Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@aynura13 said:
Who remember what part C in Q3 was about?I think part (c) was about the claim by the government that the trains are overcrowded.
I think part (b) was about the problems with selecting and measuring some of the KPIs across the 4 dimensions of the BSC so e.g. customer complaints is a typical measure of customer satisfaction, but it said in the case that the customers didn’t appear to formally complain so you have no visibility over how good your service is.
Overall I thought Q1 was fair. Part (a) on EVA had some fairly standard adjustments and the 6 marker on CSFs and the weaknesses of the existing KPIs was fair too e.g. one weakness of the units per hour produced was that the product mix was different as they had some mass produced products and some specialised ones i.e. you’ll get different throughputs depending on the mix.
For Q2 I was hoping transfer pricing would come up where you had a typical scenario with spare capacity and the transfer price being the opportunity cost = VC + lost contribution … this one was in an international context which I didn’t really revise 😐 … even still I think I bagged most of the marks in part (a) assuming its 2 marks per explained point and some working marks in part (b). Part (c) was ok as well.
The balanced scorecard question had a lot of information to digest but overall I thought it was ok as well.
Oh well, crossing my fingers for a pass for P5 and P7 .. I’ll be done forever then!
@determinedciara said:
Hey Sean, how did it fair out for you?Hi Ciara – I got lucky and managed to scrape through with 52 …
Keep at it … I am sure you will make it next sitting 🙂
@johnmoffat said:
Current assets – inventories = receivables plus cash.The whole purpose of the quick ratio is to ignore inventories (because it takes longest to convert them into cash) , so it doesn’t make any difference whether they have gone up or down.
Surely statement (ii) is valid as inventories going up will generally result in cash going down? The quick ratio will go down as a result because cash is tied up in inventory.
@carrolj said:
Does anyone remember if it was a deductible tax asset in question 1.i think the question hinted that future profits would be available??I got a tax asset as well… was too tired at that point to wonder if it was a red herring or not so I just took that as a hint .. think it was 25% x 7 (the difference between the two values) or something?
@determinedciara said:
Thanks Sean. I definitely did all the basic workings. And finished them off an slotted them in. Actually did that in the last 5 minutes because ‘thought’ I may have time to go back to Q1 , didnt so went back to it and finished off the workings. Put in the %’s and all that sort of stuff.
I really do not know. 50 marks is a lot to lose but its looking that way. How about you?I did the basic workings as well and slotted in the figures as I went along … I struggled with quite a few different bits actually in Q1 and wasn’t sure at all if what I was doing was right. I think parts b and c made up for it though so I am hopeful for a pass!!!
I really do not want to resit this paper!
As long as you showed your workings and did proformas for all workings e.g. retained earnings, other components of equity and added horizontally for current assets and showing the share capital etc you’ll get a lot of easy marks so you might have passed it… I’ve heard it is marked very generously so if you say something relevant you’ll get credit.
@determinedciara said:
For the 150 vehicles. I said that they had chosen the Europe market because if you took the price and deducted the transaction costs and transport costs, you arrived at the figure they had chosen. So that meant they had chosen the most advantageous market. Because you can deduct Transa Costs and Transp costs. But I had they should have chosen the principal market for FV which was the Asian market (assuming they had access to that market) because that was the market with the highest level of activity.
Having that said, I didnt do part c as I just couldnt think about that one and made a poor attempt at part a. Half of Q2 was on Fair Value Measurement really.
What did anyone say about choosing the SBP or FV? I said it was equity settled but now I know there was a choice, between cash settled and equity settled. Employee had the choice. Just got in a muddle 🙁 I cannot think fast enough. Knowledge is there but the questions were so ANNOYING!!!!For the vehicles one I calculated what the costs were for the other markets and said that using the 39,100 from the Europe market is not complaint because that is not the price they would receive at an arm’s length transaction in the other markets and they should be using the other values… also mentioned that while it was good that they used external data rather than internal that they should be consistent with how they apply the rule and that using the 39,100 was not compliant or ethical.
For the other one I said it was cash-settled (share appreciation rights are cash-settled) and did the calculations and said it would be revalued at fair value every year, showing the expense for each period.
I found this paper quite tough… I knew there was a trick to the P/E ratio but I couldn’t remember for the life of me how the P/E ratio is built up so I just used 19 as the NCI which I knew was wrong but I couldn’t dwell on it as I could do a few of the other bits e.g. the foreign property impairment.
