APM*** P5 June 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

Q(1) (a)specifically asked to evaluate the performance report. I made the following points. -Report is too detailed in some aspects. Could have given some total costs for say rental and utilities which comprise only 6.9% of total costs. -The degree of accuracy to nearest dollar exacerbated the detail issue. -Some comparators given were not useful. -The report did not tie well with the mission. There was nothing on shareholder wealth or customer appeal. (b) I did EVA and assumptions stated include depreciation to be same as economic depreciation and the marketing expenditure on brand building to last about 4 years and assumed that the tax payment included all tax on financing costs. (c) Explained VBM but was not sure if it was right. Talked mainly about value adding and non-value adding activities and activity drivers that may help. (d) Talked about info in Appendix 3 showing high turnover of employees. About 10% for Cafe and 15% for Juicey. May be the reason behind new mission. Soft factors are changing hard factors! (e) New mission had 3 aspects. Shareholder wealth, employees' well-being and customer appeal. Addressed how each of them could be measured from data from appendices and what needs to be added. Did anyone else write similar stuff for question 1?

Q(3)(a) Risk attitude if Turing - risk seeking. Made top of the range blades and are innovative. Diverse portfolio and not worried about losing money -- Maximax. Riemann on the other hand, in a mature market, financial trouble, razor thin margins cannot and will not want high risk as it may be the last nail on their coffin? Failure may be imminent if they take high risk. Risk averse -- Maximin (b) Calculated profits for each category and did payoff table and a regret table. Showed Turing may settle for 8MW and Riemann for 3MW. I kept on writing WM! Darn! I am not from a science background. LOL (c) Talked about synergies and management issues due to a possible hung board. Focus due to status of their own business and attitudes might impact agreeing on a strategy or even agreeing on CSFs which determines KPIs. Success also will depend on macro factors especially government's subsidies. Much of the perceived benefits and synergies have a risk of not realising or realising little. Anyone else did the same or took a completely different approach?

Any news about ACCA resits this year?

My second attempt. Q1 ok, but B part confusing which one to select. I spend 10 minutes on that. In B part each qns had 3 sub parts that make every one run out off time. I attempted 80% hope to score at least 50%.

I just find out I tick the wrong question number answered on the cover of answer booklet!!! It should be Q3 which is answered,but I tick Q2 on the cover. But when I writing the answers I write it right in the booklet. Will the Marker not mark my Q3, but mark Q2, and to give zero point on Q2? So frightened!! Does anyone know this matter?

:( I indicated on the face of my answer sheet that I did number 3 and yet it was 4. When I remember well even on the answer page I shaded 3 instead of 4... will I get any marks for that number?

I have never seen such a pathetic and badly written exam . I still cant understand what the examiner wanted to ask in question 1a . Generally he was asking to evaluate the performance . And on the other hand in case study it was stated that CEO is not interested in a group performance but he wants to know about the mix of fixed and variable cost and how it can affect the performance management. . I then analysed the performance of two subsidiaries. And stated that comparables are not given.

Reading everyone's comments I'm glad i'm not the only one who felt that exam was a disaster. I felt well prepared, learnt all the models etc. but I have to say trying to understand what the examiner was asking for was a challenge in itself and took up more time than it should have. Everything seemed a little vague to me. Panic mode starts to set in and reading everyone's comments about question 1, I completely misinterpreted the question and commented on the figures, not on the format of the report - I'm annoyed with myself, as these could have been easy marks. This was my first attempt. Definite re-sit in December.

@abdullahmv....I got the same findings with you and its was like you were coping me...lol...what you didn't copy was that the VC partners come from different backgrounds i.e. Riehman is a family owned hence is closed system in their decision making while the other is open...this will have a serious implications in performance management. Next time copy everything(haha)

On several occasions during the exam I found myself checking the front page of the question paper to make sure I was actually sitting the P5 exam. I can understand the new examiner's desire of having their own style of questions but this needs to be introduced in a more incremental way. I self study for all my exams and for the past 2 months I focussed purely on past exam papers and exam technique for the P5 exam, time management and understanding the question requirements became manageable for me the more past questions I practiced so I cannot say these were an issue in this exam.

Any news on 4 exams in year for ACCA?

