Forum Replies Created
- Posts
On Part A and B were more theory questions than calculations. I had a question for forward rates, one for forex , Miller and Orr & Baumol model.
On question 31 After I finished the exam I realised that it was a cash flow and I needed to put back the depreciation and the sunk cost ??, the 8 marks were missed. I hope to get 0.5 points for the layout and because I added the TAD for the first year. Question 32 was a standard WACC calculation, equity cost was based on DVM model ( I hope) . The hierarchy creditors I had not clue the term but I associated with the risk of the various type of finance, saying the equity is more risky, but has more return , how equity finance can be raised, etc. I don’t have a big hope for this exam because of the NPV-8 points is a big chunk that can make a difference 🙁 . Overall the exam was not hard, was tricky and drilling my brain to ensure that I understand all the concepts.I choose the same. As the other three were triggering the threats of self review, advocacy and familiarity/self interest. Not sure if I was right
Hi All, happy to hear for you guys that the exam was quite easy. Personally on part A the first question had 1-2 tricky parts in regards to right issue , not sure if I answered them right. Part B wasn’t too bad, the substantive procedures, risks, and test of controls, which I believe I answered them in a decent way. I admit I wasn’t prepared for the adequate and inadequate question in regards to the going concern. I know due to the receivables ratio going up can be a going concern issue, even if there is no a specific number for materiality, but I don’t think my answer was good enough to get any points. Overall my hopes are not too high, if I will just scrap above 50 points I will be more than happy.