OpenTuition.com Free resources for ACCA and CIMA students
Free ACCA and CIMA on line courses | Free ACCA , CIMA, FIA Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums
ACCA F9 Revision Download F9 Question Paper
May 6, 2015 at 6:54 pm
If market value of equity share is not given in the question. So should we need to add the reserves also in the calculation of WACC in book value of equity share capital or not ?
John Moffat says
May 7, 2015 at 8:03 am
Have you watched all of the free Paper F9 lectures in which we go through the while syllabus?
The WACC is always calculated using the total market values of equity and debt (unless specifically told to do different). For equity, the total market value effectively already includes the reserves (so we don’t add them again) – it is the most obvious reason for the market value being higher than the nominal value.
If you are told to calculate a WACC based on book values (which is very rare because it is silly, but was asked as part of a question last time), then the book value of equity is share capital plus reserves.
It will help you to watch the lecture where I go through last times exam – in one question you were asked to calculate the WACC using both market values and using book values.
December 4, 2013 at 6:43 pm
I’m a little bit confused. When calculating WAAC, I got 6.33%
On Equity I calculated as 41/45 times 12% = .1093 Bond 4/45 times 7% = 6.22
In your calculation, to get 10.93. Unsure how you got 10.93 for one and .62 for the other. Please explain. Kind regards.
December 4, 2013 at 6:47 pm
Not to worry. I got how you got it. I just thought you will divide first before times by the returns , which gave a different answer.
October 14, 2013 at 10:53 am
Thank you Sir for this excellent lecture. Just two short questions which although probably answered somewhere else it seems that I’m unable to grasp. First, the Examiner, in his model answer, uses as the two guesses for the IRR the percentages of 6% and 8% respectively. Is there a rule for choosing these two specific ones? Are we going to get negative marks for choosing two different ones?
And again the question about including or not an overdraft (O/D) balance in the calculations. I noticed that the Examiner in his answer mentions that either way is valid and will get full marks. But that was back in June 2010. Is this assumption still valid?
October 14, 2013 at 4:49 pm
There is no rule for choosing the ‘guesses’ for the IRR. Any guesses are acceptable (unless, obviously, the examiner tells you which ones).
Different guesses will give slightly different answers (because the relationship is not linear) but will still get full marks.
With regard to the overdraft – yes, the assumption remains valid. It really depends whether the overdraft is intended to be long-term or short-term, but unless you are specifically told then you can assume either.
October 15, 2013 at 7:14 am
May 13, 2013 at 11:00 pm
as at the first 7 minutes, i’m afraid you’re using the annuity for 9 years at 5%, not 10.
May 22, 2013 at 1:21 pm
I caught that too.
May 22, 2013 at 5:22 pm
Ooops – sorry, you are correct. I will have to record it again.
(But never mind – things like that are bound to happen in the exam and it would only lose me 1 mark :-)) )
May 22, 2013 at 8:13 pm
May 12, 2013 at 7:56 pm
Is invoice financing and or discounting an option to be considered for part d?
May 22, 2013 at 8:51 pm
Sorry for not replying sooner – I only noticed your question today!
I am not sure what you mean by invoice financing? Invoice discounting means selling an invoice to a bank and getting cash earlier. Otherwise, the only ways of reducing overdraft relating to invoices is to collect money sooner (either by offering a discount for early payment, or using a factor to collect debts.)
However the problems are:
Invoice discounting is only a short term source of finance. It will give you more money (and therefore less overdraft) as a short term solution, but it will not help in the long term – in this question they need long term finance.
Collecting debts in faster is a long term solution, but the problem here is that the company needs $4M to reduce the overdraft. The receivables currently are $11.1M and so it is not really feasible that they could manage to collect debts so much quicker that they could reduce the overdraft by the required amount.
There is no harm in mentioning them if you think of them – the marker would probably give you a little bit of credit for the ideas (but, I am afraid, only a mark or two because of what I have written above.)
You must be logged in to post a comment.