Dear sir you said market values are always ex div. Yet in example 3 you added $1.25 to $0.15 dividend. In exam, the market value we have to give would be ex div, right?

Hi John. Your lectures are enlightening. If I were to determine the growth rate using dividends paid in years 1-5 and more there was a 1 for 3 bonus issue in year 3, how would I go about this? How do I factor in the bonus issue in my calculations?

I am a little confused with the timing related to example 7. I understand that year 1 and year 2 has no dividend growth and it increases in year 3 by 4%. however, in the calculation you had discounted 189c at year 2 using 15% instead of year 3. could you please clarify this for me?

If the growing dividend was from 1 to infinity then the formula would give the PV now – time 0. Since the first growing dividend is in 3 years time, which is 2 years later than had it started in 1 years time, then the result of the formula is a PV two years later as well – i.e. time 2 instead of time 0. So we discount for 2 years to get the PV ‘now’.

Thank you for these lectures they are fabulous. Quick question on the last example – I did not understand where you go the growth rate from i.e. the .04?

Dear John, In practice, if want to value a security for example has dividends paid in last 10 years: 2, 1.2, 1.8, 1.8, 1.8, 2.2, 3.3, 3.7, 5, 5.2, what should i do? We can use CAPM to estimate discount rate? if can, beta is beta of this security (average?), Future expected dividends how to estimate? we can calculate g=ROE*retention ratio, but this g is different every year, so we use average? I understand the examples in text book, but in practice i am really confuse. Could you help?

One more question you may clarify is that in example 7 when calculating discounted present value to get the MV you used the Dividend of 20c for the first and second year as there is no growth and then instead of using 0.2*1.04 as the dividend started growth, you used 1.89 which I thought is the Market price. Why on earth you are discounting the MV in line with the dividends to get the cum.div.

Firstly we do not want a cum div value- I make it clear in the lectures that MV’s are always ex div unless told otherwise.

When the first dividend is in 1 years time, the formula gives the market value ‘now’. Here, the first of the ‘growing’ dividends is in 3 years time, which is 2 years later than in 1 years time. So the result from the formula is also 2 years later – i.e at time 2 instead of time 0. Therefore we need to discount for 2 years to get a value now.

I do explain this in the lecture and I do suggest that you watch it again – it is very common in the exam 🙂

I thought the cum.Div should be included the dividend about to be paid not the one just paid. In example 5 didn’t 30c is the dividend just paid which means that this 30c was already paid.

and so MV = dividend already paid 8 1+growth/re-G

So when finding Cum.div how come you use the 30c which we already said was the dividends already paid and then saying its about to pay

We do not want the cum div value, the formula gives the ex div value and since they have just paid the current dividend it is the ex div value that we want. If we had been required to calculate the cum div value, then we would have added 30c to the result from the formula.

Q:D CO has $5m of $0.50 nominal value it recently announced a 1 to 4 rights issue at $6per share. ..it’s share price on announcement of the rights issue was $8 per share. what is the Theoretical value of right per existing share.?

Sir, Suppose the company wanted to increase its market value of shares so they decided to pay more dividend than the usual and thus resulted to increase in its market value. Now as they are paying more dividend they will have less retained earnings to invest for companies Future growth.

So does that mean “increase in its market value doesn’t always mean the company is performing well and expected growth in the future” ?

The market value is based on the expected future dividends. Paying more dividend than usual would result in lower future growth and so in theory would not affect the market value.

At 27.40 in the video I understood why you multiplied 20 cents with 0.870 as it was year 1. However, for year 2 and 3 you multiplied both the second year’s 20 cents and third year’s 189 cents with the same discount rate of 0.756 which in my opinion should’ve been for year 2 and for year three shouldn’t 189 cents be multiplied by 0.658 instead of 0.756.

And lastly thankyou always for solving our problems. 🙂

You are happy with the discounting of the 20c at time 1 and the 20c at time 2.

With regard to the dividends from time 3 onwards, suppose for a moment that a dividend had just been pay (i.e. time 0) and dividends were growing at 4%. You would use the formula and get a PV now (time 0) of 189. That would be correct for dividends from time 1 onwards. Here, instead of it having been 20c now it was 20c in 2 years time – i.e. 2 years later. SO using the formula gives 189c two years laters as well. At time 2 instead of at time 0. So then the 189c needs discounting for 2 years.

Make sure you are sorted on this, because it is quite a common ‘trick’ in the exam.