ACCA are just having a laugh. I wounder how much profit they are making at our expense. My 4th attempt of this bloody papers P5 and P7, it is just like it is impossible to pass no matter how well you prepare. Its like a game of hide and seek with the examiners. They seem to have a fail rate to maintain, and probably getting a fat bonus for meeting their failure percentage targets. What a joke, and they are preaching about ethics etc. Would I advise anyone to take ACCA? HELL NO! In my opinion, it is a money making scam, period.

I request every one to please register a concern in "myacca" about the ambiguity of narration and format of questions, as this can be allowed for during the exam marking process ,

@abdullahmv I have very similar answers to you. However I didn't do a regret table as I classified Turing as risk seeking so maximax and riemann as risk averse so maximin. Since the question asked to use a method for each one I assumed regret table wasn't needed. There was also something about 8mw starting in 2 years so I said that the projrcted cashflow would need to be discounted but it would be still more profitable in long term. For part c) I had similar points but also talked about culture differences, and problems with who will do the measurement (neutral) and the differing nature of busines means that both will have specific performance measurements which may be manipulated to show a better picture Which other section b question did you do? I did variance question. Talked about tunnel vision approach of only using variance analysis. The results showed favourable variance overall, but the profit was down compared to budget. The managers have uncontrollable economic factors affecting variances but still being asked to explain. Budget being set at the start of the year with no movement or flexibility to respond to environment.

ARGHH.. Examinorrrrr. Real life is different dude. I work in outside world. CEO wants something else, your question wants something else. unable to complete the paper. more than 400 pounds wasted

this is deadly agenda.one can not get the trend of this exam paper , no use for pass question revision

i think in future there will not be candidate for p5

i did the same as after i finished write like two pages then i realised it didnt asked for financial performance evaluation. i think the ceo was asking to evaluate individual subsidiaries and not the company as a whole. that was the trick. Anyways i write generic answers.

@Deodat , CEO clearly stated he doesn't want company performance evaluation. he wanted to evaluate the report.

How does he say that the CEO doesnt want company performance evaluation and in the question its Evaluate the performance of the company? Who can explain this?

Lol. Hilarious

And we were thought, evaluate = numbers etc. So as soon as you see the "evaluation" with exam stress you just start analysing ratios etc. He could have at least put it in an "email format" for example like in Audit, or as part of the question he says (note that evaluation of numbers is not required).. something along these lines. I think again, and I know I'm repeating. The examiner was very unfair and ACCA should be aware of this. We cannot wait till December to re-sit and then February to receive results etc... There is also a concern that I am worried in sitting this paper again... It was harder then P2 (Corporate reporting)....

taught * sorry.

For anyone who would like to review the p5 exam questions/wording etc the exam paper has now been posted on the past papers section of acca global. https://www.accaglobal.com/hk/en/student/acca-qual-student-journey/qual-resource/acca-qualification/p5/past-exam-papers.html

jibnaylor25, exactly. I had tough time figuring out the marketing expenditure. I ended up adding half of 7m to profits and half of 7m x 15 years to capital employed. The question said that this amount for marketing has been expensed since the company started? As far as EVA calculations are concerned, this kind of expenditure should be capitalised. But then I have got an enormous capital employed figure which then resulted in negative EVA. I also provided another calculation as if without capitalising marketing expenditure resulting in positive EVA and mentioned in assumptions about the absence of amortisation rate and insufficient details for accurate calculations of EVA. I'll look forward to see the answers.

I did q2 and q4. Is it only me or has anyone noticed how similar the scenarios were: both have a cost-leadership strategy, both have long-serving employees, both CEO's are looking for introducing changes (one BPR, another Beyond Budgeting)? At times I had to make an effort to make sure I am not writing the same thing in both answers.

Dan1ly I did something similar and came up with negative Eva (I confused myself a little by assuming a 10yr life so did include some amortisation). I also put something in there about the assumptions so hopefully we will get so,e credit. Surprised more haven't commented on this as the lack of guidance here could lead to drastically different answers between students?

If I remember correctly, the question was to Evaluate the current performance report I.e. more historical info, competitor info, market info, numbers could have been rounded down, balance sheet and cash flow info would be useful, more non financial indicators etc...

hey anyone arguing Q1(a), please refer to Q1 of past paper June 2012, the two questions are basically the same...

for EVA: question is saying mk build in years so I did 3 years for some reason... anyway it does not say how many years and it does not mean it is since the start.. bloody examiners tricks. that is why it is saying : state assumptions made. it is correct either way.