- This topic has 132 replies, 53 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
- Posts
i thnk the regulator was hgh pwer high interest coz they hv high interest in wat th company provides to its customers.
@aminb001 said:
I agreed with TMA in that it is a revolutionary change.Reason being that they should predominantly be an e-commerce business.
Therefore the scope changed dramatically meaning a transformational change.
The fact that they are there financial statements and profitability ratios were falling meant that the change needed to be quick and with simultaneous tasks as it a change in the entire process being online.
if they apply big bang the board will be reluctant to change…
@eddienel said:
Hopefully I did enough. If they want better structured answers, they really need to give another hour. Or make section one’s case shorter. Although I do think it wasn’t as long as some of the past papers.Well, Appendix A and B make the case study about 3.5 pages including the questions. I had not seen one like that in the past papers.
For Q1 I feel unsure about.
For contextual features I always feel a bit unsure, for example, the time element I found hard to relate as I couldn’t seem to see any info regarding time constraints!
Preservation was also hard as the suggested change was such a major overhaul I couldn’t think of what to preserve although just now it occured to me I should have mentioned the quality assurance team perhaps.
I also found it difficult to relate financial ratios so tried to throw numbers in with an apendix showing their current performance.
Part C of Q1 threw me a bit. I wasn’t sure if it wanted me to advise actions to take as well as identify. I started off trying to suggest solutions but in the end gave up and just stated the apparent barriers and how important they were.
My biggest fear of Q1 is that I didn’t relate it enough to the scenario.
Q4 I think was the easiest of all of them. It essentially gave you all the answers without having to think about it.
I did the decision tree Q3. I actually drew the whole thing very quickly on the blank page of the question paper, very messy and then re-did this on my paper. I did not subtract the $1.5m costs as we were provided with the contribution figure so all three results resulted in a positive with option 3 being the best. (I also did check if I subtracted this and both option 1 & 2 provided losses which to me didn’t make sense).
In limitations I questions how predictable and reliable these probabilities and figures were. I also obviously mentioned that they has used an inappropriate model for static growth as this represented the industry as a whole and not themselves. I also mentioned that option 3 had the most amount of estimation and runs the risk of being less profitable if the forementioned occupancy and contribution amounts were less than predicted, although I did not calculate any figures for this.
For sources of finance, I was unsure. I literally just mentioned all three, internal funds, debt capital and equity capital and that realistically only equity capital seemed their best option, with risks mentioned about some shareholders gaining too much power.
@aminb001 said:
Did 1a ask for a particular format?OR was is just general professional marks?
I can’t remember if it said report format or not?
Format is to write a report so I put the usual to, fro, subject and a brief intro…
@eagledave said:
Well, Appendix A and B make the case study about 3.5 pages including the questions. I had not seen one like that in the past papers.no doubt this one got to be one of the lengthiest case studies to appear in P3 history
I think the socialising part of the dealership shops was a hint that the dealership should not be scrapped altogether otherwise we could loose customers
@hassanatcams said:
I think the socialising part of the dealership shops was a hint that the dealership should not be scrapped altogether otherwise we could loose customersyep u ryt….. 20 marks was too much for qustion 1a and also those 14 for POPIT…. coz it was kinda hard to link to the scenario.
@hassanatcams said:
no doubt this one got to be one of the lengthiest case studies to appear in P3 historyYou reckon marks are available for the remaining professional marks if the report format wasn’t adhered to i.e. just the start bit with the from and to…
I believe it was 4 marks for professional standard. Even without the report format I would imagine that you would gain most marks if your work was structured well and flowed well.
How an earth they think that we have the time to do this though. I wonder if most people just do the To/From bit with some headings and then lose all thought process about structure as they try to gain as many marks as possible from the content required.
@hassanatcams said:
Well actually for Q1 I did agree that a change was needed in that the co need to incorporate the online selling of products but I disagreed with the business analysts regarding the abandonment of the dealer network and completely moving to an online platform and that was because co was operating in a very niche market with majority of the customers being senior citizens so I disagreed that the dealer based model is scrapped altogether though I agreed that a change was needed but that should be by incorporating the online platform and not by scrapping the dealerships.Yes I put the advantages and disadvantages of changing from B2B to B2C model, there will be some training costs for sales and marketing for ordering processes that need to be communicated to the customers, finance department for online payment, and investment in reliable IT and website to address fraud and security issues. All of these entail cost. As a business analyst, I also looked at the future prospects of the new model given that TMC or TAC (can’t remember) identified some benefits and that 90% of the people have broadband and use the internet in purchasing. The age group of customer which is also a concern for the directors over the acceptance of the new model. I then linked FMC supplies high quality products, which the company has to maintain and ensure the customer amidst the change. This age group are likely to stick with the products hence they may be willing learn the online ordering system and also this group has the capacity to pay for premium products.
