[yume]

Hi Trephena and Gillian,

I had a query regarding the choice of company for T17, specifically about the timeline from when the corporate governance issue took place, to when our RAP is submitted.

I had initially planned to submit the RAP in the previous periods and had completed 80% of the RAP on Tesco plc, but unfortunately could not submit it earlier, and I’m therefore looking to submit it in Period 39.

However, Tesco plc had its corporate governance scandal around August 2014, and the topic itself tells us to select a company that has been “identified as having weak corporate governance structures within the past 5 years.”

Considering 5 years from August 2014 is August 2019, is Tesco plc a suitable organisation for T17 to be submitted in Period 39 (November 2019)?

Would really appreciate your help.

Thanks in advance.

[yume]

Dear Trephena,

Thank you very much for your prompt reply.

2016 annual report it is!

I will be sure to keep abreast of any new developments and current affairs regarding the corporate governance of my org.

[yume]

Dear Trephena,

I am currently in the middle of completing my RAP for May 2017 submission.

I initially started using the annual reports of my organisation for the year ending 27 Feb 2016, however, since I am submitting in May 2017, should I use the annual report for the year ended 27 Feb 2017?

The annual report for year ended 27 Feb 2016 says the accounts were signed by the auditors on 12 April 2016, so this gives us an idea of when the 2017 report will be publicly available. Wouldn’t that mean that I would have too little time for analysis if I am using the Reports that came up about a month or two before the submission period?

I just wanted to confirm this before I continued my evaluation and analysis any further.

Looking forward to your reply. Thanks in advance.

[yume]

That does help. Thank you very much.

[yume]

Hi Trephena,

Long time lurker here. I have skimmed through the entire forum for this topic and some others as well. Just want to say that you’ve provided so many of us with valuable guidance in attempting our RAPs, so thank you very much.

I haven’t been able to notice many people here choosing companies in the US, and hence following the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. I wanted to ask, is it necessary to go line by line throughout the entire respective CG code, in order to do well on the project? (earlier on i noticed you suggested to go through the combined code for a UK company line by line)

From what I researched, the sarbox act is around three times as large as the UK CG code of 2016. Would it mean, that for someone who wants to do this project efficiently and get a good grade, should that person choose a company in the UK (as opposed to the US in particular) as the UK code seems to be shorter, less detailed/ more to the point?

(I am interested in the CG of Apple Inc. and have found many articles criticizing their CG as well – so good for balance. however, i’d have to compare it to the Sarbox act. alternatively HSBC/ Barclays has plenty of info too, and i can rely on the UK code.)

Do you think it would be alright for me to choose apple, and then go through certain main areas of the Sarbox code relating to board composition, auditor independance and committees, and still be able to get an A in the project without going through the entire sarbox code line by line?

Thanks in advance!

[yume]

Thanks so much for putting things into perspective.

Looking forward to passing P7 with flying colors this September, and P2 if need be!

Thanks again.

[yume]

Welp!

It was Cash Flows… and a difficult one too i think.

At least if I have to repeat this in September, Q1 won’t be cash flows… hopefully…

[yume]

Aftaab1390, I’m thinking about if i should not read any current issues or exposure drafts, and just limit myself to the standards, in order to save time revising, and then in the exam i just dont choose Q4.

On the other hand, some of the current issues are somewhat simple to write about… so i guess i’ll see whether i’ll do it in the exam.

What do you think?

[yume]

Hi Francois988,

Why would march contents need to come in june in order for the examiner to issue a hybrid paper?

As an example, if cash flows comes in june, then cant he simply pick either the cash flows or SOFP and make that his Q1 in the hybrid paper? or does it not work like that?

Thanks in advance. I’m sitting this june and i actually like SOFP

[yume]

Hi, have you read the notes for eps? Even BPP and Kaplan have straightforward methods of approaching this.

If I understand correctly, you want to restate the eps for the previous year in order to make it comparable. Since there was a rights issue in the current year, you must multiply the previous years eps by the inverse of the rights fraction. The rights fraction is calculated thusly: MV of share/TERP. The MV of the share is what it was before the rights issue, in this case, it was 8.70.

The Theoretical Ex Rights Price is found like this:
For every four shares we have: 4 @8.70 = 34.80
We get : 1 @ 6 = 6

Add them up and we get 5 shares for (34.8 + 6) 40.80.
So the TERP will be 40.80 divided by 5 = 8.16

So there, you have everything you need to get the answer now. Check the answers to make sure its correct. Hope this helps.

Also if you want to get a question answered by the tutor himself, you should post on the ask the tutor forum, so he is sure to see it.

Take care.

[Author]

Posts