nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

FAE 2011 Where to begin

FAE_UCH

Hello all,

This thread may be a little premature but after that disaster of a paper on Saturday, I figure i better start doing a bit now while i'm still slightly in study mode. I did a masters so i feel at a huge disadvantage as i did not have to come through CAP 2. Is there any point in me now going back and trying to look at CAP2 material or would that be much too technical for this.

Does anyone know what the best plan of attack to study this? I'd love to hear past Faer's advice, or people who have a plan to share it with us.

Find more posts tagged with

fae

Quick Links

Comments

Nidot

jobr wrote: »

Those are good results! Surely that means so that even though you were in the top 20% in core & it still wasn't a pass maybe only people in the top decile did?Am I right in thinking that nobody in Ireland passed the core mocks last year?

I think that's the case. From my understanding of it, you'd need to get sufficency of 0 to pass, with the decile purely being a ranking system.

Still a bit dissappointed by the sufficency level overall, would of hoped to of done better than that. But sure as they say 'forward into the breach' only just over three weeks to go until the real things.

Stey_9

Nidot wrote: »

I just reviewed the Joanne Powell presentation there and here's my interpretation of it (I'm open to correction on this).

Decile - This is in what group of those who sat the exam were you based. For example if you were Decile 1 - then you were in the top 10% of all students who sat the exam, Decile 2 - then you were in the top 20% of all students who sat the exam, Decile 3 - top 30% and so on.

Sufficency - This is how competent you were across the entire exam, i.e. how well you actually did. For each reaching competent, competent, highly competent you receive, you get a mark based on the grading given to each indicator (Each indicator being given a different weighting and so different marks attached to it). At the end of the exam they total all your marks. The totalled marks are then compared to the benchmark to decide if you've reached competency overall.

So in core, I got a Decile of 1 and Sufficiency of 2, which would mean I'm close enough to passing then if your right, I think. I got no greens however, received 3 red's and 3 yellows, so hard to know.....

Unfortunately I'm at the other end of the scale for the Elective with Decile of 7 and Sufficiency of 8, meaning I would have been better off staying at home that day..... Work to be done!!!!!!

Rickyroma

Foxtrol wrote: »

If you click on the download button you get a breakdown of your results.

I got 6 decile but still received reds in everything except IMS (which I didn't even know I answered) :eek:

:eek:

Exacly the same result! All reds and a triumphant Yellow in IMP! And I hadn't even opened the book.

Reckon I'll change careers - I'm clearly a natural.

lucky01

I wouldnt worry about the decile ranking at all!! you dont need to get a high decile ranking to pass. e.g. someone who got 5greens and 1 red will fail, but will be in a better decile ranking than someone who got 2greens and 4 yellows, who could pass!! It is simply a grading compared to the other students, i dont care what grading I get as long as i pass! (old saying, every mark over 50 is a wasted mark!!)

Think need to focus on sufficiency! the sufficiency is a measure of how techincal your answer was and how close you were to the required standard i.e 0. If you aim for competent and address all the indicators it should be enough to get through, remembering to apply depth to PM/BL indicators. And if you can avoid a red on tax, audit, IMP, finance you will pass!

I am repeating from last year and my result in the real exam was sufficiency 1, i got a green in PM and red in BL. It was obviously the BL that stopped me from getting sufficieny 0 to pass!

Vaioer

So the guts of it is, the higher your sufficiency number, the more you should be panicing?

Great......

randomobserver

what i dont get is how can you get a good decile ranking if you have a poor sufficiency ranking, surely they are somewhat interlinked?

2nd Time Around

Can anyone clarify the correct approach to the scenario where someone asks you to prepare a report "just for them"? In the case Ply4Hire, even though the girl asks you to report only to her, the solution goes ahead & CC's the other shareholder anyway.

Then in another case, the solution prepares it for that person only but strongly suggests to forward it to the other shareholders. Surely this is correct & we should not just go ahead & CC it to others without consulting that person?

