• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

OpenTuition recommends the new interactive BPP books for September 2025 exams.
Get your discount code >>

Paper F5 Dec 2010 exam was

Forums › ACCA Forums › ACCA PM Performance Management Forums › Paper F5 Dec 2010 exam was

  • This topic has 183 replies, 102 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by Anonymous.
Viewing 25 posts - 76 through 100 (of 184 total)
← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 →
  • Author
    Posts
  • December 13, 2010 at 7:55 pm #74606
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 5
    • β˜†

    wasnt prepared whatsoever for linear programming. just hope that i have done enough, there was a lot of written questions. agree with a lot of people mix & yeild and things like curves or target costing where were these.

    December 13, 2010 at 7:59 pm #74607
    sefiller
    Member
    • Topics: 3
    • Replies: 20
    • β˜†

    Well done!!!
    labor rate variance:
    Actual price 2200*14+550*18=40700
    Standard price (2200+550)*14= 38500
    Difference 2200(A)

    Efficiency
    Actual hours 2200+550=2750
    Standard hours 650*1,5+750*2=2475
    275*14=3850 (A)

    TOTAL 6050(A)

    @suso7 said:
    labour rate variance
    650*1.5+750*2=2475 hours should take
    2475-2200=275
    275*2*(18-14)=2200(A)
    labour efficiency extra 275*14=3850(A)
    in total 6050(A)
    Did anyone do like this?

    December 13, 2010 at 8:00 pm #74608
    willynwilson
    Member
    • Topics: 12
    • Replies: 29
    • β˜†

    @pannanikt said:
    You are right there was one more constrain – labour if I am right (9600 min?) and on my graph two constrains crossed each other was that one with 5000 and labour with 9600 – I got answers as somebody already posted it here

    i think that they were the constraints, but i cant remember,

    you also have to remember that in the exam they wouldnt have said please round to 2 decimal places, if the numbers you have calculated dont have more than 2 decimal places, you could probably assume that you were incorrect!

    December 13, 2010 at 8:06 pm #74609
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 2
    • β˜†

    @pannanikt said:
    You are right there was one more constrain – labour if I am right (9600 min?) and on my graph two constrains crossed each other was that one with 5000 and labour with 9600 – I got answers as somebody already posted it here

    Hey – although they stated labour was a constraint – there was enough capacity to fulfil the optimal point that would give u the best contribution as possible!

    The constraint for labour if i remember correctly is 4L + 3C < 9600mins Whilsts if L is 0, C is 3200
    And if C is 0, L is 2400…

    Remember the maximum demand for C is 2000, therefore the labour constraint is irrelavant!

    By plottin the graph and using the follow through figures we should pick up marks…

    I think its infair for students to say this exam was easy – under time pressure, it is very easy to make silly mistakes πŸ™

    But , we can only try our best…

    Best of luck to everyone….

    December 13, 2010 at 8:11 pm #74610
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 7
    • Replies: 58
    • β˜†β˜†

    @sefiller said:
    Well done!!!
    labor rate variance:
    Actual price 2200*14+550*18=40700
    Standard price (2200+550)*14= 38500
    Difference 2200(A)

    Efficiency
    Actual hours 2200+550=2750
    Standard hours 650*1,5+750*2=2475
    275*14=3850 (A)

    TOTAL 6050(A)

    why you took 2200 to your calculations, when it said clearly that permanent labour was fully efficient? there was no variance on 2200 hours. Also how do you now actual rate that temporary staff was paid for? Temp staff rate was 18$

    December 13, 2010 at 8:17 pm #74611
    sefiller
    Member
    • Topics: 3
    • Replies: 20
    • β˜†

    It doesn’t matter I calculate the overall labor costs of a company and compare it with budgeted figures.