Sir, since you mentioned that ‘189c needs discounting for 2 years’ so then shouldn’t we use the rate from the annuity table instead of the pv table?

Might be a dumb question, but just to clear the doubt, because you said to ensure that im sorted on this topic as its a common trick played by the examiner.

No. Using the dividend valuation formula gives an equivalent amount at time 2 and we then discount for 2 years using the normal PV tables. (Using the annuity tables would be treating it as though it is 189 in each of years 1 and 2, which is not the case.)

Does the Dividend valuation model: “The MV is the PV of future expected dividends, discounted at the shareholders required rate of return” applies to unquoted companies as well?

Does the same dividend valuation model formula Do (1+g) / re-g is called Gordon growth model ?

In the notes of this chapter, we have heading “The valuation of equity – non-constant dividends” but there is no example of non-constant dividend below the notes anywhere. There is only one example which is for constant dividend only.

PS: My mistake, I posted it somewhere else before.

But that section carries on to explain about non-content dividends – read it carefully and look at example 5 and example 6!

(I hope you are watching the lectures – the lecture notes should not be used on their own because it is in the lectures I explain and expand on the notes.)

Yes, I am watching. I am not sure that questions like below is in the syllabus of F9 or not. If it is in the syllabus, can you please help me solving it?

The current dividend on a stock is $2 per share and investors require a rate of return of 12%. What is the price of the stock if dividends are expected to grow at a rate of 20% per year over the next three years and then at a rate of 5% per year from that point onwards.

As obvious as it seems but it just didn’t make sense to me as to why we added the dividend about to be paid to the ex-dividend amount to calculate cum-div. I was going to subtract it so my concept must be totally wrong there. Could you explain?

What I also didn’t understand is that in the case of Ex-Div when we say that the dividend has just been paid then the shareholders must immediately receive the dividend, so why in that case the dividend will be paid after a year.

Lets assume a share is valued on an ex div basis at $100 based on FUTURE dividends and growth etc. Well if a dividend has just been paid, we have missed it, so we look to value the share based on the normal ex div method. Now lets say that the same $100 share is carrying a dividend which is just about to be paid…lets say the dividend due is $2. Well now the share is still valued at the $100 based on its future dividends, but that share is also carrying and extra $2 value because of the due dividend. So the dividend about to be paid is added to the ex div value. I hope this makes sense, and I hope John does not mind me offering help.

If you buy a share cum div then you will then immediately get the current dividend, whereas if you buy it ex div you will not get the current dividend (because it has already been paid) and will have to wait a year to receive your first dividend. Therefore you will be prepared to pay more if you are buying a share cum div.

i was just looking at the papers and came across this question; TKQ Co has just paid a dividend of 21 cents per share and its share price one year ago was $3·10 per share. The total shareholder return for the year was 19·7%.

Im confused as none of the formulas work on this , can you please clarify

The total return is 0.61 and this is the dividend plus the change in the market value. The dividend is 0.21, therefore the increase in the market value is 0.61 – 0.21 = 0.40.

Hi John, I am a little confused between e.g #2 and #4 which basically asked the same question and obviously had the same answer. I am trying to understand your explanation about using the present value to find the market value in #4. Was this to show the two ways of getting the same answer?

If you have finished the lecture you will realise that usually we simply use the formula that is given in the exam. However, given that 50% of the exam is writing as opposed to arithmetic, it is desperately important that you understand the logic behind what we are doing and the premise that the market value is the present value of future expected dividends.

June 2008 past paper Ques 2 (d) The P/E ratio of 7.5 is used to determine the Present Value of $720,000 of the after-tax savings (96,000 x 7.5 = $720,000). How is it possible to use the P/E ratio to determine the present value? I think i understand “why” we use it, i just didn’t realize the P/E ratio could be used to determine the PV.

I apologize for asking this question here but i couldn’t find the Ask the Tutor page.

He should not have used the term present value. The P/E ratio does not replace discounting and does not give a present value in that sense.

What he means is that the value of a share (using the P/E approach) will be the EPS x P/E ratio.

So……if the earnings increase the the market value increases.

(PS To find the Ask the Tutor forums, click on ‘forums’ on the bar at the top of this page, and then click on ‘Ask ACCA Tutor’. Then you will get a list of the Ask the Tutor forums for each paper)

Okay, got it now. Thanks very much for your help. You’re a wonderful tutor, you always make things so easy to understand. (and thanks also for the link information)

Mr John, I have got a question – Why is that when we have a question that includes shares at par of say 25c we have to divide the share by 0. 25 in order to turn it into a $1 share? (to calculate rights issue for example) and then we want to include the shares in the balance sheet, we multiply by 0.25 in order to turn it again to a share of 0.25c!

