Forum Replies Created
- Posts
You will get the Foundation in Diploma certificate, as per my knowledge, which is a suite of different exams and consists of some papers of previous CAT standard. The course content is updated now. Just drop an email with your registration number at info@accaglobal.com. They will get back to you.
Although it is too late now. But Faisal Azeem, head of Education, just updated recently that CAT recognition is in its final stages by HEC.
Fingers crossed.
Thanks, appreciated.
Although there is no specific mention of Referencing in the feedback, assuming I did OK on referencing. But the hard part was that I did the referencing without using any software. So it took huge amount of time in the end, I hope to cover it this time by using some software hopefully. Your input on this ??Following are the extracts of my Feedback report..
3. Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusions Fail
This was a well presented RAP, you seemed to have invested a great deal of time and effort and achieved good results, meeting or surpassing the criteria in a number of areas. However your analysis did not quite meet the required standards. Your ratio analysis was largely descriptive, and did not contain enough real analysis. By descriptive, I mean that you spent a considerable amount of time saying how the ratio had changed, or which company’s ratio was better, but did not provide sufficient analysis to explain the changes or variances. For gross profit – the one you tried to provide the most explanations for, you commented on a number of factors including currency depreciation and raw materials but did not adequately explain why Toyota’s GP margin was significantly better – surely Toyota would also be faced by the same issues? For Toyota you made one reference to ” Kaizen costing” but did not explain this. Your PEST analysis was too brief – one short paragraph for each section was insufficient. Also your “strengths” in your SWOT were not very strong – why would be “third in the industry” be a strength? Why would be affiliation with Honda be a strength, when both Toyota Indus and Suzuki also have similar affiliations with other Toyota and Suzuki?Overall Technical and Professional Skills:: Fail
Your ratio analysis was too descriptive – with too many explanations of how the ratio changed rather than WHY the ratio changed. For inventory turnover on page 32 you said “In 2011 the inventory turnover days of HONDA improved to 48 days from 60 days in 2010. The stock in trade during the period increased by 47.82% whereas COGS increased by 35.62%. However, in 2012, its inventory turnover reduced therefore its turnover days increased to 69 days as stock in-trade and COGS decreased by 17% and 23.75% respectively on the back of reduced activity. In 2013, it declined again to 45 days as COGS increased to 73.20% in greater proportion than stock-in trade of 51.10%.” This says what happened, but does not say why. At the bottom of page 31 for the Quick ratio you said “Its inventory levels kept increasing in the three year period but the corresponding reduction in current liabilities helped maintaining the inclining trend of quick ratio.” However inventory is excluded from the Quick ratio – so there is no need to refer to inventory levels in explaining the quick ratio.
6. Information gathering and Referencing:: Fail
Though you obtained a significant amount of information in presenting this RAP, you needed to obtain more information to enable you to present more effective analysis. For your ratio analysis it seems that most of your sources were from the Honda Annual Reports – you probably need to obtain information from a broader range of sources.
Moderator Comments
Moderator agrees with marker comments You have done some good work which is well presented and it should not be too difficult to bring it up to the pass grade. A main weakness in your work is the comparator analysis. You did a very good section on sales and production for Honda and whilst you have made a good attempt at explaining many of the ratios in connection with Honda, your analysis with respect to Toyota is fairly superficial. You should also try to expand your SWOT and PEST – you presented some parts of these like a ‘shopping list’ and did not fully explain them or their impact on the car industry / the company. Applying the models in the business context to your company is a critical part of doing a SWOT /PEST analysis.You’re not supposed to include the references at the end of the project report..
References(including bibliography) file will be a separate .doc fileFor identifying the exchange rate to use. Remember the thumb rule: Always consider yourself in the adverse position in the transaction. i.e.
-paying more, in case of payments (imports)
-and receiving less in case of receipts (exports)
Ex.
Case (i) Imports of $50000, exchange rate: 1.255-1.260 $/GBP
Being on the adverse, we should be paying more for the payment of the transaction amount, so we will be dividing it by the lower number of 1.255 i.e. $50000/1.255—
Case (ii) Receipts of $4000, exch. Rate: 1.605-1.615Gbp/$…
Applying the same rule, we should receive less being on the adverse position. $4000*1.605—As discussed in pastpaper, it may be that the management is delibarately hiding its earnings (recognising with caution) but the market is unlikely to be fooled for long if they’re doing this… !
i. The guidance on PPT presentation will be available on BSC Info: pack, infact they have included some good sample presentations in recent pack (2013-14).
ii. Yes, it should be of the same font size.
iii. Reference ANNUAL report as.. (A.R 2010, A.R 2011, A.R 2012).Alhamdulillah passed on 54% 2nd attempt. . For those who couldn’t make it this time !! dont be dishearted
I used the book Exploring Corporate Strategy by Johnson, Scholes and Whittington, (recommended by P3 examiner in interview), after going through this book I knew why I failed first time ! Better LUCK next time