CAP 2 Exams 2011 Feedback

Username2011 · 23-06-2011 02:52PM

Loved the paper! Q1 suited me to a tee!
Divine intervention must have been working for me too as last night saw a similar EVA question to the one that came up today.
The only kind of stumbling block was in my Q2 co valuation where I could not figure out my P/E multiple for the earnings valuation. Did anyone else come across this issue or was it me missing something very obvious.

Whiplash85 · 23-06-2011 03:18PM

Thought the p/e multiple was just 5.multiplied it be eps and number of shares to give value of equity.

Whiplash85 · 23-06-2011 03:23PM

R0N BURGUNDY wrote: »

tried to find an example of market share / volume last night and couldnt find it in my file anywhere but when i seen today it was sales/markets i was thinking - oh dear... but put my hand on a past paper question near enough straight away by some sort of divine intervention. time was the killer yeah. talked some major crap in it on the written parts - hope theyre not gonna murder me for it. got 47 in it last year and feel like i defo did better there today.

Thought I did better than autumn too.you're never too sure how they will mark it though.didn't have a breeze of the cash balance working capital part.answered 93/94% fairly fine so we'll see how it goes.now for financial tomorrow.

tumbling_dice · 23-06-2011 03:38PM

The P/E of five that we were given was in Q3, no? Are you talking about the valuation of Bull post-takeover of Bear in Q2? I didn't really know what I was doing there, but I didn't use P/E anyway.

Long paper. Stuff I didn't like came up in Q1 but found that it was easy enough to handle because there was so many parts; nothing was too complicated. Got a little over 90% of it done and happy with most of that so that's grand.

Very tired now. Tomorrow morning will be grim, but whatever, it's nearly over!

thisguy · 23-06-2011 03:44PM

left 18 marks behind in unanswered parts which is a lot, i think what i did was done fairly alrite though for the most part so hopefully that and the assessment will get me over the line...i really dont know how anyone did these exams without the 20 mins reading time time pressure is really a killer in that exam!

BESman · 23-06-2011 04:21PM

tomfoolery60 wrote: »

Yeah the timing was a killer. How on earth did anyone do SFMA without the 20 min reading time? Must have spend 15 min reading it and still ran out of the allocated time to do it.

I thought the paper was fair enough, nothing mental in it. Time pressure quite bad though and I was very rushed for the option questions. My script starts off very neat and then rapidly deteriorates!

I think it would be some laugh to see a sample of people's scripts and watch how the quality of handwriting and presentation deteriorates as the paper goes on. Mine become an incoherent mess by the end.

Didn't think that was too bad. Was it just me or were the variances in question one really straightforward? Did I miss something? I have to say, CAP 1 Management Accounting was more difficult than some of the stuff in that case study. The other questions however... a lot of waffle. Only for the continuous assessment I'd say I failed this, but hopefully it'll get me over.

Username2011 · 23-06-2011 05:04PM

tumbling_dice wrote: »

The P/E of five that we were given was in Q3, no? Are you talking about the valuation of Bull post-takeover of Bear in Q2? I didn't really know what I was doing there, but I didn't use P/E anyway.

Yeah sorry forgot to say it was for the bull and bear question
God but im so tired after today.

thisguy · 23-06-2011 05:18PM

BESman wrote: »

I think it would be some laugh to see a sample of people's scripts and watch how the quality of handwriting and presentation deteriorates as the paper goes on. Mine become an incoherent mess by the end.

Didn't think that was too bad. Was it just me or were the variances in question one really straightforward? Did I miss something? I have to say, CAP 1 Management Accounting was more difficult than some of the stuff in that case study. The other questions however... a lot of waffle. Only for the continuous assessment I'd say I failed this, but hopefully it'll get me over.

What were they looking for with the market size and share variances?...i took a stab at them hoping the obvious route was the right one..the other variances were very handy though. Im hoping question 1 and 4 will get me enough marks, question 2 was very rushed and mostly bullsh*t!

Username2011 · 23-06-2011 05:20PM

thisguy wrote: »

What were they looking for with the market size and share variances?...i took a stab at them hoping the obvious route was the right one..the other variances were very handy though. Im hoping question 1 and 4 will get me enough marks, question 2 was very rushed and mostly bullsh*t!

They're specificic variances. The total of them = the sales volume variance

Big Face · 23-06-2011 05:23PM

Guys what were they looking for altogether with the variances?? I was confident going in about them but I messed them up altogether. Where you supposed to do the AQAM, SQSM (table) because of the 2 (IOI and Moldova) or how were both meant to be accounted for?

