[joevassallo]

Hi Kim

Can I please ask you how do the cancellations of the CBE Exam Centres affect my 7 year expiry dates on the 2 remaining papers that I have left to pass.

I have expiry dates of Dec 2022 for SBR and Dec 2023 for SBL

I am not keen on doing Remote Exams, so that I means I will have to wait till June 2021 sessions (hopefully!!)

Thank you.

[joevassallo]

I have received this email too.

But I have my doubts if I will trust the Remote Sessions, after what I read from the last December 2020 exam sessions. NOT IMPRESSED!!

Any advice?

[joevassallo]

Maybe I am wrong.

I only doubled the market share from 1% to 2% (Year 1 to Year 2). Then used the same 2% from Year 3 and Year 4

My interpretation was that it doubles in Year 2 – I cant remember if it said it will keep doubling…

Very weird exam I think.

[joevassallo]

I included the disposal proceeds as well (in year 4)

Surely this is a cash flow, although it did say the residual of the asset was NIL.

[joevassallo]

I am not sure why but it seems we are having different questions being set….

I had

Q1 APV etc etc
Q2 Interest rate swaps and collars
Q3 Demerger etc etc

So much calculations to do and explanations – very easy to overrun on time (as I did).

The problem, as always, is to try and remember everything I believe. No matter how much you practice.
Not very good unfortunately – March 2021 here we come again again.

I wish ACCA improve on their Excel – it is totally different from what we use in real life I think.

[joevassallo]

I put the fee as €180 in Year 1. I understood it was already inflated.

Then adjusted by inflation Years 2 as onwards….

I don’t recall the 5 months???

[joevassallo]

Stupid of me John, I should have easily realised and picked that one up.

I suppose this is the problem with this paper, so many factors to be on the look out (but then again should apply for all papers I guess….)

Thank you so much John, you are a great help. I will never forget that (thanks to your invaluable advice).

[joevassallo]

Thank you John.

Your explanations to my queries are crystal clear.

At least now I have got it clear in my mind, thanks to your valuable advice.

[joevassallo]

Hi John

I already covered all these 3 topics as part of my studies (Tobin Q, Calculated Intangible Values and Market-to-book Value) when I went through KAPLAN’s recent textbook, under the Chapter “BUSINESS VALUATION”

They are part of Market-Based methods and Asset-Based methods: Syllabus C2 Valuation for Acquisitions and Mergers.

So are we saying that none of these methods are examinable?

Thank you.

[joevassallo]

Thank you John

I only asked the question after having watched your free lecture on Real Options!!!

I know the first was an option to expand and a call option – I think I said that in my question.

I am not sure about the second – I read in one of the textbooks that it could result in a put option and a call option. But you are saying otherwise – just a put option….

[joevassallo]

Hi John

I came across a Chapter in AFM Kaplan explaining the Triple Bottom Line Reporting and I believe I also came across a question about it in the AFM Kaplan Exam Kit. So I am not sure why you state that it is not in the AFM syllabus.

I accept that anything in all the other syllabuses can be asked in all the papers at this advanced level.

Thank you.

[joevassallo]

From all the comments that I read it looks like time management was an issue for most students. Like everybody else I find Q1 (a 3 page question) is excessive. And by the time you read the first 2 pages, you are given a financial position and profit and loss to analyse, think and understand the company (Frick) and the industry as a whole. I find this too much to read, before even attempting to write your answers and having to flip through the 3 page question….

So effectively I agree entirely with the fact that all questions/scenarios contained a lot of information to read and digest.

Another issue that I find is that you have 3 choice questions and you need to choose 2 of them. Surely you would need to read them all of them before you decide which of the 3 you will be attempting – so this means you need more time, since once you decide to drop one one them you will realise that 5/10 minutes would be wasted (or to put it more politely you are not going to utilise what you just read!!). And these 5/10 minutes could make the difference between a pass and fail mark. They could easily have gone in more handy to use on Q1…..

In summary, I feel that questions should be made shorter and straight to the point, and cutting any unnecessary detail (I am sure the examiners disagree because they tell you all the information is there to be used). But is it all really necessary?

[joevassallo]

Is is possible, but with all that long scenario in the question, I say it is impossible…. if you see what I mean.

[joevassallo]

I am never exactly sure why do we always have such LONG questions in these type of exams. It takes so much time to read all the scenario and information given…. Time becomes of the essence then since you need to go through the long-winded question over and over again and then start thinking to formulate your answers.

P3 is all about strategies – but again not sure what the exam strategy should be here to tackle this time problem?

[joevassallo]

Paper was not that difficult – just the usual in these type of exams a lot of information to digest before attempting the answers. So time management becomes, as usual, an issue.

I found the question on Decision Trees a bit too much to allocate 14 marks to it. So many areas in the syllabus they can spread the marks…. It is a vast syllabus I think which you need to cover it all, and then you find most not tested in the question. This is my view anyway.

[joevassallo]

Correct – that is why I did too…

That is what non-current liabilities are, basically loans…..

[joevassallo]

Received result by email – pass 50 marks!!! I knew I would be close.

3 more to go…..

[joevassallo]

I agree entirely with you – as far as I know the fair value of the contingent liability should be included with the Net Asset calculations (both at acquisition and reporting dates). The question said it was “disclosed” previously at $5 (i.e. not recognised in the Accounts but shown as a Note in the Accounts). But then it had a fair value of €1m…

Besides I am not quite sure I understood paragraph 3 of email sent from Cardine, and what message is he trying to convey???

[joevassallo]

I already replied saying that the contingent liability should be included at fair value of €1

I worked Goodwill at €16m too… so your assertions and stating that Goodwill is $15 I believe are all wrong.

And if I may ask- how do you know it is worth just 1 mark?

Also the exam results will be published 16Jan16 (NOT 01Feb)

I wish that correct information is posted here, otherwise it confuses everybody.

[joevassallo]

Of course there was Goodwill to be calculated…..

THE COST OF THE INVESTMENT IS SHOWN IN THE SoFP !!!!! –
Investment in Salt $110 as shown in the SoFP

But then the cost of the investment of the foreign subsidiary was given in the question as Dinhars 368 which should be converted at rate of exchange 8 (01Nov14) = $46, which was also shown and reconcile to the amount shown in the SoFP.

[joevassallo]

I am not convinced you are correct about the treatment of the “contingent liability”…..

I feel the fair value of $1m liability has to be included both at the acquisition date and the reporting date – irrespective of the probability.

[joevassallo]

Q2 is from the September 2015 session………

Please read the front of the question paper carefully – it says Sep/Dec 2015

Also please read the article posted on the ACCA portal about the new policy adopted when publishing the Exam questions and there was also a note from the ACCA tutor posted earlier on.

[joevassallo]

Questions 1, 3 and 4 (who attempted these) are all on the ACCA website.

[joevassallo]

I have been attempting the UK version – am resident in the UK as well.

The UK version is very similar to the INTERNATIONAL, except for the new FRSs 101-102-103 which came in force on 01Jan15. There are not much differences, and questions in the UK variant normally relates to explain/identify differences between IFRSs for SME and FRS 102.
Hope this helps.

I think there is also explanations given on the ACCA portal about this.

[joevassallo]

That is exactly what I did as well…

Fair Value Adjustment for Contingent Liability $1m (minus) which is included both at acquisition and reporting dates.

The question said it was disclosed at $5m (disclosed i.e. – not accounted…) but the fair value was $1m which I think had to be included, by including it with the FV of Net Asset (hence the minus).

[Author]

Posts