    You ask a question and answer to it? It is given in the question…

    “Also how do you now actual rate that temporary staff was paid for? Temp staff rate was 18$”

    @marcin060482 said:
    why you took 2200 to your calculations, when it said clearly that permanent labour was fully efficient? there was no variance on 2200 hours. Also how do you now actual rate that temporary staff was paid for? Temp staff rate was 18$

    December 13, 2010 at 8:22 pm #74612
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 1
    • β˜†

    I think F5 was a good paper. Only constraint was time. I did four complete questions 4-5 and had only 15 minutes for Q1, so the most I could have done in that case was to write out all formulas quicky and do the written part. 10 minutes extra would have made a great difference in answering this question. Thank you open tuition for boosting my confidence in this paper. I was well prepared for any question!

    December 13, 2010 at 8:24 pm #74614
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 7
    • Replies: 58
    • β˜†β˜†

    @sefiller said:
    It doesn’t matter I calculate the overall labor costs of a company and compare it with budgeted figures.

    You ask a question and answer to it? It is given in the question…

    “Also how do you now actual rate that temporary staff was paid for? Temp staff rate was 18$”

    sorry i was not clear. How do you know that ACTUAL rate paid to temporary workers was 14$? their std rate was 18$

    14$ was standard rate of Permanent staff

    December 13, 2010 at 8:25 pm #74615
    willynwilson
    Member
    • Topics: 12
    • Replies: 29
    • β˜†

    @rach101 said:

    i thought it was L that had a a maximum demand, not C,

    the constraint would still be put at 3200 l and 2400 c, but the optimum contribution, was under the demand of 2000,

    i suppose, we will just have to wait until they publish the papers in a couple of days to see who is right!

    December 13, 2010 at 8:35 pm #74616
    sefiller
    Member
    • Topics: 3
    • Replies: 20
    • β˜†

    If 2200 hours were used by permanent then the remaining hours were used by temporary staff. In overall it should take 650*1.5+750*2=2475 hours but only 2200 is present remaining part 275 were used by temporary but two times inefficient that is 275*2=550

    @marcin060482 said:
    sorry i was not clear. How do you know that ACTUAL rate paid to temporary workers was 14$? their std rate was 18$

    14$ was standard rate of Permanent staff

    December 13, 2010 at 8:42 pm #74617
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 7
    • Replies: 58
    • β˜†β˜†

    @sefiller said:
    If 2200 hours were used by permanent then the remaining hours were used by temporary staff. In overall it should take 650*1.5+750*2=2475 hours but only 2200 is present remaining part 275 were used by temporary but two times inefficient that is 275*2=550

    ok, so temp staff efficiency variance would be like this:

    they should have worked 275 hrs
    but did work 550
    variance 275 (A)
    x their standard rate 18$ = 4950 (A)

    TOTAL labour variance was 6050 , so labour RATE variance would be TOTAL labour variance 6050 – labour efficiency var 4950 = 1100 (A), since 2 of the discussed variances (Labour and efficiency constitute total labour var.)

    I understand your approach and honestly I dont knwo which one was correct πŸ™‚ I think they may give credit to both approaches. I treated this separately, as there was some kind of a hint in the question saying that Total labour variance relates to temporary staff..

    anyway wish you all passes πŸ™‚

    December 13, 2010 at 9:04 pm #74618
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 90
    • β˜†β˜†

    I did the linear programming in 2 ways…1st i just simply do like TPAR style..then the next page I do with the equation with many constraints identified..however I just plot with 3 point…sales demand…3C + 2L = 5000 & 2C + L = 3200… ended with 1400 and 400 …cant remember which is which but total contribution is 15800..

    how if the 1st page answer is wrong…will they mark 2nd page?
    btw my 2nd page is darn messy as I did not prepare for it

    December 13, 2010 at 11:40 pm #74619
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 16
    • β˜†

    question 5 asked about the diference between budgeting in private and public sector orgs. I had no idea about this and i dont see it in my book. 6 marks gone there.
    Also labour variances was abit confusing. Everything else was good.

    December 14, 2010 at 12:19 am #74620
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 1
    • β˜†

    It was definitely an easy paper too easy so easy that i had difficulties doing it, i studied for harder stuff, but i guess time will tell. Merry Xmas everyone.

