Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Waac 12,55%
NPV 103
Could anybody explain how to solve receivable problem?
2.25*40%*15/365+2.25*60%*41/365?Beta should be calculated throug debt/ equity ratio
If debt 25 then equity 75%75% of first beta and 50% of the second beta
That was my idea, I got 1.17
I had a lot of Cs too
Goodwill 16500
With the investment income I had a mess – I thought 500 is already a share of dividends, plus I added 25%of associate’s profit and subs 9/12 of investment income. In total 1600.Yes, thank you, all is clear apart from the following – question reads: annual transfer is made to the retained earnings in respect of excess depreciation. In the answer gain is charged to other income
Yes, I am confused why 20 000 of revalued amount is charged to PL, am I right, assuming that the company might not have a revaluation reserve in the balance, so the revaluation should be charged to PL. If the company had any amounts in reserve, it would be possible to debit it.
Working
Item A Item B
$’000 $’000
Cost 240,000 120,000
Carrying amount 31.2.X2 180,000 80,000Loss – to P/L (20,000)
Gain – to other comprehensive income 32,000Revalued amount 160,000 112,000
Depreciation to 31.3.X3:
160,000/5 (32,000)
112,000/5 (22,400)
Carrying amount 31.3.X3 128,000 89,600
Addition 1.4.X3 14,400
128,000 104,000
Depreciation to 31.3.X4 (32,000) (26,000)
96,000 78,000
Disposal proceeds (70,000)
Loss on disposal 8,000Sorry for interfering, I just do not want to double – post topics.
Referring to IAS 16, question Enca (6/14)- why in that example does revaluation go to PL not to revaluation surplus? Please, explain.
Hello,
Please, advise if there were significant changes in the syllabus and if it is OK to use Study text by BPP valid for Sep 2015 – Aug 2016?
School question – first I subtracted head office expenses and got net running costs of each school. Then I calculated all expenses connected with shutting down of each school and found the difference between running and shutting. It turned out that it was more expensive to shut down School 1 then to keep running it, School 3 was on the second place in ranking but it had a capacity of 1000, which means that school 1 and school 2 did not have enough place for 80% of its pupils, so my suggestion was to close school 2.
I see! But if fixed costs will stay the same however many they actually produce, then the rate of absorption of overheads per unit should be different and the amount of o/h apportioned to this new mix should be different.
Referring to the free lectures – of course, I have watched all of your lectures and have done all practice questions. I took this kit just to have extra practice.
So, if this kind of question is in exam, the correct thing to do is to solve it the way it is solved in the answers – actual production minus actual materials and minus budgeted other costs?
Thank you!
sapphire16 said: No problem, the technical articles for F5 are here
Thanks a lot!
@sapphire16 said:
I found that in addition to the OT lectures, the technical articles from ACCA were really useful. It uses alot of context to enchance the understanding behind the topics we were learning.Could you please give a link on them? Thanks in advance!
Was it per hour? If so, it is a relief. I took it per hour and didn’t divide by 3. But if it was per unit, sure, it should have been divided.
I added but I think it was wrong, life cycle doesnt deal with lost contributions.
I did almost the same as you but for internal perspective I wrote – to train staff to reduce water interruptions. As for me to write performance mesures were the most difficult in this question.
