CAP 2 Exams 2012

muzzyizzet · 28-06-2012 04:41PM

I thought the time constraints were ridiculous. Didn't have time to think about what I was actually writing, just had to hope it made sense.

How did people go about the company valuation in q2? Thought it was trickier than it looked at first.

swn · 28-06-2012 04:55PM

muzzyizzet wrote: »

I thought the time constraints were ridiculous. Didn't have time to think about what I was actually writing, just had to hope it made sense.

How did people go about the company valuation in q2? Thought it was trickier than it looked at first.

I divided the free cash flow and profit between the two departments and calculated at their separate growth rates. Not sure was that the right thing to do but it wasnt like we had a whole lot of time to think about it.

muzzyizzet · 28-06-2012 05:02PM

swn wrote: »

muzzyizzet wrote: »

I thought the time constraints were ridiculous. Didn't have time to think about what I was actually writing, just had to hope it made sense.

How did people go about the company valuation in q2? Thought it was trickier than it looked at first.

I divided the free cash flow and profit between the two departments and calculated at their separate growth rates. Not sure was that the right thing to do but it wasnt like we had a whole lot of time to think about it.

Yeah I did the same. It looked a bit messy but it seemed like the logical thing to do.

myshirt · 28-06-2012 05:20PM

I agree with chatterpiller on the exam technique.

You only need 50. But in another sense it's a misnomer, as with the move up to cap2 you face a more rigid marking scheme.

Basically, if it's not in the marking scheme, you get no marks, plain and simple.

Say all the correctors were in agreement that there were 8 legitimate and solid points that could be said in an answer.

The marking scheme will give marks for 4 and they will have 5 for the corrector to choose from.

Student needs four of those five, with no marks for anything else, legitimate or not.

Then when they are finished correcting, they have a discretion to give you a max of 20% of the marks you missed out on if they felt your points were valid but unfortunately not in the marking scheme.

EDudder · 28-06-2012 06:28PM

Just out of interest, where did you hear that that's their marking regime?

Tricky1979 · 28-06-2012 07:04PM

Any last minute advice for F.R.?

ted2767 · 28-06-2012 08:08PM

Tricky1979 wrote: »

Any last minute advice for F.R.?

Don't panic and pick up the easier marks and see how far that takes you

aka accounts 2010 · 28-06-2012 08:45PM

Tricky1979 wrote: »

Any last minute advice for F.R.?

Don't fall into the trap of spending so much time on workings that you leave yourself short of time to do what was actually asked. Very easy to spend too much on consolidated workings and then not have enough time to layout the SOCI and SOFP or Cashflow etc etc. The marks are in the actual answer, not the workings!!!

srm23 · 28-06-2012 08:47PM

I took away the fixed costs too myself. I think they should of had that variable note on the appendix!
Hopefully you dont lose all the marks if you didnt calculate contribution correctly. Lashed down loads of calculations for q4 & q2 part a so need some of them to be right!

ted2767 · 28-06-2012 08:49PM

aka accounts 2010 wrote: »

Tricky1979 wrote: »

Any last minute advice for F.R.?

Don't fall into the trap of spending so much time on workings that you leave yourself short of time to do what was actually asked. Very easy to spend too much on consolidated workings and then not have enough time to layout the SOCI and SOFP or Cashflow etc etc. The marks are in the actual answer, not the workings!!!

Sorry completely disagree if your answer isn't right the first thing they will do is check your workings.
If your working are say 60% right you will get a certain amount of the marks so I'd say their vitally important actually.

aka accounts 2010 · 28-06-2012 08:57PM

ted2767 wrote: »

Sorry completely disagree if your answer isn't right the first thing they will do is check your workings.
If your working are say 60% right you will get a certain amount of the marks so I'd say their vitally important actually.

I never said the workings were not important, of course they are. All I'm saying is that plenty people spend so long on the workings that they don't have time to even layout the SOCI and SOFP, not to mind start throwing figures from the workings into it!!!!

srm23 · 28-06-2012 08:58PM

ted2767 wrote: »

aka accounts 2010 wrote: »

Tricky1979 wrote: »

Any last minute advice for F.R.?

Don't fall into the trap of spending so much time on workings that you leave yourself short of time to do what was actually asked. Very easy to spend too much on consolidated workings and then not have enough time to layout the SOCI and SOFP or Cashflow etc etc. The marks are in the actual answer, not the workings!!!

