FAE 2017

jus_tin4 wrote: »

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.

Yeah, I'd say you're right. I didn't see them throwing in indirect indicators anyway, just thought it was odd at the time not having either an ethics or Corp Gov indicator in either papers and decided to cover myself. Plus the business plan indicator was very generic and didn't seem like a full indicator.

LeTissier wrote: »

Yeah, I'd say you're right. I didn't see them throwing in indirect indicators anyway, just thought it was odd at the time not having either an ethics or Corp Gov indicator in either papers and decided to cover myself. Plus the business plan indicator was very generic and didn't seem like a full indicator.

There was a professional ethics question in the core paper so that would cover that. But yeah, bit surprised not to see corporate governance on it, but then again, it can't come up every year.

Anyone back studying today?

Faecanditate wrote: »

For finance on sim 1. Did ye work out the cash conversion cycle for each year? Think mine went from c. 50 days in 2015 to about 80 in 2017 with the debtor/inventory days going up but creditor days down?? So I said her concerns were valid etc and make recommendations. Do they ever release a summary of the % of people who got C/BC in each subject?? Just wondering how many actually go down on the BC subjects, hoping it's a low barrier to get it. I'm sure the assessment rationale they put out is open enough to the person correcting?? Is it one corrector per paper or several with different disciplines?

I might be wrong but I don't think it's broken down at that level but you can often read between the lines in the examiner comments. It'll often say something along the lines of over 70% students got BC or above (or something similar).

The bar for a BC is quite low. For example, I mis-read the Finance (Working Cap) question in the Sims and though the company was looking to bring in a "late payment penalty" not "late payment procedures" so I missed out on that element of the indicator. But I know I'll still have done enough in the other elements of the indicator to get the BC I need.

Getting from NC to BC doesn't take much, but getting from BC to C is a lot harder. The hardest part of the exam is getting the 3 C's in FR and, to a lesser extent, the 2 C's in BL. I'd say that's where the vast majority of people fail.

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

Don't think it's broken down at that level but you can often read between the lines in the examiner comments. It'll often say something along the lines of over 70% students got BC or above (or something similar).

The bar for a BC is quite low. For example, I mis-read the Finance (Working Cap) question in the Sims and though the company was looking to bring in a "late payment penalty" not "late payment procedures" so I missed out on that element of the indicator. But I know I'll still have done enough in the other elements of the indicator to get the BC I need.

Getting from NC to BC doesn't take much, but getting from BC to C is a lot harder. The hardest part of the exam is getting the 3 C's in FR and, to a lesser extent, the 2 C's in BL. I'd say that's where the vast majority of people fail.

That's what I'm hoping for. Id be sick if I actually passed all the harder ones and failed the whole lot on a BC requirement! Nothing we can do about it now anyway only wait the long wait!!

jus_tin4 wrote: »

Anyone back studying today?

I haven't opened a book. I cant face it.

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

Yeah, doing APM now. I've already done a bit on it in the last 2 weeks and I'm bringing a HC in from the interim so I'm going at a leisurely pace today.

Very good! I'm going in with a bc again! So does that mean I need 4 c?

I had a broken hand at the time of doing the interim so can't really give out... was just glad I was able to do it

Faecanditate wrote: »

What did you think of the tax indicators on the papers?

Thought the losses were tricky for the comp very specific to corporation tax and there was 2 trades in the company and case V so had to think about them all and also the anti avoidance provision. hopefully to get BC just to even mention the anti avoidance and a few other bits.

R&D was a nice question though for the SIM no tricks or surprises with the calcs and then cap allowances on the building. think it will be easy enough to get a BC for this one once the credit is mentioned and some form of calc is done.

On the MA indicator in the comp I (stupidly) forgot to divide my billing rate by the no. of employees (had something like €1,300 and should have divided by 30 employees to get €44) - I know I should have spotted the rate was a bit off the wall but was just in such a rush!

Fairly certain I used the correct approach for the b/e point and flex afterwards, but with the wrong rate.
Anyone think that my scrape a BC, as I don't think I've enough in the target citing to get a BC either??

jus_tin4 wrote: »

Very good! I'm going in with a bc again! So does that mean I need 4 c?

I have a BC from the interim as well. The elective is measured at sufficiency only, so 9 indicators is 36 points max, so only 18 points required to pass. If I get a BC on all of the indicators tomorrow, I will scrape a pass.

Qwert6 wrote: »

ye I suppose they aren't as technical as cap2 but failing one subject means having to do the whole thing which is a pain in the hole. I also think ive missed the core too which means we could have a ****e xmas

The FAEs generally aren't too bad in that they're nowhere near as technical as the CAP 2's but yeah, the volume of information and fact you need to get a minimum "competency" in each subject is the problem. It's hard to pick up on everything. I missed a few bits that I'm kicking myself over (depreciation in finance lease, late payment in finance indicator and capital allowances in tax indicator) but overall I think I did better than I expected. And I expect most other people will be pleasantly surprised by their results too


I wonder what sort of marks you need to rank in the top 10 for the FAEs? I'm guessing it'll be in and around 14-16 HC's. I can't even fathom the amount of effort needed for that level of grade

westerner01 wrote: »

On the MA indicator in the comp I (stupidly) forgot to divide my billing rate by the no. of employees (had something like €1,300 and should have divided by 30 employees to get €44) - I know I should have spotted the rate was a bit off the wall but was just in such a rush!

Fairly certain I used the correct approach for the b/e point and flex afterwards, but with the wrong rate.
Anyone think that my scrape a BC, as I don't think I've enough in the target citing to get a BC either??

I'd say you'll be fine. Looks like your approach is correct but just a miscalculation. I'd don't think that error would even preclude you from getting a C, depending on the rest of your approach

jus_tin4 wrote: »

I think I forgot to flex it tbh! I calculated the b/e tho in hours and rate so I think that will def get me a bc at least maybe a c! Flexing was really just a re do on your calculations so I'd hope for a bc with no flexing for sure

Ya a lot of people were thrown by the flexing. I'd say a reasonable attempt at calcs with some comments should get it.

Faecanditate wrote: »

Ya a lot of people were thrown by the flexing. I'd say a reasonable attempt at calcs with some comments should get it.

Does would be the things for a HC I'd imagine!

I'm legit too tired to study for tomorrow -_-