Forum Replies Created
- Posts
manthan007 wrote:do admin reviews work? iam very confident that i shudve passed. i got a score of 48. should i send for a review?
How did you request for an administrative review, as i am also interested in it ?. Scored 47 and believed i could’ve passed the exams. It is shocking to note that more people are requesting for an administrative review, which is not good for the exam. A lot of people are now questioning ACCA’s transparency.
p4 was a disaster for me….couldn’t attempt 6 marks question (Macaulay duration). others were inadequately attempted.
Did question 1 require us to write a report or prepare a report. I didn’t realise this until I finished my answers and no way to now include the To: , From: , Subject and Date ish. had to squeeze them in above the exam paper, I hope I get some mark there. however, the introduction was not done as there was no space for it and I couldn’t just cancel my answers.
I needn’t mention the economy, efficiency and effectiveness brouhaha, but was direct in linking them to the main objective of the organisation- TRH and was able to explain if there was value for money based on the objectives of the organisation. Remember it asked what performance measure could be applied….
I had taught it was probability, along the line I discovered it wasn’t, but continued to use it as if it was…really tough determining the risk appetite.
started with question 4 and spent so much time. I tried all my best to answer directly from the questions and now only the marker can determine if I made sense. I think it will be hard to develop marking scheme for this kind of questions. In my opinion, there is no one answer.
How on earth will an examiner approve 28% pass rates on p5… The examiner must be enjoying this….considering p7
I didn’t expect it to be easy and so my expectations were met….hoping for an escape…50% will do.
@ ashabiggs06…I do not fink june 2012 question is a reflection of question 1. june asked to critically assess, but this question as for evaluation of performance report and specifically mentioned appendix one…I fink the examiner expects general opinion abt the financial statements….on d fixed and variable…all I said was that the coy should adopt the ABC approach as against the current absorption line on labour. and cost should be apportioned to individual sub. it will be out of place to charge overhead of cafe to juicy. also for the variable element, costing should be allocated according to line of service.
pre tax means before tax, which means tax is yet to be applied and therefore has to be applied…I guess buck of the marks for the eva calculation will lie on calculating the wacc.
I got same 12…somfing…as wacc, but could not find information for the marketing to capitalise and so was silent on that.
I guess question 1b meant to discuss held 2 maturity fixed deposit loan…if d loan is held within 12 months, then the principal and interest should be shown on cash and cash equivalent balance @ year end. But if the coy. Decides 2 terminate d loan a penalty will be charge, which implies that the cash and cash equivalent @ year end may not be up to 3m or 7m. Also, the company can decide 2 reinvest d fixed deposit, if the do reinvest it, the value @ the year end can not be cash and caash equivalent….well DAT was my answer ..don’t know if it’s what the examiner wanted.
d questions were 2 demanding…in q1. I stated that Bcg is best to apply 2 d scenario…but unknowingly went ahead 2 analyze with ansoff matrix. However…my analysis still were in order…hoping 4 a passcome Feb. Goodluck everyone…merry Xmas.
Lolzzzz…cardine so funny…4 me…d paper look easy and scanty but happen 2 be a disater on a second look…all my eggs were in cashflow statement…am sure d examiner is aware he broke dem all…I pray for 50 pass mark…till Feb. Guyz. Merry Xmas.
Passed with 50%. i expected more than this, coz i wrote d exam very well…automatically in Ps level.
No one has said anything on q1. The NPV. How did u guyz inflate the sales and VC ? I inflated base on the first year sales/ vc. And FC was ignored, as the examiner already told us that the cost has already been incurred. I hope I did the right thing. Never seen such kind of que. In my life.
Jaysuey, u damn right. I used Premium in place of Market risk, that’s y my figure is lower, but we made d same point(conclusion) though. That was an oversight or lack of concentration due to time pressure. I probably will loose few marks there. But over all, the buck of the marks will lie on the explanation. I hope examiner understands my point.
Hello cazza, u are right that we got WACC increase of diff. Of 0.3%.I think it’s bcoz the structure was given in %. I used d figures as given. May be u assumed mkt value 4 both structures…well, may be d examiner is only interest in d behaviour of WACC( i.e the changes that occurred) and not the figures.
Y is everybody getting 10% and 10.3% for d WACC ? I got 5.2% and 5.52%. respectively…and my reasons r dat even though d capital structure changed from 75%equity: 25%debt to 60%equity: 40%debt, the risk(:) also increased from 1.6(can’t even remember d figure again, but I fink it’s 1.6) to 2…and so the WACC also increased, ordinarily WACC should reduce as a result of increase in debt and decrease in equity, but d risk was also increased.