Despite screwing up the NCI working I hope I’ve done enough in the other bits to pass this….
@fagan949 said:
What about the 500m bid in q1 b?For one of the scenarios (bid and acquire) I had a working like 80 + (100 x 2) + (120 x 8) = the cash flows and then I took away the 550m bid and the 400m to acquire the company which left 290m profit….. don’t think its quite right but I had a decent go at it so might get some marks hopefully.
Very time pressured but the content was fair and I managed to finish it.
For Q1 I used PESTEL and Porters 5 forces and had loads of points on political. I saw loads of points for political but I also had a few paragraphs for the others. Naturally the opportunities and threats in the conclusion flowed from the external analysis as they are external in nature (as opposed to strengths and weaknesses which are internal). For the riots I said that is a threat because the company may be seen to be supporting the riots with their investment, therefore exacerbating the situation.
For part b I used an NPV analysis essentially as I thought the clue was in the examiner saying to ignore the time value of money. The probabilities seemed like a bit of a red herring and I felt that you could only really mention them on the grounds of risk etc (think there is a 30m cost (10m + 20m) if you bid and don’t win?)
Question 2 was fairly straightforward. I had 2 products that were cheaper to outsource and 2 that were cheaper to manufacture but I recommended not to outsource in the end due to the marketing strategy and the relatively low savings (I had 9k based on current production levels). I mentioned the potential loss of sales from boycotts etc.
Question 3 was also relatively straightforward. Last part of question 3 in particular was easy with 6 marks up for grabs if you used Mendelows and then gave an example in the case study e.g. the new mayor being the new project sponsor having high power and interest and so is a key player which the project manager needs to work closely with etc. etc.
@usamaniaz said:
I have doubts about 3 as well.Q9 I can’t even remember what I ticked.
Q12 I’m with yiu on this. Coz what gromit is saying is fine. But I’m not content.
I wouldn’t worry too much about Q12. ACCA get feedback from the tuition providers after the exams and if others feel the question has been worded ambiguously as Gromit said then ACCA may give credit for both responses (B and D).
@xlnc123 said:
Sean.Refer to exam paper December 2011 q4c
This whole paper was based from previous past paper questions.
Obligatory
Auditors are obliged to make disclosure where, for example, there is a statutory right or duty to disclose, such as if the auditor suspects the client is involved in money laundering, terrorism or drug trafficking in which case they must immediately notify the relevant authorities.
In addition, auditors must make disclosure if compelled by the process of law, for example under a court order or summons, under which they are obliged to disclose information5 (a)
Voluntary
In certain circumstances auditors are free, as opposed to obliged, to disclose information without obtaining the client’s permission first. These circumstances can be categorised into the four areas below:
Public interest – An auditor may disclose information which would otherwise be confidential if disclosure can be justified in the ‘public interest’. This would be perhaps if those charged with governance are involved in fraudulent activities;
Protect a member’s interest – Members/auditors may disclose information to defend themselves against a negligence action, disciplinary proceedings or if suing for unpaid fees;
Authorised by statute/laws – There are cases of express statutory provision where disclosure of information to a proper authority overrides the duty of confidentiality;
Non-governmental bodies – Auditors may be approached by non-governmental bodies seeking information concerning suspected acts of misconduct not amounting to a crime or civil wrong. Disclosure should only be made to those bodies with statutory powers to compel disclosure.Ah ok, thanks 🙂
I disagree with Q2 on the basis of my tuition notes!
Q5 I’ll concede as I was torn between the two. I had arguments for both of them…. for the going concern one I know they have to evaluate management’s use of the going concern but they don’t have to express an opinion in every report, only highlight where they feel it has been used inappropriately.
For ISA, surely as this is a global paper in certain national contexts it wouldn’t apply? Therefore in certain countries where ISA has no legal status the auditor would not be responsible for following them as it represents best practice like the UK corporate governance code.
Q10 I disagree with as well because internal auditors should report to independent NEDs / audit committee and not the finance director who could have a vested interest in the internal audit
In my notes from my tuition provider:
Voluntary disclosure – an auditor may decide to disclose information if he feels it is in the public interest e.g. if the management are involved in fraud (I linked the money laundering sentence to this). They may also disclose information to defend themselves in a claim of negligence or if suing for unpaid fees.
Yes, these are what I put down. I’m fairly confident on Q2 Q3 and Q12 though :p …