[marvin thales]

easiest F4/F5

hardest to pass F8/P7

[marvin thales]

HI,

even if I cannot help (since I work in Italy) I suggest you to consider Robert Half’s analysis/statistics in this respect, it can give you an overall idea.. (but I don’t think they distinguish between acca qualified or not).

Regards
Marvin

[marvin thales]

hi kasonde, would you be so kind as to forward something to me as well kaculinim@libero.it

I failed P7 once so it is still hard to pass to me..

thanks
Marvin

[marvin thales]

34 years old, the optionals to seat, started in 2010.

[marvin thales]

34 years old, the optionals to seat

[marvin thales]

I didn’t think my question could be so complex ..

there has recently been an article over hedging matters so that I tried to understand whether my understanding about hedging was correct.. regardless of whether or not the P7 could ever ask such tricky question. (. it is the P/L impact of the underlying or the cash out aspect that drives the hedging suitability, )

[marvin thales]

if there is I’d say that Capex should be hedged through fair value hedge..

[marvin thales]

Dear Mike,

I don’t have the text you mention.

However, on the grounds of the materials I have, the examples I’ve got concern forward exchange rate contracts or subsidiary investments ones (the latter hedged through fair value hedge).

I’ve never tackled an example as that over tangible assets: I raised the point because of the related depreciation which impacts P/L in different years so that I thought (probably incorrectly) it would make sense argue about the correct hedge method (regardless of effective cash outs) from a conceptual standpoint.

However there is no point to write out the entire page… .

thanks

Marvin

[marvin thales]

Dear Mike, would you be so kind as to give a feedback to this as well.

thanks

[marvin thales]

thanks Mike, I confirm I have read the relevant articles.

[marvin thales]

P7 the lowest mark ever, just 37 (1 attempt) while P2 one of the highest 67 (1 attempt) …weren’t they supposed to be tied somehow .. now I have to clear the options which now appear very very challenging

really don’t know where the improvements could be carried out (except handwriting of course, but how can one improve it under pressure conditions ? ANY SUGGESTIONS ?)

answered to all questions and points made (as far as I remember) were many of those identified in the examiners report, most probably they were not deep enough .. oh I really would like to know .. 🙂

How to tackle the next sitting, any suggestions ?

thanks a lot

[marvin thales]

passed P2 with 67 but an incredible 37 as for P7

were they supposed to be connected ?

[marvin thales]

thank you Mike anyway,

However the method mentioned by bviragos sounds more robust…

[marvin thales]

thanks bviragos, good luck to you too.

I have already made the check you mentioned.

The method adopted is reasonable of course (correct). I’m wondering whether the one I have in the Kaplan’s exam kit is another permitted way to do the calculation (the reference is 2012 kaplan exam kit, working 4 pg. 186)

.. but the outcome is not the same

Mike, any suggestions ? could the latter method be correct as well ?

Thanks again

Marvin

[marvin thales]

Hello Mike, Ren and bviragos,

attempting Rosie paper (June 2011) I noticed that the calculation of further 10% interest (from 70 to 80%) is particular and however different than that used in the Question Grange (10 % is not calculated on the net assets at the reporting date but on NCI at acq. date + post acquisition profit of NCI)

In Grange the result of the calculation is based on the difference between consideration (for the 10%) and the 10% of net assets at reporting date (which was the date of the further 10% increase).

Whilst Grange (dec 2009) is in my exam kit (with the note “adjusted”) I had to download Rosie from ACCA web site, is it probably to be adjusted ?

I hope that’s the case otherwise I haven’t understood the transactions between equity holders ..

thanks

Marvin

[marvin thales]

I think I found the link when you explained it in the recent past.. yes, equity-accounting should be the only method allowed

thanks

https://opentuition.com/acca/p2/ias-28-associate-companies-and-joint-ventures-example-1/

[marvin thales]

when writing the resubmission statement one has to stay stick to the points raised by the marker illustrating how the issues are addressed

[marvin thales]

Q4 a)

I did the calculations as you said above but i forgot to consider the initial investment, how marks do you think I can pick over there ?

thanks

[marvin thales]

thank you very much.

[marvin thales]

hello guys, are there any changes regarding 2013 syllabus ?

[marvin thales]

Hi, where can I find the answers of June 2011? In the acca site I didn’t find them….

Thank you

[marvin thales]

thank you so much.

[marvin thales]

Hi,

durinG dec 2010 exam, in q4 I considered the car benefit limit as beinG 82.000 instead of 80.000, do you think I will earn (however) any related marks ? or it will be a strict assessment …

thank you

[Author]

Posts