Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Thank you for the clarification Gillian. I’m at peace knowing that I linked my business and financial analysis. I have two questions, in my presentation I made just one error in my sentence wording (omitted wording). I hope this will not heavily affect my chances of passing?
The second question is that if the grammar and meaning are clear but there are very little grammatical mistakes, hope it will not affected my chances of passing?. Thank you.
Your comment on the program lead made me shiver ???. I hope I made it through. I did topic 5, I only need a C grade to obtain first class as my average is close to 80.
No need to get scared. If you watched the OBU Youtube channel, Dr Kate stated that that’s how it will be that we should not be worried.
faisal1711 wrote:Dear Agboolakenny84,
Hi, Faisal.
So here’s what I did.
At first, I studied using the Kaplan Study text. When I completed the whole study text, I began practicing questions on the BPP revision kit. Looking back, I can say that was a waste of time to me personally.
I was a bit confused and tensed because SBL has a lot of models and theories and I initially thought I was to memorize all models and theories. Thank goodness that was not the case. Once I was done panicking, I decided to put my trust in ACCA Pakistan practice to pass tutor webinars, I say this because with these webinars I had a score of 77 in AA and 71 in AAA. That was when I found my savior, Sir Hassan Dossani. I judiciously watched his webinars from September 2021 up till June 2022 while also attending his September 2022 webinars and as a result of watching these webinars, SBL began making a lot of sense to me. He shares his notes to a WhatsApp group and these notes contains a summary of the aspects of the syllabus which is required to pass.In addition to watching webinars, I answered tons of questions on the ACCA practice platform. In fact, I think I answered the full exam questions at least 30 times lol. Also, I read examiners report to find out where candidates continuously make errors and mistakes. Also, I read the latest technical articles which was Responsible leadership and another one I can’t remember. Responsible leadership came out in my exam.
Also, I read Sir Hassan’s summarized notes everyday for at least 50 days. This way, all necessary models and formats where imprinted in my brain.
Lastly, I ensured to watch videos on professional skills marks from the ACCA website and YouTube channel. Sir Hassan always says not to panic about professional skills marks that it’s all about how you present and structure your answers.
During the exam day, I made sure to be strict with timing. As I have fast typing speed, I am able to type my thoughts quickly which helps saves me time in the exam. I spent 40 minutes reading the exhibit and copying and pasting on the word processor. I ensured to do the templates and proforma for each question before fully answering a question. By this I mean, to from, subject and date (something like this).
I also ensured to make relevant answers to the exam. I linked my answers to the exhibit so I can score high. Always link your answers to the exhibit at all times. In addition, keep your morale and mood on a high throughout the exam. Never give up in the exam. These are the words Sir Rizwan Maniya told all students listening to ACCA PM June 2021 Webinars and it stuck to me throughout my ACCA journey.
I hope I have been able to help you in some way. I wish you the best in your SBL reattempt. Remember, tell yourself at all times, I will dismantle SBL and will come out victorious in this battle. Have a blessed day.
Was working capital meant to be inflated? In my variant it was requested to include the working capital for a percentage of revenue.
farahhh wrote:@mustafatariq I didn’t release back the working capital in the 4th year, as it was a 10 year horizon. I just added the inflated impact.
Also did you inflated the post tax cashflows of 55m$?It was part of the report.
Mustafatariq21 wrote:Zaid it was not part of report
Yes I discounted. I used the 25 year annuity factor minus the 5 year discount factor.
simon374 wrote:I got a negative NPV for investment A and a positive NPV of investment B of about $1.3m
Same here, it was much higher than 4-5m.
All the calculations were positive, but investment b with real options was higher.ale.crr wrote:I got around that but I added the annuity factor for the years 5-25 so it was much higher but don’t know if it’s right!
Did you add the after tax cash flows ? I got 13-16m. Can’t remember the exact figures.
However it’s not the final answer that matters, it’s the steps.abin111 wrote:Can anyone tell what they got in their result in the 50 marker…for me it was some 3 million for investment A and 5 million something for investment b with the real option incorporated.less than a million for investment b without real option.
Segregation, conflict of interest are more associated with benefits of splitting the role of the Chairman and CEO.
saif2589 wrote:seperation of audit/risk committee slides i wrote
benefits<br>-independence of thought and decision not involved in self interest threat<br>-segregation of duties as both committies duties will be divided<br>-reduces conflict of interest as both committes would know who they would be accountable to<br>challenges<br>-unity of both committee rather than one committee<br>-more knowledge and skills would be spread if both committies are joinedWeak points overall. You didn’t apply to the scenario.
