Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I think I have screwed up the paper (my second attempt). Despite hours of study and question practice I couldn’t nail it on the day. I started with the optional questions (3 and 4) but got stuck on the first part of Q3 (CGT calcn) and wasted too much time trying to work out what was needed. Also I dwelt too long on one part of Q4 (cant remember which), so wasting more time. Then I did Q2 and spent far too long on the first part (impact of errors on IT, CGT and IHT) but found the ethics part ok. All this meant I had only half an hour for the long Q1 and could only manage about 10 marks worth.
How did the rest of you fare? I realised later that I would have been better perhaps doing Q5 as I seemed more sure of how to answer it.
Please let me know how you found it.
Ashok Rao
I thought the paper was ok on the whole- not too challenging except for certain parts. I considered the key roles of the chairman in Q1 part d and how they would benefit Lysus but was limited in ideas for application to scenario. I did Q2 but struggled with the part on CSR strategy even though I had read the article. I spent too long trying to recall the definitions and had no time to apply them to the scenario. Also with the last part of Q4 (importance of sound internal controls at Pulpo) though I explained what an internal control is. The advantages of environmental reporting was straightforward- learnt from my notes.
Overall I think I have done ok but could not do justice to the last part of Q1 due to time pressure and shortage of ideas (regarding the benefits of having a non-executive chairman). The second part of Q1d seemed more straightforward requiring a description of the risk embedding process, with which i was familiar. Senior management commitment ~(tone at the top), communication to lower levels and part of everyone’s job description. Reporting arrangements and whistleblowing procedures for staff to report concerns; training in risk management and rewards/sanctions.
In Q2 the agency problems re RIA (institutional investor) seemed straightforward (from notes) – separation of ownership from management meaning it is difficult for RIA’s clients to monitor its activities. I mentioned information gap resulting (the clients have far less knowledge than the directors) and agency costs to monitor the directors (agents) such as publication of annual report and appointment of committees. I hope this is what was required.
I just hope for the best.
Please let me know how the rest of you found it.
Ashok Rao
It is only worth it if you get a borderline fail, i.e. 48 or 49%. At least there is some chance of getting the mark raised to a pass. Anything below that is very unlikely to be changed.
I asked for a review two sittings ago for P1 when I got in the mid 40s but was unsuccessful and wasted my money I felt.
Please let me know if any of you guys have demanded a review and the outcome. All they say in the review is whether you passed or failed each question, which is not that helpful. For the money one pays to ACCA in exam fees and subscriptions, they should at least give more detailed feedback on the exam.
Good luck in the June exams for those who failed- I have failed P1 now six times and P5 three times. I feel I let myself down on the actual day and not because of poor preparation.
Ashok Rao
I have made a right mess of this paper! I spent far too long on Q1 leaving little time for the others. In the end I only managed to do most of Q4 and did not even start the final question. A day to forget for sure!. I know it is a dead cert fail but by how much is the question.
I sat my exam in Peterborough and after the exam I heard many students sounding pessimistic, which at least consoled me that I was not the only one who found the paper tough.
Ashok Rao
I failed by just two marks – my second attempt. I was naturally gutted. I scored 15% more than last time, so at least there was a marked improvement.
I understand that the national pass rate in P5 was very low, so I can take some consolation from that.
Ashok Rao (First Intuition Cambridge)
I failed by only five marks despite all my hard work preparing for P1. I think I know which areas I struggled with and perhaps if I was calmer in the exam room i would have made a better fist of it!.
This is my sixth sitting in this paper and my highest mark to date. I feel really gutted.
Ashok Rao (First Intuition in Cambridge)
I found this paper more manageable than previous ones. I think I was on the right tracks in Qs 1 and 2 but got a bit stuck in parts (b) and (c) in Q4. I was not sure how to frame my answer to (b) regarding constructing an ethical case- I used the deontological approach to justify his reporting to an external source. It is right to protect the public interest above one’s need to serve the employer’s interests.
In Q1, I was clear about the purposes of a corporate code but could not fully apply this to the marketing decision. Otherwise I think I did ok in Q1. Defining the three principles in part (a) was easy and it was not difficult to apply it to the case. Q2 was the nicest I felt. It was a fairly narrow scenario regarding an individual making investment decisions. The discussion on risks was fairly straightforward but the final part (how information in the corporate governance section of the Annual Report would help him make his investment decision) was not so straightforward, I think). I was not sure what they were looking for there. I suppose it relates to potential risk and return.
Hopefully what I have written is good enough for a pass!
Your ideas would be much appreciated.
Ashok Rao