Sorry if this is a dumb question, this point always confuses me, I have no idea why do we need the share to be a $1 share? Why not just perform our calculations on a 25c share?

We do perform our calculations on 25c if that is the nominal value.

What I am guessing you are confusing it with is that quite often in questions you are told the total nominal value of the shares (an extract from the Statement of Financial Position) and we need the number of shares. So…..if the nominal value is 25c a share and the SOFP figure for share capital is $100M, then $100M is the total nominal value of all the shares and so there must be 400M shares of 25c.

The videos are all working fine – the problem must be at your end. Have you looked at the technical support page? You will likely find support for your device there.

Why is it only the future expected dividend that effects the theoretical value of the share price? Why wouldn’t the expected capital gain of the share be a consideration too for instance? Thanks.

In theory, it is the expected dividends that affect the share price. If the dividends are expected to grow, then over time the share price will grow (and therefore we have a capital gain). However the only reason for the capital gain is because of increased expectation of dividends. (All in theory, obviously 🙂 )

Could you help me understand why share prices on the stock exchange keep changing every day but for the same companies? for sure I know that dividends from what we have learned is a factor but not paid daily I guess and so is interest rate.

The share price is based on what investors expect in the future. So although dividends are a factor, it is expected future dividends.

News about the company comes out all the time (and also about the state of the economy – which affects companies).

If there is news that makes investors expect the company will do better in the future, then they will be prepared to pay more for the shares – and so the share price will increase. If there is news that makes investors expect that the company will do worse in the future, then the share price will fall.

if there is any chance of me passing my ACCA papers it’s all due to this amazing website…. the lecturers are just superb and everything they say is engrained into our brains.. 🙂

this particular lecture keeps stopping and stare ting, been here since 7am and I’ve not even made it half way the lecture. All other lectures are top notch.

We use cookies to improve your experience on our site and to show you relevant advertising.To find out more, read our updated privacy policy and cookie policy.OkRead more

ayeshatabani says

Dear sir you said market values are always ex div.

Yet in example 3 you added $1.25 to $0.15 dividend. In exam, the market value we have to give would be ex div, right?

ayeshatabani says

ok.. I got it, Its going to be mentioned whether they want ex or cum div

John Moffat says

you are correct 🙂

ujun says

Hi John.

Your lectures are enlightening.

If I were to determine the growth rate using dividends paid in years 1-5 and more there was a 1 for 3 bonus issue in year 3, how would I go about this? How do I factor in the bonus issue in my calculations?

John Moffat says

You would calculate the growth rate of total dividends (rather than dividend per share).

ujun says

So would you say that a limitation of using the growth rate model is that share capital remains constant?

John Moffat says

It is not a limitation of the model, maybe a limitation of the answer we use depending on whether it was calculated correctly or not 🙂

ujun says

?

Thank you sir

John Moffat says

You are welcome 🙂

debbie says

hi john,

I am a little confused with the timing related to example 7. I understand that year 1 and year 2 has no dividend growth and it increases in year 3 by 4%. however, in the calculation you had discounted 189c at year 2 using 15% instead of year 3. could you please clarify this for me?

John Moffat says

If the growing dividend was from 1 to infinity then the formula would give the PV now – time 0.

Since the first growing dividend is in 3 years time, which is 2 years later than had it started in 1 years time, then the result of the formula is a PV two years later as well – i.e. time 2 instead of time 0.

So we discount for 2 years to get the PV ‘now’.

debbie says

thanks john

John Moffat says

You are welcome 🙂

ilonadevereaux says

Dear Sir

Thank you for these lectures they are fabulous. Quick question on the last example – I did not understand where you go the growth rate from i.e. the .04?

Please advise.

Thank you

John Moffat says

The question says that the growth rate is 4% (I assume that you did download the free lecture notes before watching the lecture?)

amana1999 says

sir do u have the lecture on business valuations and market efficiency?

John Moffat says

Yes. Work through the notes and lectures in chapter order and you will find there are lectures on everything.

maisunny says

Dear John,

In practice, if want to value a security for example has dividends paid in last 10 years: 2, 1.2, 1.8, 1.8, 1.8, 2.2, 3.3, 3.7, 5, 5.2, what should i do?

We can use CAPM to estimate discount rate? if can, beta is beta of this security (average?),

Future expected dividends how to estimate? we can calculate g=ROE*retention ratio, but this g is different every year, so we use average?