I would appreciate any insights on the matter!!

MW2011

2nd Time Around wrote: »

Can anyone clarify the correct approach to the scenario where someone asks you to prepare a report "just for them"? In the case Ply4Hire, even though the girl asks you to report only to her, the solution goes ahead & CC's the other shareholder anyway.

Then in another case, the solution prepares it for that person only but strongly suggests to forward it to the other shareholders. Surely this is correct & we should not just go ahead & CC it to others without consulting that person?

I would appreciate any insights on the matter!!

Normally you would cc the other directors or shareholders if it would be an ethical issue not to involve them. Say the other director had given personnal guarantees then he should no what is going on even if the other director doesnt want to tell him.

You would suggest telling the other directors or shareholders if it wasn't as servere say something like whether they should be included in a business decision

MW2011

Does anyone know how they did the swap in the Core case??

They get a comparative advantage of .25%, does anyone know how they split this .20% to Active Health and .05% to Holton?

Then with regard to the swap itself where is the 6.05% that active health pay come from??

Foxtrol

randomobserver wrote: »

what i dont get is how can you get a good decile ranking if you have a poor sufficiency ranking, surely they are somewhat interlinked?

Think it just means that there were a good few people further away from passing than you were.

Fiona44

I think you can get a higher decile ranking than someone else and be further away from passing though?

I got decile 2 and sufficiency 9 in the core - I think that means I've more work to do than someone who got decile 9 and sufficiency 2?!

carly_2011

I'm just going to do what i can at this stage and hope for the best!!

ahtfulal

Just go in and sit the exam and do your best that's all that can be done, no point worrying about deciles, depths or strengths at this stage!

Perkina3

The mocks are and were designed to give you a kick up the arse and get ur head down the for the next few weeks.... I didn't do too badly and it still scared the crap outta me....

You guys are all worrying but think bout it...There was a 75% pass rate last year... Don't be stressing over the mocks result (I know easier said than done)

Just go in and sit the exams and for most of us hopefully we will be happy come November...There is still plenty of time cuz we have most of August to go!

luco123

Hi was doing part 6 ( Village Living Concept) of the Right Type Group Case study no.10 in Derry Cotters cases book.

The lease consists of 8 half yearly payments of €100,000 beginning half way through the year.
Pv of asset is €600,000
As per IAS 17 you depreciate over the shorter of the lease term ( 8 1/2 payments therefore 4 years) or UEL (5 years)

The depreciation they calculated for the half year was €120,000.

Can anybody explain where they got this figure from?

Perkina3

Hey Luca,

I did this question a couple months back and from what I remember I concluded that it had something to do with their overall depreciation policy.

You can make assumptions if a piece of information is not provided to you and I think they are operating of the the assumption that there is a full years depreciation charged in the year of acquistion AND disposal. It's the only way that this can be rationalised as the depreciation would then be charged over 5 annual period given that the asset only comes into use halfway through a year.

Ie July - December year 1 - 120k
Year 2 - 120k
Year 3 - 120k
Year 4 - 120k
January - December Year 5 - 120k

TBH I would have depreciated it over the 4 years with a full years dep in year of acquisition and none in year of disposal but I reckon you will be grand either way

luco123

TBH I would have depreciated it over the 4 years with a full years dep in year of acquisition and none in year of disposal but I reckon you will be grand either way[/QUOTE]

Thanks perkina, thats what i thought they had done.

So if you are doing a lease question and you are told the firms depr policy is to charge depr in year of acq and none in disposal would you bring this into the calculation of the lease depr?

Perkina3

That's a good question actually....

Again, I would presume so but to cover youself just make the assumption and state as much....Just put the assumption at the top of the page and work from there.

The examiners will be reasonable with respect to that and so long as it's reasonable e.g. that you are following the company's stated depreciation policy with respect to applying the full depreciation on the leased asset I think you will be fine.

