*** P2 December 2011 Exam was: Post your comments and vote in Instant Poll ***

I feel I put in lots of effort revising and practising questions to be left feeling pretty deflated. Time spent on this revision would of been better spent eating mince pies and getting ready for xmas..Complete waste of time..I went into the exam feeling well prepared as had learnt all key issues and topics and had read around obscure bits..wasn’t expecting 2 whole questions to be sooooo strange and alien to me!!

why are people so angry? They can test any area of the SYLLABUS, not the books you’ve been reading. Once you’ve been through your text books, it helps to look at what the ACCA is actually testing.

Q2 was just DRs and CRs

Q3 was about the specialised entity but like the ACCA have said, we don’t need specialised knowledge, but just an understanding of the framework

Q4 I knew I wasn’t going to do two months before today!

You might be lucky to win with a question on a subject that you know enough about to answer, but the broad range of accountancy knowledge that we have all gained from our studies is simply not tested.

Agree!!!Tonnes of materials to study but they ask about exception of the exception in last paragraph of a standard.

Time spent on this revision would of been better spent eating mince pies and getting ready for xmas..Complete waste of time..I went into the exam feeling well prepared as had learnt all key issues and topics

.wasn’t expecting 2 whole questions to be sooooo strange and alien to me!!

+1 It is crazy to learn all details of all rules! In real life the understanding is much more important! anyone can then open the standard and look for detailed application.

On the football thing, I recall from earlier studies that football clubs are special circumstances, however, that might be UK & Irl GAAP. Im not sure about IFRS

So I wrote a sentence saying I was aware of this, but I shall treat it like a normal company intangible asset, and carried on from there.

Im probably wrong, but I said the initial agents fees were capitalised(cost of bringing the asset to full working order kind of thing), but the extension fees were not.

Regarding the Q1 $5M repairs. What were we meant to do with this. I thought about a few methods, discounting etc & then guessed that it was repairs, and should be expensed when applicable, but im fairly sure thats not correct.

Anyway, I dropped a few marks here and there, if I pass, ill probably be a straight 50.

I capitalised the roof repairs as enhancement expenditure and made a provision for it under IAS37. The cost was so material and regular (every 5 yrs), it didn’t suggest “expense”. Re football Q, wasn’t there a similiar Q a few years back and printed in the Kaplan and BPP books. The football players are effectively “licenced” I think and covered under IAS38 as intangible. Treated the matter of “fees” as potential agency income for which under IAS18 they could only recognise “commission” element thereon. I left Q1 til end and did so unnecessarily goofy stuff there in the rush. A lot of theory on this paper, no?

hmmm paper was tough
i read question 2 …and got stuck under exam pressure such a question is a disaster……………..moved on to current issue attempted it well

paper was a bit unexpected no tax, lease,share based payments….and i dont know u have whole p1 and f8 on ethics what the hell ethics doing in p-2???

i read employeee benefit adjustment 3-4 tymes at at the end i atlast figure it out that is assest cealing…:D BUT I CALCULATED IT WRONG HOPE TO GET ATLEAST 3-4 MARKS IN THAT ADJUSTMENT

////aileenhughes41 Treated the matter of “fees” as potential agency income for which under IAS18 they could only recognise “commission” element thereon.

I believe transfer fees were paid, not received, therefore I was writing about capitalization. Well, excepecting my head to explode in a minute, I am not 100 percent sure that I read the question correctly. Other guys, what do you remember and think? IAS 18 or IAS 38?

Thanks.

@redrose said:
Hmm..i see pepople commenting about question 1b, on segment reporting..but i
( my opinion).. did not personally relate to operating segment.. actually it made no sense… i think they were asking on ethics regarding disclosure and how it may affect the shareholders and stakeholders…… ( i may not be right).. what do you guys think could i possibly be right?

Wasn’t that Part (c), can’t remeber what’s asked in (b) exactly, I could be wrong
Ok I remeber now, part b was about commenting on the situation, and part c was about CSR Vs Shareholder’s rights.
I commented on part b by thinking that somehow the segment report doesn’t need to tell everything since it could be commercially sensitive to competitors, so things like expense and revenue stream may not have to be disclosed in a great detail blah blah waffle
Part C would just be indirectly discussing profit Vs CSR.

Well reading all this makes me feel better. It feels like a “ha-HA! I knew you wouldn’t study that!” from you know who.

Roll on tomorrow, who’s up for P1?!

Think the intent was to let some of the retakers to pass only. Exam was a noncence with obsolete knowledge like partial goodwill and corridor approach as well as narrow questions on unpopular segmental reporting subject and reorganizations. Where are the current issues gone?

Q3 was very hard. I read it 3 times but still nothing came in my mind on how to deal with it. Q1 was easy but 15 marks segment reporting part was unexpected. Instead of examining different IAS the examiner examined only Intangibles in Q3.
Level of difficulty ? Very Hard