I understand the examples in text book, but in practice i am really confuse. Could you help?

John Moffat says

For your first example you calculate the average growth rate and use that in the dividend valuation formula.

You use the equity beta to calculate the cost of equity, then use this to calculate the WACC.

You either use past dividends of rb growth to estimate growth. It is shareholders expected growth that we need – that will be an average,

All of the above is covered in my lectures and I do suggest that you watch them all.

maisunny says

Thank you so much. I will review all of your lectures. Best wishes for you, sir!

John Moffat says

You are welcome 🙂

barre44 says

Sir,

One more question you may clarify is that in example 7 when calculating discounted present value to get the MV you used the Dividend of 20c for the first and second year as there is no growth and then instead of using 0.2*1.04 as the dividend started growth, you used 1.89 which I thought is the Market price.

Why on earth you are discounting the MV in line with the dividends to get the cum.div.

Thanks

John Moffat says

Firstly we do not want a cum div value- I make it clear in the lectures that MV’s are always ex div unless told otherwise.

When the first dividend is in 1 years time, the formula gives the market value ‘now’.

Here, the first of the ‘growing’ dividends is in 3 years time, which is 2 years later than in 1 years time. So the result from the formula is also 2 years later – i.e at time 2 instead of time 0.

Therefore we need to discount for 2 years to get a value now.

I do explain this in the lecture and I do suggest that you watch it again – it is very common in the exam 🙂

barre44 says

Thank you, you always make things look very simple!

John Moffat says

You are welcome 🙂

barre44 says

Sir,

I thought the cum.Div should be included the dividend about to be paid not the one just paid.

In example 5 didn’t 30c is the dividend just paid which means that this 30c was already paid.

and so MV = dividend already paid 8 1+growth/re-G

So when finding Cum.div how come you use the 30c which we already said was the dividends already paid and then saying its about to pay

John Moffat says

We do not want the cum div value, the formula gives the ex div value and since they have just paid the current dividend it is the ex div value that we want. If we had been required to calculate the cum div value, then we would have added 30c to the result from the formula.

elo says

Kindly assist with workings of mcq 15

sept 2016

Q:D CO has $5m of $0.50 nominal value

it recently announced a 1 to 4 rights issue at $6per share. ..it’s share price on announcement of the rights issue was $8 per share.

what is the Theoretical value of right per existing share.?

John Moffat says

You can find lectures working through all the questions in this exam linked from the following page:

http://opentuition.com/acca/f9/acca-f9-revision-kit-live/

nomadd says

Sir,

Suppose the company wanted to increase its market value of shares so they decided to pay more dividend than the usual and thus resulted to increase in its market value. Now as they are paying more dividend they will have less retained earnings to invest for companies Future growth.

So does that mean “increase in its market value doesn’t always mean the company is performing well and expected growth in the future” ?

Thankyou.

John Moffat says

The market value is based on the expected future dividends. Paying more dividend than usual would result in lower future growth and so in theory would not affect the market value.

mracca11 says

Hello Sir,

At 27.40 in the video I understood why you multiplied 20 cents with 0.870 as it was year 1. However, for year 2 and 3 you multiplied both the second year’s 20 cents and third year’s 189 cents with the same discount rate of 0.756 which in my opinion should’ve been for year 2 and for year three shouldn’t 189 cents be multiplied by 0.658 instead of 0.756.

And lastly thankyou always for solving our problems. 🙂

John Moffat says

The answer is correct.

You are happy with the discounting of the 20c at time 1 and the 20c at time 2.

With regard to the dividends from time 3 onwards, suppose for a moment that a dividend had just been pay (i.e. time 0) and dividends were growing at 4%. You would use the formula and get a PV now (time 0) of 189. That would be correct for dividends from time 1 onwards.

Here, instead of it having been 20c now it was 20c in 2 years time – i.e. 2 years later. SO using the formula gives 189c two years laters as well. At time 2 instead of at time 0.

So then the 189c needs discounting for 2 years.

Make sure you are sorted on this, because it is quite a common ‘trick’ in the exam.

mracca11 says

Sir, since you mentioned that ‘189c needs discounting for 2 years’ so then shouldn’t we use the rate from the annuity table instead of the pv table?

Might be a dumb question, but just to clear the doubt, because you said to ensure that im sorted on this topic as its a common trick played by the examiner.

John Moffat says

No. Using the dividend valuation formula gives an equivalent amount at time 2 and we then discount for 2 years using the normal PV tables.

