FAE 2017

John.burke · 24-08-2017 09:06AM

Did everyone treat the credit control issue as a blended BL/Finance indicator? Seems obvious enough to me the time. I'm assuming Swot + business plan is one BL indicator too

chazzy100 · 24-08-2017 09:12AM

John.burke wrote: »

Did everyone treat the credit control issue as a blended BL/Finance indicator? Seems obvious enough to me the time. I'm assuming Swot + business plan is one BL indicator too

SWOT and business plan were separate indicators.

CAIBoyz · 24-08-2017 09:18AM

John.burke wrote: »

Did everyone treat the credit control issue as a blended BL/Finance indicator? Seems obvious enough to me the time. I'm assuming Swot + business plan is one BL indicator too

If they were together where was the 4th indicator in sim 2?

John.burke · 24-08-2017 09:20AM

chazzy100 wrote: »

SWOT and business plan were separate indicators.

Very unlikely. Business plan requirement was generic with swot been specific. Both had to be submitted to bank. No way are they giving 25 min to list details of a generic business plan. Just my opinion

John.burke · 24-08-2017 09:23AM

CAIBoyz wrote: »

If they were together where was the 4th indicator in sim 2?[/quote

Poor credit control is evidence of a poor organisational structure. 7 indicators across the 2 sims

John.burke · 24-08-2017 09:25AM

Jsmac67 wrote: »

There was also no FV given in the question so it was impossible to determine what the lower of minimum lease payments and FV was for recognition.

All round mess of an indicator.

No fv ? a 3rd part paid 7 mil for the asset in the open market! This represents fv

Humour Me · 24-08-2017 09:29AM

Sim 1
Audit of receivables Audit
Provisions FR
Credit control Finance
Sale and Leaseback FR

Sim 2
Business Plan BL
SWOT BL
R&D expenditure Tax
Target costing MA

AtticusFinch86 · 24-08-2017 09:30AM

The Swot and Business plan were definitely separate BL indicators. You were asked to explain what a BP was and guide them on what needs to be included, that's well over a page of narrative at least. You were also asked to explain the SWOT and give them a detailed SWOT analysis (meaning a bullet point list won't suffice)

The credit management one was a single finance indicator.

AtticusFinch86 · 24-08-2017 09:32AM

John.burke wrote: »

CAIBoyz wrote: »

If they were together where was the 4th indicator in sim 2?[/quote

Poor credit control is evidence of a poor organisational structure. 7 indicators across the 2 sims

There were 8 indicators across. Pretty sure Paul Monaghan said the structure was going to be 8, 4, 4

John.burke · 24-08-2017 09:34AM

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

The Swot and Business plan were definitely separate BL indicators. You were asked to explain what a BP was and guide them on what needs to be included, that's well over a page of narrative at least. You were also asked to explain the SWOT and give them a detailed SWOT analysis (meaning a bullet point list won't suffice)

The credit management one was a single finance indicator.

Don't think so ; that's like treating the ias 16 and Ias 23 issues separately when clearly related. We'll see come October I guess, anything else is just speculation

jus_tin4 · 24-08-2017 09:35AM

I actually thought that there may have been a indirect indicator for BL. Swot and business plan imo was to straight foreword for 2 indicators.

Anyone mention there was no finance person? Both were engineers. I didn't think there was a truest obvious strategy, I know that there were focused on child tech but other than that no mission or vision really.

I thought that was an issue, not an obvious point and prob worthless but I was looking for anything that might get me over the line

Humour Me · 24-08-2017 09:39AM

As long as you addressed all of the information requested, it doesn't matter if you answered them as separate or combined indicators.

AtticusFinch86 · 24-08-2017 09:40AM

John.burke wrote: »

Don't think so ; that's like treating the ias 16 and Ias 23 issues separately when clearly related. We'll see come October I guess, anything else is just speculation

I promise you. They are 2 separate indicators. Each of them takes 1-2 pages at a minimum.

Also, there were 8 indicators in the Sims. We'd previously been told this would be the case. If they were a combined single indicator, that would mean there were only 7 in the sims.

That's not to say you wouldn't still get a C in both if you combined them and the depth of your answer was on the money, but there were definitely 2 C's going for them.

AtticusFinch86 · 24-08-2017 09:43AM

jus_tin4 wrote: »

I actually thought that there may have been a indirect indicator for BL. Swot and business plan imo was to straight foreword for 2 indicators.

Anyone mention there was no finance person? Both were engineers. I didn't think there was a truest obvious strategy, I know that there were focused on child tech but other than that no mission or vision really.

I thought that was an issue, not an obvious point and prob worthless but I was looking for anything that might get me over the line

I think those issues were included to be used in the SWOT

John.burke · 24-08-2017 09:44AM

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

I promise you. They are 2 separate indicators. Each of them takes 1-2 pages at a minimum.

Also, there were 8 indicators in the Sims. We'd previously been told this would be the case. If they were a combined single indicator, that would mean there were only 7 in the sims.

That's not to say you wouldn't still get a C in both even if you combined them and the depth of your answer was on the money, but there were definitely 2 C's going for them.

Aye, agree to disagree I guess. But that would make it 5 BL indicators as ignoring the credit management which was responsible for large write offs was clearly mapped to BL and Finance.

jus_tin4 · 24-08-2017 09:46AM

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

I think those issues were included to be used in the SWOT

Say your prob right! Just thought it was strange for no corp gov question across both papers, given the significance of it. Think I included some of it in my swot and then wrote and few bullet points at the end about lack of board etc as a quick add on near the end.