Through sales and marketing communication, the ease of use of the internet ordering should be emphasized to encourage customers to embrace the change.
well I think for the beginning and conclusion 2 marks seem sensible while other 2 would be for the content is the written part. things like professional terminology, structure, etc
@eagledave said:
Yes I put the advantages and disadvantages of changing from B2B to B2C model, there will be some training costs for sales and marketing for ordering processes that need to be communicated to the customers, finance department for online payment, and investment in reliable IT and website to address fraud and security issues. All of these entail cost. As a business analyst, I also looked at the future prospects of the new model given that TMC or TAC (can’t remember) identified some benefits and that 90% of the people have broadband and use the internet in purchasing. The age group of customer which is also a concern for the directors over the acceptance of the new model. I then linked FMC supplies high quality products, which the company has to maintain and ensure the customer amidst the change. This age group are likely to stick with the products hence they may be willing learn the online ordering system and also this group has the capacity to pay for premium products.Through sales and marketing communication, the ease of use of the internet ordering should be emphasized to encourage customers to embrace the change.
well your points sound equally sensible to me.
@hassanatcams said:
well I think for the beginning and conclusion 2 marks seem sensible while other 2 would be for the content is the written part. things like professional terminology, structure, etcI agree
however I mentioned that the co would have to build a proper IT Dept as they don’t have one yet
@dvyn07 said:
if they apply big bang the board will be reluctant to change…They wouldn’t be reluctant if their financial position is unstable.
Revenues were falling, direct and indirects where doing up…
A past paper in the kit said that if there are financial troubles then Time Contextual factor would be considered to require immediate attention.
did Q1 tell us to choose if we were for or against the radical change proposal by TCA for FMC? I dont think I chose a side…
@adeoluomosanya said:
did Q1 tell us to choose if we were for or against the radical change proposal by TCA for FMC? I dont think I chose a side…Q1a was asking us how the 5 contextual factors of change would need to be considered when managing the proposed change by TMA.
This part has come up many times.
@eagledave said:
Well, Appendix A and B make the case study about 3.5 pages including the questions. I had not seen one like that in the past papers.Check out 6/13, 6/12, 6/11, 6/10 6/15 its similar in lenght or slightly longer
@adeoluomosanya said:
did Q1 tell us to choose if we were for or against the radical change proposal by TCA for FMC? I dont think I chose a side…No, it didn’t but the CEO would like to understand the implication of the proposed change and wants to have holistic view of this.. We therefore have to look at the current situation based from the case, the proposed change, and then the impact. So by explaining all this, you have to somehow express your opinion by critical analysis and also we are allowed to disagree and then justify why.
Time management was also the issue for me. I did 2 , 4 and 1. Think I failed tho.
@eagledave said:
No, it didn’t but the CEO would like to understand the implication of the proposed change and wants to have holistic view of this.. We therefore have to look at the current situation based from the case, the proposed change, and then the impact. So by explaining all this, you have to somehow express your opinion by critical analysis and also we are allowed to disagree and then justify why.This was part b i believe using POPIT, which is the holistic view.
@eddienel said:
Check out 6/13, 6/12, 6/11, 6/10 6/15 its similar in lenght or slightly longerIt is longer than those plus the topics (although easy to understand) don’t usually come up, not in a long case study, cause we usually practise Pestel, 5 forces, etc, or other usual areas which makes it harder I guess. This one is particularly tougher to get into – just my personal opinion of course.
Dude looking at your answers now i’m pretty sure you passed hahaha
I did not think twice about subtracting the costs didn’t even occur to me they gave us the contribution figureugh looking back now i feel like i didn’t do well at all.
aw well, we can only hope for the best!@dt1988 said:
For Q1 I feel unsure about.For contextual features I always feel a bit unsure, for example, the time element I found hard to relate as I couldn’t seem to see any info regarding time constraints!
Preservation was also hard as the suggested change was such a major overhaul I couldn’t think of what to preserve although just now it occured to me I should have mentioned the quality assurance team perhaps.
I also found it difficult to relate financial ratios so tried to throw numbers in with an apendix showing their current performance.
Part C of Q1 threw me a bit. I wasn’t sure if it wanted me to advise actions to take as well as identify. I started off trying to suggest solutions but in the end gave up and just stated the apparent barriers and how important they were.
My biggest fear of Q1 is that I didn’t relate it enough to the scenario.
Q4 I think was the easiest of all of them. It essentially gave you all the answers without having to think about it.
I did the decision tree Q3. I actually drew the whole thing very quickly on the blank page of the question paper, very messy and then re-did this on my paper. I did not subtract the $1.5m costs as we were provided with the contribution figure so all three results resulted in a positive with option 3 being the best. (I also did check if I subtracted this and both option 1 & 2 provided losses which to me didn’t make sense).
In limitations I questions how predictable and reliable these probabilities and figures were. I also obviously mentioned that they has used an inappropriate model for static growth as this represented the industry as a whole and not themselves. I also mentioned that option 3 had the most amount of estimation and runs the risk of being less profitable if the forementioned occupancy and contribution amounts were less than predicted, although I did not calculate any figures for this.
For sources of finance, I was unsure. I literally just mentioned all three, internal funds, debt capital and equity capital and that realistically only equity capital seemed their best option, with risks mentioned about some shareholders gaining too much power.
- The topic ‘*** ACCA P3 September 2017 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***’ is closed to new replies.