This topic contains 87 replies, has 65 voices, and was last updated by Anonymous 6 years ago.
December 14, 2010 at 9:32 am
Please share your comments about P2 exam!
December 14, 2010 at 11:58 am
what questions came out?December 14, 2010 at 12:10 pm
consolidated cash flows, very tricky and also the comment on the usefulness of the direct cash flow compared with the indirect cash flows. (It is stated in Kaplan text book, that direct cash flow will not be examined, and there is no detail of direct cash flow at all in Kaplan’s text book) -.-
Hopefully, still get 50/50 marks..
on Section B..SME, Share based payment, Fin instruments (hedging) and another question on 3(b) 10 marks, which I don’t understandDecember 14, 2010 at 12:39 pm
What did the question on SME require???December 14, 2010 at 12:58 pm
The question on sme asked us to discuss if the IASB could have adopted any other approaches instead of creating an IFRS for SMEs. It also asked how the IASB defined SMEs.
Part b of the SME question asked how witebrik a company would calculate goodwill using full method, how it will account for emplyee benefits and research and development costsDecember 14, 2010 at 1:00 pm
Approches to develop IFRS for SME and which one did the Board choose. What are the simplications in the IRSR’s for SME. Then there are 3 questions on how to treat the items according to SME. They are on benefits ()actuarial gain and lossses), goodwill and R&D.December 14, 2010 at 1:24 pm
I didn’t get to do the exam. death in my family. how was it?December 14, 2010 at 1:53 pm
cashflow was really tricky…
ifrs 2 …. easy
IAS 37 and 32 were ok…
overall a balance paper…
hope to get 50December 14, 2010 at 2:00 pm
Fair paper.December 14, 2010 at 2:12 pm
ok paper…hoping to get 50!!December 14, 2010 at 2:15 pm
loads better than the june paper!hoping to get 50..December 14, 2010 at 2:20 pm
cashflw was the most predictable thing this tym in p2! and the question was easier cmpared to last 2-3 atempt questions!!
q2 was bit dificult, q3 was ok
balanced and fair paper! better thn last 2 paperz!!December 14, 2010 at 2:21 pm
I saw cashflows and was over the moon, as i revised this loads, unfortunatly the bastard notes fucked me over, and i was all over the place.
Hopefully ive got enough marks on the written stuff to pass, but the consolidation was a big let down…
Good LuckDecember 14, 2010 at 2:43 pm
a balanced paper, hope to get 50 marksDecember 14, 2010 at 2:49 pm
I had prepared well for the SMEs question, i should easly get a good number on that. question one was ok but not exciting, good luck to us all, I hpe we all go through. I mean those that made and effort to read.December 14, 2010 at 2:50 pm
paper was easy…
Q 2 share based payments
Q 3 IAS 37 IAS 24 IAS 32 39
Q Ifrs for SMEs…December 14, 2010 at 2:55 pm
Can someone plese tell me if Manair in Q3 was a trade investment, joint venture or a JANE?
Disaster of a paper – and i thought i knew my stuff!December 14, 2010 at 2:59 pm
Balance paper it was… not diffcult. Cashflow-consolidation was ok.. i have little doubt of IAS 7 direct and indirect method , What was the requirement actually? any one please tell me. I wrote obviously INdirect method is more useful to user and company too, it segragate Operation, investing , financing cash flow thus telling true performance of company…making decision easier for investors, lenders…. etc
Am i done right?? PLZ Some 1 tell
Hope to get pass with 50-55December 14, 2010 at 3:03 pm
Hey, I don’t think it is joint venture, joint venture only allow the unanimous approval, not majority approval.December 14, 2010 at 3:11 pm
Does anyone remember what Q2 parts b & c were about?
Really not sure how I did.December 14, 2010 at 3:18 pm
the kaplan text has said the direct method would not be tested…..so what happen and for a whopping 7 marks…seems unfair…..asides that i believe any well prepared student should make the examDecember 14, 2010 at 3:24 pm
@keeno007- i think manair should have been accounted for as atrade investment. i had 19.9% but then did not have significant interest and so trade investment appliesDecember 14, 2010 at 3:27 pm
Cheers Gloria – i started off writing about a JANE until i read that the majority shareholder had control of the sub – panicked – then started writing about FRS 25 AFS trade investment – accounted for at fair value trhrough reserves – please god we are right.
Cant beleive i may have to sit this shit again!December 14, 2010 at 3:32 pm
I think it should be an associate as IAS 28 says:
If the holding is less than 20%, the investor will be presumed not to have significant influence unless such influence can be clearly demonstrated. [IAS 28.6]
The existence of significant influence by an investor is usually evidenced in one or more of the following ways: [IAS 28.7]
representation on the board of directors or equivalent governing body of the investee
participation in the policy-making process
material transactions between the investor and the investee
interchange of managerial personnel
provision of essential technical informationDecember 14, 2010 at 3:41 pm
b)I explained also pro – associate arguments.
a) Legal suite-Contingency; Finance charge provision
c) Share cap + share premium to be recorded. Unsure of how to treat pref.shares in this case ?
b) also applied all pro indirect method arguments as some wrote.
c) explained why it is misleading and not ethical
but on a) numerical part I am not sure how many marks i’ll get , difficult notes
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.