Hope this helps

Vaioer

Has anyone done the Sutherland Case from the Sample Paper 2 from last year.

A couple of issues
- The father is looking to retire, but wants to keep 1%. However there are currently only 4 shares in the company. Surely this needs a 1 for 5 share split, such that the number of shares goes to 100 and this will allow him to keep 1. Not mentioned in solution.
- One of the group companies is an investment property. IAS 40 applies, which means that any changes in value should not be reflected in the Revaluation reserve, but there is a revaluation reserve on the SOFP. Any ideas?
- You have been approached "to buy the office premises". Why would you even bother going into a long treatise on asset sale v share sale?

Also, good to know I am ethically conflicted as I go for lunch with the boss.....

levi

Vaioer wrote: »

I hear ya,Midwest Oils as an example.

Specifically says that they are open to your suggestions on reorganising the companies into separate divisions and what are the tax implications.

Not even mentioned in the solution.

I was just doing MidWest Oil there too and was totally off on the wrong track - I went through all of the tax implications of restructurng the business and also went through implementing a new information system...

If this happens in the exam do they include these indicators when marking your paper if the indicators you've addressed are valid?

Perkina3

Just came across this and it would help clarify the swap question in sample paper 2 including my own questions...

If you have a look at the 2008 MABF paper there is a pretty detailed swap question there and the answer if you spend a few mins lookin over it actually makes sense and will help you under stand the the swap question.

I have attached them to make it easier...
Again hope this helps

Coldplayer

Guys could someone please post the Ply for Hire case, it was on the portal a few days back then magically disappeared!

ohcrap

ply4hire attached

Coldplayer

Cheers

YaBagle

Hey guys I remember Paul Monaghan mentioned a few times about a case called level playing field and said that it was a good one to have a look at as there were some stuff in it that could come up in the exam.

I'm wondering if anyone has it or could post it up on this discussion board as I can't seem to find it and I wouldn't mind having a look at it if I could

lucky01

2nd Time Around wrote: »

Can anyone clarify the correct approach to the scenario where someone asks you to prepare a report "just for them"? In the case Ply4Hire, even though the girl asks you to report only to her, the solution goes ahead & CC's the other shareholder anyway.

Then in another case, the solution prepares it for that person only but strongly suggests to forward it to the other shareholders. Surely this is correct & we should not just go ahead & CC it to others without consulting that person?

I would appreciate any insights on the matter!!

This confuses me too! although it did say somewhere in the ply for hire case to also forward the report to her father so I think thats why the solution went ahead and CC her father in it. The report wasnt forwarded to the other shareholders (her brothers) I thought it should have been forwarded to all the shareholders.

I think in the exam if one person asks for a report I will just suggest that the reported be circulated to all other shareholders! do you think this is the correct approach?

lucky01

YaBagle wrote: »

Hey guys I remember Paul Monaghan mentioned a few times about a case called level playing field and said that it was a good one to have a look at as there were some stuff in it that could come up in the exam.

I'm wondering if anyone has it or could post it up on this discussion board as I can't seem to find it and I wouldn't mind having a look at it if I could

level playing fields is the core comprehensive 2010 Mock exam paper.

Gametime

Hi,

Could any post the solution to the 2011 SIMS Mock? I've had a look round the student website but cant seem to find it. Would really appreciate it

Cheers

dchitz

Hi.

Could someone please post up last years sample papers and solutions and last years mocks and solutions as i cant find these anywhere.

Thanks guys

Perkina3

Hey Luco,

just on the Right type case there.

Spoke to a friend of mine this morning bout it and my thoughts on it appear to be wrong.

If it's a finance lease then it is depreciated the same as the other assets under IAS 16 unless there is no reasonable certainty that the lessee will retain ownership at the end of the lease.

I was directed to IAS 17.27 and it makes sense. Sorry for telling ya wrong but at least someone corrected me before the exam