Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Overall a much more balanced and predictable paper than December. Yes, there were some extra layers of difficulty, but that’s expected from a strategic level exam.
I’m fairly certain I passed, and also that I would have in December had I drawn these questions then. REALLY frustrating, and very confusing as to how or why December was the way that it was.
48 – fail.
Everyone was complaining after the exam due to the question selection and I am SHOCKED I did this well. First fail of this paper and only second in the entire experience. Whatever, I’ll get it next time, when they pick some mainstream topics.
Thank you everyone who’s commented!
I thought this exam was incredibly difficult, and was taken completely off guard by the questions and the EXTREME focus on risk management instruments. I studied so much, and about 90% of that was a waste of time because it wasn’t even examined. ACCA needs to do some real soul searching because the “Russian Roulette” model of examination doesn’t reflect the reality of professional knowledge and application.
Pass – 50, first try. I also got a 50 on my last attempt at SBL – have no clue how because I always walk out of an exam thinking I got 65…..
Oh well, a pass is a pass and now I just have AFM before I’m an affiliate!
tgoddard92 wrote:APM PM 13:30 sitting – Couple of questions where it wasn’t obvious what was being asked at first but overall a nice paper!
I had this version. Did much better on Q2 and Q3 but think I got the majority in Q1 anyway. Feeling as confident as I have in past papers but you never know.
50 marks, first try. Any more than the minimum and you’re trying too hard.
Really felt I knew it more than that but a pass is a pass!
Update, and I realise how late this response is – I got a 64 on my second attempt.
What I was doing wrong was the format of my answers – I think I understood it but I wasn’t putting my answers in a format which would get marks.
Formats I used that works –
Risk
There is an increased risk that [line on financial statement] is [over/understated] due to [some weakness or failure from the question]. This will result in [relevant performance metric] being materially misleading to investors.Remedy
“Inspect the [document or extract] to search for [facts or figures to verify] to ensure that [line on the statement] is accurate and prudent. [Details from the question] might prove [something else] and [really spell it out for them].—–
I’ve spent a lot of time practicing in a foreign country, I just think I was skipping ahead and assuming markers knew what I meant. But this test is a little basic – spell it out for them in the desired format.
ranganaherath wrote:Hi did anyone get the a streaming website as the Q4 which included research and production costs and also the platform was on a lease or something which wanted us to discuss about digital company and manufacturing company
I personally included the middle two portions in the intangible assets. I excluded research and feasibility as expense as incurred, as it was research and not development. I also excluded the marketing costs as they are G&A to be expensed. I also treated both the same, and I personally have no clue if any of this is right.
Q1 – straight forward except for the share based payments (went with $10m consideration and $4.4 million as P&L loss for the year) and the deferred tax asset obligation (I deducted the NCI portion from the net assets).
Q2 – Computer parts had to be depreciated separately, which I did at half rates because I skipped and didn’t have time to think of anything else when I came back to it. Ethics on crypto, focused on GDPR, reputational risk, chief accountant pressure and self dealing.
Q3 – Focused on how intangibles for tech companies are worth way more to investors than what they’re allowed to be recognised as, as well as management commentary and metrics to fill in the gaps. Balance sheets especially aren’t comparable. For the Deferred revenue I just recognised as performed (domestic in first years and both in final two).
Q4 – it was a sale because rights and obligations of ownership were transferred. Did my best with lease accounting.
On all – ran out of time, which is unusual for me but this was my first strategic exam.
I don’t believe there’s a way to get any feedback or remark your exam. You can have them recount your marks, but from what I read it isn’t helpful and almost never results in scores changing or anything valuable coming from it.
So I’m trying to move forward, but I don’t know how to.
38 – a full 30 marks fewer than I thought I’d done. I’m 4 out of 5 now passing on my first try (and generally getting the marks I thought I did), really not sure what went wrong as my methods have worked without exception on the other ones. Any suggestions on how to adjust welcome!
Also passed tax with a 57 – so still making progress
