- This topic has 51 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by
.
- Posts
the exam was ok,but not enough time. too many things to analyse in so little time. 3hrs is not enough for financial reporting.
Agreed- especially with short questions there is a good bit of workings to do and it takes time to figure out what they are asking and then to do the actual workings. It should be at least 3.5 hours.
I agree, time is not long enough, i ran out of time actually so missed the last question and was rushing at the end so i know i made loads of mistakes when actually given more time it probably wasn’t a bad paper to receive.
I don’t know how examiners constructed this exam. It was totally unfairly distributed.
What was not altogether in exam:
Revenue, Adjusting events, Financial isntruments, Provisions, Inventory and more interestingly any questions about Statement of cash flows. This is almost half of the syllabus.Instead: Loan notes, loan notes and loan notes everywhere.
If you have 2 paragraphs about loan notes in one of Constructive questions, what is the logical reason to have it in the second constructive question?I felt so bad after the exam. coming here made me feel a bit better knowing the timing was a bit harsh. Not a difficult exam but timing was so much constraint.
Never felt so bad after the exam..there was so much to cover in this syllabus and a lot of things which I didn’t know very well actually came up in section A and B..I’m really disappointed that shares and loan notes seemed to be everywhere, and there was not a single question on revenue, cashflows and leases…
The exam was not a bad exam at all but I have to agree with everyone else, it needed to be aleast 3.5 hours due the amount of calculations required. But I’m sure if I practiced sticking to the 1.8 mins per mark it would have been fine…but still! Not easy to stick to the 1.8 mins per mark!
Im surprised, you didnt have revenue questions-second or third section B was all about revenue.Do we have different variants?
Anybody get the section C question on the consolidated accounts where the parent had bought 80% of the sub that year.
The question asked you to analyse the groups performance from last year (even though there was no group last year as it was only a single entity) and gave I think two ratios and a the gross and net margin % from the previous year for the parent alone but no other back up figures for analysis.
Anyone think there was a lack of information to do an analysis , the ratios and % given are really only of use if you have figures to back them up .
I found this part very difficult – any thoughts anyone ?
There was a tip–effect of acquisition on parent.So, i think, we had to compare Parent without Sub with its past years performance.
Thanks yeah i can see how there would be an effect but i thought they asked to use the net/gross margin calculated in part 1 which included the sub – anyway maybe i was just tired at this stage and totally made a mess of it
@archi604
You just made my day. I can’t help but laugh reading your comment.Imagine ” loan notes, loan notes, loan notes everywhere….”
Really very hard specially section c Final account was with seven adjusting entries which is almost half cylabus and I never found such type of questions in past exame paper even in BPp and kaplan text book.
very satisfied, seemed easy, time was quite enough I think…when finished all tests and 3 OTQ time was left 90 min, after that for 1 st QN spent about 55 min, and left 35 min was almost enough for second QN. can’t wait till 15 of July…
Section C required to analyze the ratios for the group or the entity? since they only gave us the data for the entity ( which in my opinion could be the same as the group) ?
Also, it required us to analyze its ability to take the loan or not … or just to compare it with last year ?
Also, in Section C part 2, which required to explain the accounting of associate in the financial position…
The CBE answer area had just spreadsheet without a wording area… where it was should be answered ? in the spreadsheet?
I genuinely found my MA, FA and LW exams more difficult than FR. This is my first applied skills exam so maybe I was just lucky, does anybody feel similar? I feel as though most of the exam was on consolidation and had ZERO questions on leases, 2 marks for financial instruments, 2 marks for revenue, but AT LEAST 30 marks (not exaggerating) on consolidation. We’ll see if it actually went well on July 15th, I suppose.
i agreed with everyone . i find time was a constraint and the spread sheet and word document was not friendly. the entire exam it seems was based on consolidation they were everywhere.
The exams that is encouraged to practice gives no insight as to how an ACCA exam will be given…because the questions I attempted today was very very in depth and not much time to really take in to consideration what it is asking. The CBE wasted more of my time since using the spreadsheet to do workings for the long list of adjustments to make whilst preparing a p+L for a group is ridiculous…..overall ACCA design those exams almost out of arm’s length
Does anybody remember the deffered tax answers, in section B, something like Cr 4000 tax income Dr 4000 deffered tax or what was deffered tax from revalorization, or yes yes no no answer. The only other answer i could remember in my head was intengible capitalization question being 229,000.
I am also sad that they decided to question us on 40% of sylabus topics, they should have made it more versityle, hald of the standards didnt have any questions.
How I feel about this exam – The examiners approach is that you have to do an unlimited numer of practice questions beforehand and in the exam just produce answers like a robot. If you take a bit of time to think trough the questions you lost. They just want the very strong students to pass. The exam was mostly intra-group adjustments bot in mcq part and part c.
- The topic ‘*** ACCA Paper FR June 2019 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***’ is closed to new replies.