(Using the annuity tables would be treating it as though it is 189 in each of years 1 and 2, which is not the case.)

Laiq Hussain says

Hi sir,

Does the Dividend valuation model: “The MV is the PV of future expected dividends, discounted at the shareholders required rate of return” applies to unquoted companies as well?

Does the same dividend valuation model formula Do (1+g) / re-g is called Gordon growth model ?

Thanks,

John Moffat says

In theory it applies to all companies – quoted or unquoted.

Laiq Hussain says

Thanks,

In study texts, we have Gordon growth model. Is it the same Dividend valuation model or different?

John Moffat says

The same 🙂

Laiq Hussain says

Hi Mr. Moffat,

In the notes of this chapter, we have heading “The valuation of equity – non-constant dividends” but there is no example of non-constant dividend below the notes anywhere. There is only one example which is for constant dividend only.

PS: My mistake, I posted it somewhere else before.

Thanks,

John Moffat says

But that section carries on to explain about non-content dividends – read it carefully and look at example 5 and example 6!

(I hope you are watching the lectures – the lecture notes should not be used on their own because it is in the lectures I explain and expand on the notes.)

Laiq Hussain says

Yes, I am watching. I am not sure that questions like below is in the syllabus of F9 or not. If it is in the syllabus, can you please help me solving it?

The current dividend on a stock is $2 per share and investors require a rate of return of 12%.

What is the price of the stock if dividends are expected to grow at a rate of 20% per year over the next three years and then at a rate of 5% per year from that point onwards.

Thanks,

John Moffat says

Yes – it is in the syllabus and is often asked.

But you must ask this sort of question in the Ask the Tutor Forum and not as a comment on a lecture.

Arun says

Hi John,

As obvious as it seems but it just didn’t make sense to me as to why we added the dividend about to be paid to the ex-dividend amount to calculate cum-div. I was going to subtract it so my concept must be totally wrong there. Could you explain?

What I also didn’t understand is that in the case of Ex-Div when we say that the dividend has just been paid then the shareholders must immediately receive the dividend, so why in that case the dividend will be paid after a year.

Thanks.

gonko says

Lets assume a share is valued on an ex div basis at $100 based on FUTURE dividends and growth etc. Well if a dividend has just been paid, we have missed it, so we look to value the share based on the normal ex div method. Now lets say that the same $100 share is carrying a dividend which is just about to be paid…lets say the dividend due is $2. Well now the share is still valued at the $100 based on its future dividends, but that share is also carrying and extra $2 value because of the due dividend. So the dividend about to be paid is added to the ex div value. I hope this makes sense, and I hope John does not mind me offering help.

John Moffat says

If you buy a share cum div then you will then immediately get the current dividend, whereas if you buy it ex div you will not get the current dividend (because it has already been paid) and will have to wait a year to receive your first dividend.

Therefore you will be prepared to pay more if you are buying a share cum div.

fahim231 says

hello sir

i was just looking at the papers and came across this question; TKQ Co has just paid a dividend of 21 cents per share and its share price one year ago was $3·10 per share. The

total shareholder return for the year was 19·7%.

Im confused as none of the formulas work on this , can you please clarify

John Moffat says

It is not using a formula from the formula sheet.

The shareholder return for the year is the dividend plus the increase in market value, as a percentage of the market value.

So the total return here is 19.7% x 3.10 = 0.61.

Sine the dividend is 0.21, the market value must have increased by 0.40.

mayzin1707 says

Sir,

It is decrease by 0.40 from 0.61 to 0.21?

Thanks.

May

John Moffat says

Not at all!!

The total return is 0.61 and this is the dividend plus the change in the market value.

The dividend is 0.21, therefore the increase in the market value is 0.61 – 0.21 = 0.40.

cecel says

Hi John,

I am a little confused between e.g #2 and #4 which basically asked the same question and obviously had the same answer. I am trying to understand your explanation about using the present value to find the market value in #4. Was this to show the two ways of getting the same answer?

John Moffat says

I don’t understand why you are confused.

If you have finished the lecture you will realise that usually we simply use the formula that is given in the exam. However, given that 50% of the exam is writing as opposed to arithmetic, it is desperately important that you understand the logic behind what we are doing and the premise that the market value is the present value of future expected dividends.

cecel says

okay! understood! Thanks!

308002873 says

June 2008 past paper Ques 2 (d)

The P/E ratio of 7.5 is used to determine the Present Value of $720,000 of the after-tax savings (96,000 x 7.5 = $720,000).

