- This topic has 59 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
- Posts
@seagoat would be mind showing your predictive calculations too? It would be interesting to see how well you think you’ve fared.
Q1. 25 + 2 + 4 = 31
Q2. 3 + 1 + 2 + 3 = 9
Q3. 2 + 6 = 8
Total 48.
No professional marks allocated.
@Gabriel it is especially difficult to estimate those for P2 and I would have to look into answers which I don’t want to do.
One thing I can say If my destiny is to fail I want to see less than 40 marks. Expecting anything between 40-49. Now I know it contradicts last sentence but this is how it is.
@seagoat – everytime I read your comments I imagine your that dog / it sums up how you feel .. lol
@Craig
actually this is a good topic for sociology/psychology students to do their thesis:
how ACCA impacts life of their students.I’ve just been contemplating the reality of having to sit P2 again…… and I honestly don’t know if I can do it. The thought of it is just…. aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggghhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!
@kenny totally emphasize with you. P2 is so boring! P7 is so interesting
surprising how our predictions are all so similar and we have all marginal fails.
surprising no one did question three from those visiting the forum and predicting the marks.
The thing is you actually need a lot of P2 knowledge about IAS to be able to present in P7 right? But as I heard P7 is rounded about “standard” standards 🙂
Question 3 was like from outerspace…
I did Q3
I did ok in Part A of the exam but Part B (Q3+Q4) were 10% knowledge, 40% good guess and 50% shot in the dark
Overall i’m thinking
Q1 25+2+5 =32
Q3 about 8
Q4 about 8Total 48
maybe a prof mark or two might get it over the line.
This by far the most unsure I have ever been about passing an exam…. some of my answers in Part B could be bang on or way off.
I did question 3 too, the sneaky thing about question 4 is that ‘impairment of assets’ is not a current issue as per say, impairment of financial assets is, frustrating thing also is that examiner does have an article on ‘impairment of assets’ but this is buried in the continued professional development section of ACCA website and not in technical article section relating to P2. His article was nearly word for word q4….but as I said in CPD section.
I am sure he will allude to that article in his examiner report…making us look foolish.
Because for him we are financial accounting freaks soooo keen on doing consolidations, studying IAS’ and we have nothing else to do but doing what he calls a ‘wider reading’ – which has no borders for this paper…
@seagoat totally agree with you. As I usually put it, it seems that he sat the exam for P2 Dec 2014 not at the potential student level but at his own level, professor level. He must have forgotten that professors don’t sit exams but set exams. Doesn’t the examiner have a wife to take him off researching so much, he sees to have unlimited time to go deep down within the standards
@tallaghthoop and the article was written so where in October 2013 and got examined in Dec 2014. What a use of a brain by the examiner!We can go on complaining but the problem is ACCA is merciless and wouldn’t care a bit about our pains. Why would they? They got all the money they wanted from us.
@seagoat I’ve replied to your messages
So can we expect IAS 41 and Integrated Reporting in June 2015 – there was so much commotion about this new Int. Reporting introduced to many syllabus
@seagoat I’ve replied to your message
@Gabriel there is no need to inform me that you replied to my message here 🙂 – I will check inbox don’t worry
@klemtafote said:
my study mate did question 3 and i was like thumbs up dude…you are very brilliant…..I don’t actually understand what you mean there. Was he smart in doing question three and those that didn’t missed out?
I take it as ironic comment since Q3 was imo the hardest amongst descriptive so his study mate choose the toughest instead easier ones.
So Gabriel, how’s that letter to the ACCA coming along? Probably a bit late now wha?
Not to worry, we’ll all be out of misery for better or worse in a couple of days
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.