[cutebubble]

@aliamir

Heyy – How I approached value chain qs:

For IT I spoke about the issues in Harland – how there’s emerging space for tech innovation I.e with AI, and how Rodnim is currently making use of the QR code system but in order to gain competitive advantage they could be doing more to meet the expectations from clients to be “innovative” e.g Big Data, or mapping system etc..

also challenged whether the use of QR codes is actually that innovative or whether Rodnim was forced to use the system bc of the external environment i.e it would be weird for Rodnim to still be on paper ticketing systems if all their competitors were using QR codes.

Expanded on how strategic drift is what’s slowing their margins (but referenced this back to IT), and to end I said – evidencing why they should prioritise IT if they want to strengthen their market position – something like that.

I followed the same approach for the other points, some required more detail than others – the common evaluation point was that all the changes from the analysis required huge capital investment so I recommended that changes should be done incrementally rather than all at once or prioritised according to business needs.

Unfortunately I got carried away – had I been more concise I probably would have been able to leave some time at the end – anyway it’s done now hopefully I passed.

[cutebubble]

The exhibits were unnecessarily long, I finished the paper but ran out of time, so q2 in section A (the memo about intrapreneurship was very weak – this was a 16 mark question, so I’m not pleased at all.

Hoping the rest of the paper went well.

Section A
(i) Porter’s value chain: IT, Procurement, HR, Marketing and Services
(ii) Intrapreneurship

Section B
(i) Benefits/ issues regarding tender for sports event
(ii) Memo about Risk management

Section B (2)
(i) Two slides about benefits and negatives regarding Big Data with notes

Anyone else struggle to finish the paper?

[cutebubble]

Passed 51% second attempt, I’m so pleased

[cutebubble]

There’s an insert button next to the delete button on the keyboard, you might have pressed it by accident, if you click it again, it will stop over writing your text. I used to have this problem and it drove me insane

[cutebubble]

@emmamoon It sounds like we had the same variant and that we put similar answers down.

For the first qs I said materiality should be at the lower threshold due to increased ops activity, maybe I didn’t read the extract thoroughly bc I don’t remember them saying that B&Co was as existing client ?.

For qs2 there was also a 6m asking why written rep isn’t enough on it own, I explained that it can only be used to support other evidence in acc with Isa 580 and I think I also added a recommendation of what other evidence they could gather and how, but honestly 6 marks for this question seemed awfully mean.

For the appraisal I also wrote that the resignation was the wrong place to state that and that they should not mention the FD by name as he could sue for defamation. I said also that it shouldn’t be titled opinion but disclaimer of opinion.

Q3 I mentioned KPI metrics how they are difficult to measure as there isn’t a standard set rule and therefore there’s a lot of reliance of judgement. The rest were v similar to yours. I didn’t finish the very last qs in sec 3 bc I was pressed for time – so I mentioned that the recycling metric was unreliable as data was never received by the ops manager.

Fingers crossed for you that you pass! Sounds like you smashed it

[cutebubble]

First question was the theatre group.
A) business risks
B) material misstatements (only wrote 6 paragraphs essentially 4 points) I mentioned the government grant and the provision financial analysis on the revenue and assets and a materially calc) – not feeling confident about this one
C) was about material misstatement for the acquisition that took place in the year with goodwill audit procedures
D) auditors responsibilities to non-compliance, this i felt went quite well

Section 2 was a completion review and reporting qs – related party transactions and provisions and appraisal of auditors report

Section 3 was sustainability reporting – not pleased with this at all! It was very hard to identify the ethical threats in qs 2 when asked matters to be considered before accepting the engagement. So I only wrote three paragraphs two about professionalism – spent way too long on this also I wish I had given up and spent more time on qs 1

[cutebubble]

Okay that’s a slight relief, I only wrote four points for part A so let’s see.

I think the audit opinion section required some thought, bc they never mentioned if adequate disclosure was provided relating to going concern (unmodified + EMP/ adverse) or whether the auditors felt like enough audit evidence was gathered (Disclaimer). So I think we’ll be marked on this based on our justification primarily.

[cutebubble]

For section B – I wrote that a KAM section would be needed because it’s a listed company, but I feel like I missed something because for the matters related to going concern (the retail industry), it all felt too easy and I feel like finding the indicators for going concern from the exhibit couldn’t really be expanded beyond what was already provided.

Was there a second exhibit that I missed maybe with financial information, I don’t remember if there were 2 exhibits for that qs or just 1

[cutebubble]

Passed with 56! I’m so grateful bc I didn’t finish the paper. I failed FM three times and passed SBR first time so I’m so happy.

@hilamu I split my notes in three: IFRS, IAS and ethics and then proceeded to only work on past papers according to those specific standards.

For example I’d revise IFRS 3 and then read through as many past paper questions with IFRS 3. So when I attempted the question I’d know exactly what standard to quote and use.

You’ve got this! It can be so discouraging but you’ve made it so far already

[cutebubble]

I just had the Friday exam, worked backwards, so I ran out of time for the group qs. There was a bit on whether bonds should be amortised and share bases payments – looked at those qs once so I hope I wrote enough to secure some marks.

The political instability qs was fine there was just a lot going on, the extract for inventory had 6 paragraphs, and you had to write about the accounting treatment. Definitely the reason why I ran out of time.

Ethical qs was fine although not many threats. There was self interest threat which came up a lot, and professions competency, but nothing of much else.

Rev recognition for crowdfunding was okay, disclosures also took quite a bit of time I definitely agree that the 8 marks for disclosures was too much. I spoke about the importance of materiality, how it should be organised and concise and that it should be entity specific in order for investors to have value from it.

Really hope I passed but gutted I missed the goodwill qs

[Author]

Posts