

I mean “why do we not minus the $20k of credit control staff? and why do we not need to include overdraft under cost of new policy but under benefits instead?

The fact the we need fewer credit control staff means that we will save 20,000 if we use the factor. The saving of 20,000 is therefore listed as a benefit of using the factor.

Using the factor will mean that average receivables are reduced throughout the year (because we are collecting money faster). Therefore the overdraft will be reduced, and therefore there will be less interest payable. It is the interest saved that is listed as a benefit.

the management of recievables and payables when I tried some of previous paper exams it will become complicated how can I ease them and the lecturer said first list the costs and then the savings but that didn’t work at all exercises can you show other ways to solve them ease my understanding of this management of receivable and payables

Although you can set out your workings in different ways, the approach is always the same – we need to calculate the costs and the savings resulting from the new policy and make the decision on that basis.

Every question is worded differently and when there is a problem it is in interpreting the question.

If you have problems with any specific past exam question then do ask in the F9 Ask the Tutor forum and I will try and help.

shaafia says

In example 2, to calculate the average receivables after discount, why didn’t we take into account the discount as well? I mean, instead of $20m*54/365, why is it not $20m*99%*54/365?

shaafia says

I’m sorry I meant to say why is it not ($20m-$120k)*54/365?

John Moffat says

You can (and I do say this in the lecture).

Sometimes the examiner ignores the discount in his answers, and sometimes he subtracts it – there are arguments both ways.

However he has always said that he accepts either for full marks (and the difference is always small in the exam).

shaafia says

thank you

John Moffat says

You are welcome

$@M says

Hi Sir,

Thank you for the great videos.

I have a doubt for Ex.4, the ans behind is 44.58%, but as per your calculation for ex.1,

I get 14.45%.

Kindly clarify.

Thanks.

John Moffat says

I don’t know how you got your answer.

The interest is 2/98 (0.020408) over 20 days.

The yearly interest rate = (1.020408)^(365/20) ) -1 = 0.4458 or 44.58%

$@M says

Thank you sir, it was my arithmetical mistake.

Lilit says

Once again thank you !!!!!!!!! You make complicated stuff so easy to understand !!!

John Moffat says

Thanks for the comment – I am pleased it is helping you

ahlaamzk says

Hi Mr. Moffat,

In example 1, for calculating the discount (1% X 60% X 20M) = 120K, why did you then not use the 15% overdraft? I am confused as to why the 15% overdraft is only used when calculating benefits and not costs.

Thanks

ahlaamzk says

Sorry I mean example 2

ahlaamzk says

I figured it out

priyanka says

Sir,

Can you please explain in example 5, when rate of effective cost is greater than rate of interest on overdraft, why is it beneficial to the company?

John Moffat says

Delaying payment would save us overdraft interest, but would lose us the discount.

Losing the discount costs more than the saved interest therefore it is better to pay early.

Or, the other way of looking at it is that paying early gains us the discount, but means paying more overdraft interest. Again, it is better to pay early if we save more than we lose.

priyanka says

Thank you, I understood it.

shahz20 says

Dear John,

I don’t understand the workings provided in the back of the notes to examples 1 and 4. It’s different to how you taught in the lecture. I get the arithmetic but could you please clarify in your earliest convenience as am sitting September session. Still got a lot to do.

Kind regards

Shahz

p.s your lectures are great as always

John Moffat says

Have you watched the first lecture on the management of receivables (this is the second one).

In that lecture I go through example 1 (which is ‘simple’ discounts)and the answer is the same as in the current edition of the free lecture notes.

shahz20 says

yes, I watched the first lecture and I understand how you arrived at it. I checked the answer in the back, it is presented different. I understand the arithmetic but I want to know which way is acceptable in the Exam? Thanks

p.s i downloaded the notes once more to double check

John Moffat says

I don’t understand. Both the lecture and the answer at the end of the lecture notes end up with an effective annual cost of 27.75%.