Humour Me · 24-08-2017 09:48AM

John.burke wrote: »

Aye, agree to disagree I guess. But that would make it 5 BL indicators as ignoring the credit management which was responsible for large write offs was clearly mapped to BL and Finance.

I actually don't understand how they could include a blended indicator like that. It's a single indicator so would they award a C for BL and a C for Finance? I don't think that's likely.

Alfred Borden · 24-08-2017 09:54AM

madhouse2 wrote: »

What do you think is the min to get Bc in the core?

Hopefully its a low bar for MA anyways

chazzy100 · 24-08-2017 09:54AM

John.burke wrote: »

Aye, agree to disagree I guess. But that would make it 5 BL indicators as ignoring the credit management which was responsible for large write offs was clearly mapped to BL and Finance.

Mate was 100% 2 indicators. It even says "Secondly" and in a new paragraph. The credit management indicator was finance. Working capital management is part of the syllabus and has descriptive elements to it.

Qwert6 · 24-08-2017 09:56AM

John.burke wrote: »

No fv ? a 3rd part paid 7 mil for the asset in the open market! This represents fv

somebody could have just paid this not necessarily the FV of the property? no?

Qwert6 · 24-08-2017 09:58AM

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

The Swot and Business plan were definitely separate BL indicators. You were asked to explain what a BP was and guide them on what needs to be included, that's well over a page of narrative at least. You were also asked to explain the SWOT and give them a detailed SWOT analysis (meaning a bullet point list won't suffice)

The credit management one was a single finance indicator.

how detailed do ya think they wanted it ? im scared now. I think I just used bullet points didn't really flesh it out much

jus_tin4 · 24-08-2017 10:01AM

Qwert6 wrote: »

how detailed do ya think they wanted it ? im scared now. I think I just used bullet points didn't really flesh it out much

Same as! I don't think you'll would lose a c over that though... well fingers crossed!

LeTissier · 24-08-2017 10:02AM

I was very confused with the BL indicators myself. So I wrote a business plan for Techno and explained the elements of a business plan then went back and wrote an indicator on the ethics of handpicking 10 debtors for the circularisation. I seem to be the only person I've been talking to who did that though.

jus_tin4 · 24-08-2017 10:10AM

LeTissier wrote: »

I was very confused with the BL indicators myself. So I wrote a business plan for Techno and explained the elements of a business plan then went back and wrote an indicator on the ethics of handpicking 10 debtors for the circularisation. I seem to be the only person I've been talking to who did that though.

The BL was def the swot and business plan.i thought there may have been a strategy issue but this could have been rolled into the swot. The debtor circulation was audit. It would have been an ethic issue if you were the auditor I believe( audit not my strong point) but it was more a case that we couldn't do it,that it would impact audit evidence if we did. I also mentioned that if we did it would have an impact on the report.

John.burke · 24-08-2017 10:10AM

chazzy100 wrote: »

Mate was 100% 2 indicators. It even says "Secondly" and in a new paragraph. The credit management indicator was finance. Working capital management is part of the syllabus and has descriptive elements to it.

Aye working capital management is a critical function to a business hence to just ignore it is clearly a strategic issue with potential to cause receivership. I.e no cash flow . Fair enough if ye didn't link this 2 strategy/poor organisation and BL. There was always going to be a blended indicator

unknown1990 · 24-08-2017 10:11AM

Just realised that stupidly I weighted the interest rates for borrowing costs in the comp but I think you only do that for general borrowings. Would you say that's a fundamental error? I think the borrowings were specific just totally lost the run of myself with it

jus_tin4 · 24-08-2017 10:17AM

unknown1990 wrote: »

Just realised that stupidly I weighted the interest rates for borrowing costs in the comp but I think you only do that for general borrowings. Would you say that's a fundamental error? I think the borrowings were specific just totally lost the run of myself with it

I would see this as only a minor. Would think you could still get c if your answer was still mostly right

AtticusFinch86 · 24-08-2017 10:20AM

Qwert6 wrote: »

how detailed do ya think they wanted it ? im scared now. I think I just used bullet points didn't really flesh it out much

I doubt it'd need to be too detailed, 2-3 points on each.

From looking at past papers, you'll only be in bother if it looks like the below

Strengths
-Cash position
-Strong R&D
-Staff, etc.

I think they probably want you to briefly explain it a bit more

Strenghs
R&D --> company has proven track record in R&D which is vital in continously changing industries such as tech industry

Opportunities
R&D Facility --> Investment in R&D facility should bring further product innovations down the line. This is vital for success in disruptive tech sector

Again, looking at past papers, I'd say 2-3 on each would be plenty

unknown1990 · 24-08-2017 10:22AM

John.burke wrote: »

Aye working capital management is a critical function to a business hence to just ignore it is clearly a strategic issue with potential to cause receivership. I.e no cash flow . Fair enough if ye didn't link this 2 strategy/poor organisation and BL. There was always going to be a blended indicator

To be honest it so isn't a big deal either way. Like if anything you had a really good finance answer and if you only saw three indicators in sim 2 probably dedicated a lot more time to the bl so I can't imagine it matters. Mike Farrell always says it doesn't matter how you split them out

AtticusFinch86 · 24-08-2017 10:22AM

unknown1990 wrote: »

Just realised that stupidly I weighted the interest rates for borrowing costs in the comp but I think you only do that for general borrowings. Would you say that's a fundamental error? I think the borrowings were specific just totally lost the run of myself with it

I'm pretty sure they need to be weighted. The tricky part was that only the Sept expenditure was at the higher rate. But yeah, it's unlikely to have much of an impact on your rating for that indicator, it's a very minor detail

FAE 2017

Comments