    December 14, 2010 at 12:38 am #74621
    KeshaM
    Member
    • Topics: 9
    • Replies: 36
    • β˜†

    Thats why I read Kaplan textbook and practise BPP as my ACCA experiensed friend advicedme πŸ™‚

    December 14, 2010 at 12:46 am #74622
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 6
    • β˜†

    @willynwilson said:
    I thought the exam was severly time pressured! I just about finished, labour rate and labour variance was a bit rubbish!

    I got 875 and 1275 too
    Linear programming, optimal point was at the two constraints that weren’t 1+0.5 = can’t remember!

    I think I got 1275 and 875 for optimum plan, with a shadow price of 1 I think!

    It said on the question that unfinished products were going to be made the following week, so I just got rid of the 2 decimal places and calculated the full products!

    Q2, the company performed much better than the year before, and as market was going to decline by 20%, their turnover only decreased 8%!

    Q4, cost drivers, I had procurement and purchase orders, delivery against deliveries, machine running costs and machine hours, and machine set up against production runs!

    Anyone agree?! Please say yes! Lol!

    December 14, 2010 at 1:52 am #74623
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 3
    • β˜†

    Oops..For ABC costing I put cost driver for machine running costs against production runs((( Please advise!

    December 14, 2010 at 4:13 am #74624
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 1
    • β˜†

    What a mess!
    If I’ve got time to copy the whole answer booklet again, should earn more marks πŸ™
    Hope for a pass only

    December 14, 2010 at 4:58 am #74625
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 2
    • β˜†

    i want only a pass !

    December 14, 2010 at 5:50 am #74626
    rajasaadishrat
    Member
    • Topics: 8
    • Replies: 15
    • β˜†

    Can any 1tell me plz about budgeting question was it numerical or about theory???i will sit for f5 in june11 so wana knw plz reply…..

    December 14, 2010 at 6:38 am #74627
    ivenny
    Member
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 5
    • β˜†

    @grindmastah said:
    linear programming

    x= 825, y = 1275

    OMG.. My answer was x=828.57 and y=1,257.15 πŸ™
    but the binding constranits is it:
    1. 3x + 2y = 5000
    2. 4x + 5y = 9600

    December 14, 2010 at 6:51 am #74628
    ivenny
    Member
    • Topics: 1
    • Replies: 5
    • β˜†

    @suso7 said:
    If I remember shadow price was 1.84

    Yeah yeah its $1.84

    December 14, 2010 at 7:19 am #74629
    Handsome
    Member
    • Topics: 9
    • Replies: 94
    • β˜†β˜†

    @yelena said:
    Oops..For ABC costing I put cost driver for machine running costs against production runs((( Please advise!

    I did the same, i hope it was correct, because there was such kind of question in BBP

    It was loss in Product C in Absorption and Loss in Product A if we use ABC

    is it ok/?

    December 14, 2010 at 7:59 am #74630
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 7
    • Replies: 58
    • β˜†β˜†

    @handsome said:
    I did the same, i hope it was correct, because there was such kind of question in BBP

    It was loss in Product C in Absorption and Loss in Product A if we use ABC

    is it ok/?

    yes, I had same results πŸ™‚

    December 14, 2010 at 8:15 am #74631
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 9
    • β˜†

    @ivenny said:
    OMG.. My answer was x=828.57 and y=1,257.15 πŸ™
    but the binding constranits is it:
    1. 3x + 2y = 5000
    2. 4x + 5y = 9600

    I`ve got the same figures πŸ™‚

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 25 posts - 76 through 100 (of 184 total)
← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 →
  • The topic ‘Paper F5 Dec 2010 exam was’ is closed to new replies.

Primary Sidebar

Donate
If you have benefited from our materials, please donate

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options: Β β€œRead the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE 2025 Exams

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • umangkumbhat on What is Assurance? – ACCA Audit and Assurance (AA)
  • ahmadhoney on How to register with ACCA?
  • John Moffat on Interest rate risk management (1) Part 5 – ACCA (AFM) lectures
  • osman-the-zephyr@ on MA Chapter 1 Questions Accounting for Management
  • adebusola on MA Chapter 1 Questions Accounting for Management

Copyright © 2025 Β· Support Β· Contact Β· Advertising Β· OpenLicense Β· About Β· Sitemap Β· Comments Β· Log in