The workings are effectively the same (although how you do your workings is not relevant – simple discounts will only be asked as an MCQ and there nobody looks at your workings)

Adrian says

Hi sir John

Just a slight correction. In eg 2 where u made the recommendation to offer the discount, you really should’ve said used the factor because the question ask about factoring of receivables

John Moffat says

But example 2 is about discounts, it is example 3 that is about factoring.

Noreen says

When looking at factoring, how would you handle bad debts that existed before the factoring? In addition if the factor is only offering 80% on invoice rates at an interest rate?

John Moffat says

Irrecoverable debts existing before using factoring would be ignored. We are looking to see if factoring would be worthwhile as a long term policy for the future. Existing bad debts would be the same whether or not we decided to factor.

The situation where the factor charges interest on advances is dealt with in the revision lectures – I go through an example that it in the free revision notes.

Raghav says

Hello Sir,

Where are video lectures of Example 4 & 5 (Working Capital Management- Payables Part)?

John Moffat says

There are no videos for those two examples because the technique is identical to that of simple discounts to receivables.

You can test yourself on them (and, of course, the answers are at the back of the Lecture Notes).

Raghav says

Thank you so much sir !!!.for such a quick reply

one more thing that I want to know..the questions given in Kaplan’s complete text book are sufficient for practice .?

John Moffat says

You should really get an Exam Kit because they contain lots of exam standard questions (including past real exam questions), and practice is vital.

DreamerSK says

Hello,

What if 60% of the customers only account for 1% of sales. In practice, would this be accounted for?

John Moffat says

It doesn’t make any difference.

You cannot force the customers to take a discount. However, you will offer one if it costs less that the interest we would otherwise paying – and then we would hope that everyone would take advantage of it

DreamerSK says

I’m still unclear as the calculations are based on the percentage of customers and not the dollar amount they represent.

DreamerSK says

Hello,

What if 60% of the customers only account for 1% of sales. In practice, would this be accounted for?

Thanks in advance.

Irma says

Dear Sir Moffat,

Thank you for your grateful lectures.

I have one question.

In the example 2, when interest saved on lower receivables is calculated, new level of receivables is calculated as 20 million * 54 days/365 days.

1% of discount was offered. 60% of customers are taking the discount. So new level of receivables is 20,000,000 – 120,000 after discount.

Why is new level of receivables calculated as above, and not as follows?

(20,000,000 – 120,000discount) *54days/365 days?.

Best regards

John Moffat says

Certainly you can subtract the discount. In some answers the examiner has subtracted the discount and in other answers he has not – he gives full marks for either.

Irma says

Thank you Mr Moffat

Best regards

Erica says

Sir, why do we not minus the $20k of credit control staff? and do we not need to include overdraft under cost of new policy but under benefits instead?

Erica says

I mean “why do we not minus the $20k of credit control staff? and why do we not need to include overdraft under cost of new policy but under benefits instead?

John Moffat says

The fact the we need fewer credit control staff means that we will save 20,000 if we use the factor. The saving of 20,000 is therefore listed as a benefit of using the factor.

Using the factor will mean that average receivables are reduced throughout the year (because we are collecting money faster). Therefore the overdraft will be reduced, and therefore there will be less interest payable. It is the interest saved that is listed as a benefit.

bona007 says

Is the net cost $46,027 ($120000-$73973) in question 2?

John Moffat says

Yes it is. (There are answers to all of the examples at the back of the course notes – it is listed on the contents page.)

Abdullahi says

the management of recievables and payables when I tried some of previous paper exams it will become complicated how can I ease them and the lecturer said first list the costs and then the savings but that didn’t work at all exercises can you show other ways to solve them ease my understanding of this management of receivable and payables

John Moffat says

Although you can set out your workings in different ways, the approach is always the same – we need to calculate the costs and the savings resulting from the new policy and make the decision on that basis.

Every question is worded differently and when there is a problem it is in interpreting the question.

If you have problems with any specific past exam question then do ask in the F9 Ask the Tutor forum and I will try and help.

Abdullahi says

Working Capital part at the side of recievables and payables when I tried some of previous Paper it will become complicated how can I ease them

Abdullahi says

I want to print out the F9 lecture notes, how can

John Moffat says

If you download them first, you should be able to print them out as normal.