- This topic has 164 replies, 88 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by
.
- Posts
R u not a bit too over confidence about urself. (mr beata)
i believe passing acca is a bit of both luck and hard work, not only intelligence.
i know other people with less intelligence than u , pass level 3 papers with flying numbers.
so i believe acca gives everyone equal chance to earn their qualifications, not only super intelligent people.
thanks very much
reshma
Q2. The easiest question, I attempted it first. I got option 1 for best option with net benefit of$900000 and increased capacity to 800 units. Q3. Very subjective. I got mostly incremental and barely particaptive. Q4. I got bonus of manager F capped at $36000 and manager N got no bonus. Roi was 28.5% and 8%ish. I used net assets – current liabilities. Also i added the $6.8m investment to manager N’s ROI because he is an investment centre manager. Q5. Was okish. I got $24.80 for manufacture of component X 🙁 However I got make 600 buy 200. I would like to hear from you guys 🙂
I got 23$ too for material A in question 5, with 8$ per labour hour. I studied from a BPP text book, and from here, and I think it was not that bad. I expected much worse. 🙂
The examiner was not fair on the limiting factor question and the one for net benefits…..we hope acca addresses that
Disaster thats one word for us…if acca tryin to.make a fortune from.us by failing us…these are hard times.paying exams fees..studying so hard to get a question which u cannot tell what its realy askin for is an insult
Does anyone remember Q2 with a table? I would like to complete it but can’t remember the case…
If you look at the technical articles for throughput accounting part 2 they’ve explained it in simpler terms there
I thought I did okay on the exam, until I read the comments in this thread that is! Just a quick question on the bottleneck and the throughput figures at the top. I used those figures to arrive at the cost of the materials for the extra units to be produced. However, based on the comments where people ignored those figures, I am now worried that I shouldn’t have. Can anyone put me out of my misery?
For question 4. Who else excluded the trade payables when calculating the ROI and used net profit?
I would like to look at this task (Q2) particularly after reading technical artical part 2, as it a fresh look:))
Because of this type exams a lot of students here in Malawi are no longer doing ACCA they have switched to Degree programs and no wonder we are writing 3 to 5 papers in a day without the centre (hall) being full to its capacity as it used to be in the past.ACCA please do something.
they should examine from the entire syllabus,,,not only concentrate on like on two topics,,,,
In my opinion, the F5 examiner should focus more on testing our knowledge rather than our ability to interprete questions accurately. I prepared so hard for this exam and yet still found it so tough to interprete the questions well enough. Just absolutely gutted!
Even I got the same answer for question 5!!
$23 and 600 to be made internally, and what answer did you get for variance mix and yield?Robert hi,
I got almost exactly the same answers in all parts, except MCQs, where I feel a bit more confident on.. Hope we are both right
I got 16.51(A) for material mix and 86.81(A)for yield . I just pray I am right. I am positive.
@gonko said:
Material x took 1 kg of A at 1.60.
2kgs of B at 1.50.
2 hours labour at 12.00 per hour.
3 hours machine time at 80c per hour.Total 31.00
Anybody remember the case relating labour? Why everybody got 8 per hour while I got the same like here – 12 per hour:(((
I am still trying to understand how you calculate it.
What is the most annoying part is that we will never see a past paper with something similar since the Sep/Dec exam has already been uploaded and it does not EVEN have on that question.
I will have to rely on FORUMS to tell me how do do this question since the DAMN KIT I have wont have it in
- The topic ‘*** F5 December 2015 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***’ is closed to new replies.