How is it possible to use the P/E ratio to determine the present value? I think i understand “why” we use it, i just didn’t realize the P/E ratio could be used to determine the PV.

I apologize for asking this question here but i couldn’t find the Ask the Tutor page.

John Moffat says

He should not have used the term present value. The P/E ratio does not replace discounting and does not give a present value in that sense.

What he means is that the value of a share (using the P/E approach) will be the EPS x P/E ratio.

So……if the earnings increase the the market value increases.

(PS To find the Ask the Tutor forums, click on ‘forums’ on the bar at the top of this page, and then click on ‘Ask ACCA Tutor’. Then you will get a list of the Ask the Tutor forums for each paper)

308002873 says

Okay, got it now. Thanks very much for your help. You’re a wonderful tutor, you always make things so easy to understand. (and thanks also for the link information)

John Moffat says

You are welcome – and thank you 🙂

Mahoysam says

Mr John, I have got a question – Why is that when we have a question that includes shares at par of say 25c we have to divide the share by 0. 25 in order to turn it into a $1 share? (to calculate rights issue for example) and then we want to include the shares in the balance sheet, we multiply by 0.25 in order to turn it again to a share of 0.25c!

Sorry if this is a dumb question, this point always confuses me, I have no idea why do we need the share to be a $1 share? Why not just perform our calculations on a 25c share?

Thanks,

Maha

John Moffat says

We do perform our calculations on 25c if that is the nominal value.

What I am guessing you are confusing it with is that quite often in questions you are told the total nominal value of the shares (an extract from the Statement of Financial Position) and we need the number of shares.

So…..if the nominal value is 25c a share and the SOFP figure for share capital is $100M, then $100M is the total nominal value of all the shares and so there must be 400M shares of 25c.

We never turn them into $1 shares – ever 🙂

Mahoysam says

I see, lol! It was a dumb question !!

Thank you Mr John.

Hoping to pass!

Maha

John Moffat says

No problem 🙂

kenton spencer says

i cannot seem to view the videos

John Moffat says

The videos are all working fine – the problem must be at your end.

Have you looked at the technical support page? You will likely find support for your device there.

kenton spencer says

i cannot see to view the videos

neilsolaris says

Why is it only the future expected dividend that effects the theoretical value of the share price? Why wouldn’t the expected capital gain of the share be a consideration too for instance? Thanks.

John Moffat says

In theory, it is the expected dividends that affect the share price. If the dividends are expected to grow, then over time the share price will grow (and therefore we have a capital gain). However the only reason for the capital gain is because of increased expectation of dividends. (All in theory, obviously 🙂 )

neilsolaris says

I see! Thanks for explaining that for me.

Yando says

Could you help me understand why share prices on the stock exchange keep changing every day but for the same companies? for sure I know that dividends from what we have learned is a factor but not paid daily I guess and so is interest rate.

John Moffat says

The share price is based on what investors expect in the future.

So although dividends are a factor, it is expected future dividends.

News about the company comes out all the time (and also about the state of the economy – which affects companies).

If there is news that makes investors expect the company will do better in the future, then they will be prepared to pay more for the shares – and so the share price will increase.

If there is news that makes investors expect that the company will do worse in the future, then the share price will fall.

Yando says

Very clear. Awesome!!! Thanks alot

John Moffat says

You are welcome 🙂

umair112 says

how could i see the book in which the tutor solve example or understanding..pleas guid

John Moffat says

If you look above the video, it says that the lectures are based on our Course Notes!!! You can download them on this website.

aloy4christ says

Does the lecture have mobile phone version? Like hw many megabytes do I need to have b/4 watching the lecture whether on phone or laptop computer?

admin says

most lectures are on average 15-30MB

Safwan says

if there is any chance of me passing my ACCA papers it’s all due to this amazing website…. the lecturers are just superb and everything they say is engrained into our brains.. 🙂

umair112 says

@safwanjaffary, what meterial are use for f9?

Safwan says

@umair112, i am studying F9 from BPP study text and the notes provided here on opentuition.

busay44 says

This lecture has really helped me to understand rather than just cramming formulars to the exam

afridi420 says

admin this video stops every aftr 2min.plz do somthing

admin says

maybe your internet is slow. lecture plays fine

Khadija says

thanku so much my doubts are clear now…..

avsebaale says

this particular lecture keeps stopping and stare ting, been here since 7am and I’ve not even made it half way the lecture. All other lectures are top notch.

admin says

Wait for the lecture to fully load before you press play