Forum Replies Created
- Posts
this paper had a lot of crossovers from f5….especially Q1 b and Q2……for outsourcing financial info. had to do the contribution per limiting factor and (Make or buy) calc….the examiner was testing hw much course do we remember
@rochelleobar19: Totally agreed
for 1c—I think the parent was underestimating the net assets by not recognizing the intangible asset i.e. customer acquisition, and through this he would overestimate the purchased goodwill…nd the financial statements won’t be faithfully represented….
Kathy took social expectations in to consideration therefore she is operating at the conventional level…isnt it?
I think the CEO was @ post conventional because he was imposing his view that there shudnt be disclosure—can link to to pristine capitalist to understand…
I have heard that the examiner looks into elements like writing and neatness . I dont think the examiner should expect this from us as we are required to write a lot in less time. I hope they read this…
What does this mean ( Implementing IFRS 06.08, Handrew 06.05 ).?…You can find this written under the tips for June 2011 exams.
i totally agree with barky….it wasn’t a well set paper….no ethical threats, no safeguards…sumwat all guesses went wrong
I was expecting 80+ even after appearing for 4 papers which I cleared all…but I ended up getting only 64 in f5….Wat do u ppl say ab8 me sending it for a re-check…Are there any instances when outcome(in terms of marks) has changed….I am happy but not satisfied…
Secondly Congrats to all for the gr8 performances..Q8) can be related to Stilk v Myrick….where Stilk was not paid the extra amount because he had performed his contractual obligations and not exceeded them…Same was the case here …the person in question was required to complete his work in three months nd there is no need for the lady to pay the extra amount…