I started adding them together in the actual formula which I think was a no no. Was it a case of working out a normal variance for each IOI and Moldava and then add them afterwards? Which would be about 0.5 marks a variance basically..............Ahhhhhhhhhhhh........Im wrecked!!

I am adding up potential marks in my head. Dont know if i'll make 50. Time really destroyed me and getting muddled on variances put the nail in the coffin. Miffed because I could of done a lot better.

The Big Red Button · 23-06-2011 07:56PM

Dunno why I read these threads.

I do the exam and I think I did OK, and then I read other peoples posts ... nope, I didn't do that, I don't know how to do that ... I don't even know what that term means ...

At this stage, if I get even one out of the four (probably auditing), I'll be happy tbh!

tt1 · 23-06-2011 08:18PM

i think dey were looking IOI and Moldova to be looked at seperately. IOI was just the normal variances AQ X AM etc then Moldova was a seperate contract so just fixed costs were a variance. Well thats what i did not sure if thats right. Also i took it as using absorption costing as fixed cost were mentioned and not variable costing did anyone else do that??

FX was easy enough and hope i did well in question one cause seriously ran out time. Was 1 o clock when i started the 3rd question so that was a rushed job with a load of crap written.

Have to try and figure out consolidation now tonight could be an all nighter ha

Thank god were finished tomorrow going to sleep the whole weekend before work starts next week

R0N BURGUNDY · 24-06-2011 09:22AM

chatterpillar wrote: »

Dunno why I read these threads. I do the exam and I think I did OK, and then I read other peoples posts ... nope, I didn't do that, I don't know how to do that ... I don't even know what that term means ...

At this stage, if I get even one out of the four (probably auditing), I'll be happy tbh!

Im just browsing over peoples posts because im the same = the more i read about what other people did the more worried i get!! done now!! getting smashed tonight for the first time in at least a month yeeeeoooooo!!!

KingEnda · 24-06-2011 02:15PM

THAT WAS EASY?????????

Oh well over and done with, off now for a polite pint or 2 with a crowd of depressed students

How did you find that?

tt1 · 24-06-2011 02:55PM

that was pretty easy compared with last year alright, didn know how to do the denfined benefit bit of question 2 but my csofp balanced

sfma was defo the toughest, the rest were fair exams. time for a good few overdue pints tonight

R0N BURGUNDY · 24-06-2011 04:32PM

just goes to show u - no point trying to play it and focus on 2 exams and then get the other 2 in the resits or something when an easier exam than usual might come up. last years summer exams - omg = cant remember my exact mark for FR but low 40s - got 66 in the autumn one (resat all 4 again!!!) last summers exams were a complete bollocks tbf.

Pawwed Rig · 24-06-2011 06:00PM

prinz wrote: »

Didn't really get the "substantive analytical procedures", should it not be subtantive procedures and/or analytical procedures? What's a substantive analytical procedure? Ended up just doing a quick numerical calc for that part.

Q2 on the Bank Confirmation piece.... was there supposed to be two separate bank accounts? Why would the bank statement of one account include an overdraft figure from a second account? If they are relating to one account why would the bank confirmation letter deduct one account from the balance of another... is there something I missed on that.... The same piece seems to indicate that there is one account... and two accounts...

Analytical procedures are substantive procedures.
Yep 2 seperate accounts. Think if you wrote that question in exam 'Why would the bank statement of one account include an overdraft figure from a second account?' you are hitting the right notes. Sometimes banks will offset but should be included in FS.

Pawwed Rig · 24-06-2011 06:03PM

tt1 wrote: »

that was pretty easy compared with last year alright, didn know how to do the denfined benefit bit of question 2 but my csofp balanced

Am sick. Was definitely passable but made a complete horlicks of it

Pawwed Rig · 24-06-2011 06:04PM

Whiplash85 wrote: »

Thought the p/e multiple was just 5.multiplied it be eps and number of shares to give value of equity.

Reduce PE by 20-30% for an unlisted company

Big Face · 24-06-2011 06:56PM

What did use think about the mistake in question 1? where it was meant to say Delta's general reserve and it said Alpha instead!!

This completely through me. I sat for ages trying to figure it out and was even going to ask if it was wrong. I near hit the rough when they made the announcement about 45 mins - hour into the paper. My head was away from that.

I got hammered in time altogether. Disgusted.

The Big Red Button · 24-06-2011 09:08PM

Big Face wrote: »

What did use think about the mistake in question 1? where it was meant to say Delta's general reserve and it said Alpha instead!!

This completely through me. I sat for ages trying to figure it out and was even going to ask if it was wrong. I near hit the rough when they made the announcement about 45 mins - hour into the paper. My head was away from that.