For weaknesses your answer should be something like
– There are 3NEDs and as a result splitting the committees would lead to a dilution in the BoD which could lead to changes in operations and cultural issues.– The Internal Audit Department reports to both the audit and Risk committee hence splitting could lead to confusion as to the work the IAD department is supposed to undertake and could lead to issues regarding work of the IAD.
Benefits
– Risks are more dynamic in nature and would need to be monitored consistently as the government legislations and risks are ever changing compared to audit where financial statements are prepared on an annual basis. (Splitting would therefore mean that risks are priotized)And so on….
saif2589 wrote:seperation of audit/risk committee slides i wrote
benefits<br>-independence of thought and decision not involved in self interest threat<br>-segregation of duties as both committies duties will be divided<br>-reduces conflict of interest as both committes would know who they would be accountable to<br>challenges<br>-unity of both committee rather than one committee<br>-more knowledge and skills would be spread if both committies are joinedNobody can tell you if you’re correct. We’re all students. The examiner will decide if you’re correct.
saif2589 wrote:Thanks, what about the risk and mitigation. For that I wrote
Ignore the thread. Everyone wants to confirm their bias here so that they don’t panic lol.
nighteyes wrote:Hmmm, the more I read in this thread, the more I think I completely ballsed up the QH case study. Bloody hell…
Exactly. I think dipatil is talking about a different question. This is the approach I used.
I didn’t include annual reports or emails like saif did. I stated the power and interest of each stakeholder then used it to evaluate on the level of reporting to do. For example QH must always adhere to and comply with government regulations.
There was an opportunity to tag with the government on promoting environmental sustainability.
agboolakenny84 wrote:I don’t think it was IR. I stand to be corrected. You would have to classify the stakeholders into Power and Interest using the stakeholders theory, thereafter you will classify each of the stakeholders and decide how to report to them.
I disagree. How then would you classify the stakeholders using IR ?. Of course you can use power and interest to classify the stakeholders. The government has high power and high interest as they can implement regulations and legislations and they want to ensure that housing was good in Moria.
Employees have high interest as they would depend on QH for salary payments and could even have high power as skilled staff has been identified as a weakness.
You could do the same for all the remaining external stakeholders.
agboolakenny84 wrote:I don’t think it was IR. I stand to be corrected. You would have to classify the stakeholders into Power and Interest using the stakeholders theory, thereafter you will classify each of the stakeholders and decide how to report to them.
See, in SBL there are variety of interpretations.
adrianlam168 wrote:I thought Tows Model should be more appropriate since the exhibit did give us the strength, weakness, opportunities and threat. Thought using Tows to evaluate the competencies of QH is the best approach??
I don’t think it was IR. I stand to be corrected. You would have to classify the stakeholders into Power and Interest using the stakeholders theory, thereafter you will classify each of the stakeholders and decide how to report to them.
tara19 wrote:As far as I remember the stakeholder question was phrased like ‘ what factors should QH consider when deciding how and what is reported to the stakeholders’
When I first read this question I wrote down integrated reporting and the 6 capitals so when I came to write I would remember.<br>But when I came back to write I read the question again and took the stakeholder matrix route – keep informed, keep satisfied etc. because it mentioned what factors I thought it was asking more how do we know what to report to the stakeholders ie how involved are they rather than what reports do they get – but I could be wrong??<br>I guess now I am thinking about it maybe it could have been leaning more towards they should adopt IR and the advantages. Can someone enlighten me?Thank you very much. I spent 3 minutes deciding this. It was more of factors to consider than how we should report to them.
Scott5190 wrote:Same, I felt my question related to more how we should approach each stakeholder I.e power vs interest and also what information needed to be included and why we needed to include it I.e transparency/proactive for gov legislations/regulations not the ways we should report to them
How did you answer the factors to consider question ? Did you classify each stakeholder according to their power and interest ?
Luke wrote:evaluate the core competencies and resources that give QH a competitive advantage
Benefits and challenges of segregation of audit and risk committee<br>Benefits of Cyber security controls of new customer portal<br>Risk and risk mitigation<br>Factors to consider on how to address the stakeholdersI have this same question. Please help. Almost all companies have been affected disproportionately by the pandemic either by increased revenue in 2020 and decreased revenue in 2021 or decreased revenue in 2020 and increased in 2021.
sweetum3 wrote:Hello,
Hi there, you’re not the only one thinking this way. I’m also planning to submit the OBU in November once i’m done with the September exams. I have the 2 full months to myself and i’m prepared to work hard. I can start scanning the topics and looking for a mentor before September as well. Goodluck.
The building purchased was also a significant audit risk. The risk that the useful life attached to the building would be over optimistic. Also the loss making Law department could mean the building is impaired as well as this can be an internal indicator of impairment.
tendaichewe wrote:only managed 6 ROMM as follows;
