Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I have a question on this too as I see in my notes and the Kaplan exam kit that there is a section for UK GAAP focus. I entered for INT – does it mean you ignore this?
Are any of you using the September ACCA Revision Sessions that are online?
The syllabus for P2 is vast and there are a lot of questions in the exam kit to cover. To go through them in full means you can’t do as many.
I am yet to read all of the articles and examiners reports which I believe are also useful.
A lot of the kit is past papers although even the up to date one for this sitting doesn’t include any 2017 past questions so I am doing those separately.
Thank you very much for your words of support and advice. I will follow this.
I have enough to get through as it is, it was just mere curiosity as to how much of the new text is MCQs.
I see, carrying value.
I don’t actually even know where this question came from but I am assuming that you have got this right and that I need to go back and learn some of these terms.
I’m also still not happy with the question and will be going through the old BPP revision kit I have now.
Thanks for your help!
Yes I am looking at the specimen paper which shows there are more MCQs which is why I am asking this question. Thanks for your response. CBE is different to the written paper still though isn’t it, according to the ACCA site it looks as though it is.
The trouble is there is only one specimen paper to practice from.
What I mean is that if the wagons are now worth $15500 and there are only 4 left this is the equivalent of £3875 each. This is what the cost of the wagons must be even if it doesn’t make sense.
I’m going to look at other questions.
Yet if one word or phrase was written in the exam it wouldn’t be enough to score the marks. The examiner is very specific about what they want to see. I will look at the examiner’s reports for this topic as it might highlight in more detail of what I should be writing.
Thanks for giving me the idea.
That was a quote from the question of the original value. At the end we would only have 4 wagons and surely there would have been a depreciation amount to have been deducted off of the $24k anyway (which we are not told). I’m assuming we are talking about impairment here due to the adverse publicity etc in the question itself. This is also why I thought the GW was lost other than the fact that the assets already have to be written down and you can’t have negative GW.
I’m a bit confused as out of the 4 wagons left, they now have a value of $3875 each if the impairment of $8500 comes off. However, the net selling price of each wouldn’t remain at $6k each anyway but surely it is lower than the ‘net selling price’ now? The NSP and recoverable amount are not the same. If they can only recover $3875 per wagon then there is no choice but to write down to this amount?
I haven’t come across a question like this one before so although I had a way of working out the answer I am still trying to get a good understanding of this topic.
Thanks
I would say that originally there would have been GW of $10k as OL = $10k and Wagons $30k. Given that the business is now only worth $25000 and OL = $9500 I would say that the Wagons are written down to $15500 and answer 2.
However, who is to say that there is still GW of $10k and the Wagons are written down to $5.5k? I would say that the GW has been lost but perhaps I am wrong.
Somehow I have to filter through their answers and narrow it down. As I rarely know what to write I have to rely on their answers to get an idea of what I should be writing.
I don’t have the up to date revision kit, I don’t know if they have all been changed now for the new Sept sitting format. I will be using the one for exams up until June 2016.
It has more than 33 questions on MCQs but still not as many to reflect the new style of paper.
I see, didn’t realise that. In fact I never sat F3 as I am a Full Member of AAT so have not needed to look at the F3 lectures before.
Haha thanks Mike. I think I will run out of MCQs by then. I guess I can always go over the same ones again.
I’m not really going there for basic bookkeeping I just want to make sure I am prepared for everything that will be tested in F7. If any of the other modules include something that will be on this paper I will be watching it.
It certainly is trying to imagine it when given the scenario.
I am going to look up some questions but might ask you about this topic again. I remember specifically when going through the BPP Revision Kit last time that some of the answers are really lengthy and also remember thinking that I wouldn’t have known to have wrote some of these things they commented on.
Yes and I believe you have said Ratios have been covered by John under F3 so I will look this up too.
Any extra lectures/resources of learning material are useful to know about.
I’m not liking the extra MCQs – now I know why you have said to do lots of practice of them.
I really rather thought this was the case and I am probably overthinking it by trying to work out a calculation behind it.
I wasn’t asking you to watch it, merely explaining that there is a lecture called that as it seems to be a question that has been added in i.e. not part of the usual notes.
I remember this was there when I did the March sitting and I already have the notes printed out. Yes it is nothing to do with that example but is explained before you do the R&I question. Under the lecture there is the notes for the other example that has this ‘$12000’ come from somewhere.
I am continuing to go through the other examples. However, I still don’t understand where this $12000 equaling 25% comes from.
It is definitely something to do with valuation of the nci but for this question I don’t understand. Nevermind, I will look at the others and some questions in the revision kit.