[Johann]

Pass 80% first time finally all done! Was really afraid of SBL but in the exam hardly used 10% of the theory in the syllabus. The trick of this paper is to be as practible as possible and use common sense, use the scenario as much as possible as each paragraph would have hints to answer questions. Finally forget about the models.

[Johann]

pass 85

[Johann]

Dear Professor

Thanks for your reply.

Was thinking about receivables confirmation BPP list it only under the existence assertion and as per your reply above you suggested that it also tests about rights and obligations.
Wouldn’t also test for completeness that is if a blank confirmation is sent and the debtor replies back with a list of invoices one can determine if all invoices have been recorded correctly and therefore test for completion. On the same basis if the debtor confirms the amount or else states that there are any disputed items would this also test the valuation assertion? Is my reasoning correct?

My final question is regarding calculating receivables turnover and receivables days:

you have confirmed that it tests for valuation only, however why does comparison for payables turnover and payables days test for existence, valuation and completeness whereas receivables turnover tests only for valuation? Since the tests are the same shouldn’t we get the same results with the only difference that one relates to payables and one to receivables?

Does this has to do because with receivables we test for overstatement and for payables we test for understatement?

Appreciate your explanation for the above.

Thanks in advance

Regards

Johann

[Johann]

Dear professor

Thanks for your reply. Are the first two answers correct as these have not been marked with a yes 🙂

regards

Johann

[Johann]

Thanks alot

[Johann]

Dear professor

Thanks for your reply i fully understood part 2 but still am bit shaky on the first part.

So if i understood correctly if this years dividends are given we need to account for the growth to derive next years dividends however if we are given what the actual dividends will be at a future date we account for these as d1and therefore no need to account fir growth. Correct?

[Johann]

Dear John

Thanks for the reply.

I just hate learning rules and was trying to figure the logic out of it. Now it is clear

Thanks for your usual assistance much appreciated 🙂

[Johann]

Thanks professor now it is much clearer 🙂

[Johann]

86 tnx open tuition

[Johann]

George

What do u mean after 9/12? intragroup before acq was 500 per month so these need to be deducted as they dont accrue evenly throghout d year they relate solely to revenue generated pre acq. then u apportion d rest Is my reasoning wrong?

[Johann]

Any ideas about q1 intragroup trading before acquisition had this to be deducted from revenue and cos before apportionment of 9/12

[Johann]

@michaelmonti said:
Selling price with commission I got 1326.
185*2000
322*3000….. I think.

Lower of cost and nrv one we had to take cost the other nrv selling price less commision but dont remember d ans

[Johann]

Hi for sure this exam was quite tough what i can remember from q 2 was that it was better to acquire co 2 as its net assets were higher than 12k the purchase price which would lead to a bargain purchase on the other hand the other one was not

Q 3 re loan notes i did the same re share capital but the rest went to share premium however do not remember what the figures were for sure these hadnt to be expensed but reduced from ln and suspense

[Johann]

It was very hard compared to previous papers especially adjustments in ques 3 relating to finance leasing which were not treated seperately as usually was the case in previous papers and repayment of loan notes which have never featured in previous exams

[Johann]

A big thank you goes to prof. Moffat his lectures were of such a great help. Keep it up professor and open tuition.

[Johann]

Thanks professor much appreciated.

On another note is imperfect information examinable?

[Author]

Posts