Jesus that's bad! :eek: They announced it in Dublin I think about 20 minutes in, but you'd imagine that once it was spotted in one centre they'd have gotten on to the other exam centres straight away.

I don't get how a mistake like that can happen though? Surely they should have at least one person who hasn't seen the paper before to actually sit down and do the paper before it's finalised. If they had, something like that would have been spotted. I noticed one or two other tiny things too on some of the papers - something worded ambiguously, or tiny typos or whatever - stuff like that should really have been picked up on before the exam.

BESman · 25-06-2011 01:46PM

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Am sick. Was definitely passable but made a complete horlicks of it

Agreed, there were only 5 or 6 adjustments in Q1 and the other questions had a nice bit of theory in them. Can't believe I made a balls of it. Balance sheet was way out and ran out of time.

chatterpillar wrote: »

I don't get how a mistake like that can happen though? Surely they should have at least one person who hasn't seen the paper before to actually sit down and do the paper before it's finalised. If they had, something like that would have been spotted. I noticed one or two other tiny things too on some of the papers - something worded ambiguously, or tiny typos or whatever - stuff like that should really have been picked up on before the exam.

Well this is the Institute we're talking about here...

Big Face · 25-06-2011 01:53PM

chatterpillar wrote: »

Jesus that's bad! :eek: They announced it in Dublin I think about 20 minutes in, but you'd imagine that once it was spotted in one centre they'd have gotten on to the other exam centres straight away.

I don't get how a mistake like that can happen though? Surely they should have at least one person who hasn't seen the paper before to actually sit down and do the paper before it's finalised. If they had, something like that would have been spotted. I noticed one or two other tiny things too on some of the papers - something worded ambiguously, or tiny typos or whatever - stuff like that should really have been picked up on before the exam.

I maybe was a bit out with the time there, probably was about 30 minutes really when they announced it. Either way its still a joke that they made the error.

I took far too long on the Consol as well, balance sheet way out to. Difficult paper as always but do able. Timing is everything and I made a mess of that!! Thought of repeating that again in October is sickening!

I just hope it is at least the same sort of level as yesterday and not even harder.

Whiplash85 · 25-06-2011 02:55PM

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Reduce PE by 20-30% for an unlisted company

But it was a listed company.They were discussing paying out dividend proposals.

Pawwed Rig · 25-06-2011 05:11PM

Whiplash85 wrote: »

But it was a listed company.They were discussing paying out dividend proposals.

Was a private company. Private companies pay dividends too. Says in question that one of the directors 'is keen to that the company be taken public in the very near future'.

toobeyshaw · 26-06-2011 12:44PM

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Am sick. Was definitely passable but made a complete horlicks of it

Totally agreed - I was happy when I got the paper because I felt I could do it. I left the case study till the end but didn't leave myself enough time so I only got half of it done and that half was really rushed. I will be back in Oct for that one, raging because it was actually a good paper!

Username2011 · 26-06-2011 07:25PM

congrats to everyone sitting the papers.
the 20 mins this year was a godsend and the papers did seem a lot fairer in that nothing came up topic wise that was unforgiveable.
as well, having tax at the start was a huge advantage compared to last year.

however i still think it's very unfair and unreasonable of the institute not to start the exams on a monday and give a break in between on the wednesday. the amout of people whose performance will have weakened by the friday due to tiredness rather than incompetence is ridiculous.

all in all, im happy with 2 and worried about 2 but i gave it my best shot and sure that's all we can do. so congrats to everyone for coming out the other side and hopefully see ye next year for the fae's rather than October!

prinz · 26-06-2011 11:14PM

toobeyshaw wrote: »

Totally agreed - I was happy when I got the paper because I felt I could do it. I left the case study till the end but didn't leave myself enough time so I only got half of it done and that half was really rushed. I will be back in Oct for that one, raging because it was actually a good paper!

This is exactly what happened to me. Did the reading thought the paper was grand, decided I could knock the two short questions out first. Ended up blowing the timing completely. Started in on the case study last and started rushing. Disaster. Made a balls of it and didn't even get a lot of the case study attempted.

The Big Red Button · 26-06-2011 11:26PM

Yeah I was the other way round, made a decent effort at the case study, but then made a balls of the two short questions - barely even got one of them started.

Not feeling too optimistic really.

louise1985 · 27-06-2011 09:02AM

Ya felt the paper was do able but made a heams of it!
Felt I knew the stuff but got so overwhelemed that I mad a balls of it! def be back in Oct

for now going to enjoy the time to the results!
If they can make a mistake in the paper maybe they can make a mistake correcting my paper and get me a pass

CAP 2 Exams 2011 Feedback

Comments