Sorry completely disagree if your answer isn't right the first thing they will do is check your workings.
If your working are say 60% right you will get a certain amount of the marks so I'd say their vitally important actually.

Lash any aul numbers into an sofp

Shane732 · 28-06-2012 09:03PM

srm23 wrote: »

Lash any aul numbers into an sofp

Sure stock is the balancing figure anyway so it'll be grand!

EDudder · 28-06-2012 09:16PM

ted2767 wrote: »

I'd only open Ward for the tables as I think it's quite long winded and most past papers I've seen are quite practical and applied.
As regards Fin. Reporting I reckon a published set of accounts will come up with consolidation as Q 2 / Q 3

Do you mean you reckon there will be no consolidation in question 1? Has that happened before? Thinking back to the mock, I'm not sure if it was a consol in q 1. Must have another look at it.

myshirt · 28-06-2012 09:19PM

Shane732 wrote: »

Sure stock is the balancing figure anyway so it'll be grand!

Yes I agree... plug it! Make it balance!

I hope to god that a FX consolidation Q does not come up, or that they involve compound instruments in it.

Regardless, I think there definitely will be something we don't know.

It's all about distilling the info.

Here has anyone a quick synopsis of how to consol a FX sub?

SOCI - use average rate
SOFP - use closing rate

and translate Goodwill on 1/1 and 31/12

Is there anything else, broadly?

ted2767 · 28-06-2012 09:20PM

EDudder wrote: »

ted2767 wrote: »

I'd only open Ward for the tables as I think it's quite long winded and most past papers I've seen are quite practical and applied.
As regards Fin. Reporting I reckon a published set of accounts will come up with consolidation as Q 2 / Q 3

Do you mean you reckon there will be no consolidation in question 1? Has that happened before? Thinking back to the mock, I'm not sure if it was a consol in q 1. Must have another look at it.

Possibly yeah they might give a trial balance and about 8/9 notes and off you go!

It's the same question that came up in the mock.

Dave Ahern was saying in one of the repeat lectures that he reckons this is what will come up.

myshirt · 28-06-2012 09:24PM

ted2767 wrote: »

Dave Ahern was saying in one of the repeat lectures that he reckons this is what will come up.

Any other tips?

ted2767 · 28-06-2012 09:28PM

myshirt wrote: »

ted2767 wrote: »

Dave Ahern was saying in one of the repeat lectures that he reckons this is what will come up.

Any other tips?

Ah look there might be nothing in it!
Regular consolidations have come up as q1 the last 2 sittings so they might be of a mind to mix it up.
That being said predictions are dangerous!

srm23 · 28-06-2012 09:29PM

What to look at for ethics? Is any of it in the standards?

EDudder · 28-06-2012 09:33PM

True but there's nothing wrong with thinking about possibilities.

There would be nothing worse than some poor person spending weeks on every type of consol under the sun and then freaking out when they see a TB.

I think I'd be very happy if it came up that way and then a consol in section B.

Sale of a sub - really hope nothing like that comes up.

lauma · 29-06-2012 02:13PM

So what do we think of today's paper? Very long I thought I will never finish the case and by the time I finished it was an hour left , so did that trial bal question and started question 3 only half did . Praying now for pass

EDudder · 29-06-2012 02:35PM

Jesus Christ.

Shane732 · 29-06-2012 02:35PM

lauma wrote: »

So what do we think of today's paper? Very long I thought I will never finish the case and by the time I finished it was an hour left , so did that trial bal question and started question 3 only half did . Praying now for pass

I started with the optional questions. I did question 2 and 3. Meant I had a good crack at the whole paper. The financial analysis question was a nice question to get - should be some high scores in it

I thought question 2 and 3 were quite fair.

The consolidation was tough but it's a matter of trying to pick up marks where you can on it. There will be decent enough marks going for the foreign exchange translation and time appoarching etc...

If the consolidation had been a bit easier than it would have been a grand paper.

At least there over now!

Shane732 · 29-06-2012 02:37PM

EDudder wrote: »

Jesus Christ.

I think most people will be in the same boat on the consolidation question.

The Big Red Button · 29-06-2012 02:40PM

I tried Q3 first, was pretty happy with it. Made a mess of Q1 though. >.< Had a quick attempt at Q4, didn't have much time for it, but will hopefully pick up a few marks.

myshirt · 29-06-2012 03:05PM

All I done was the adjustments, the calculation of goodwill, and retranslation etc.

I done the time apportion on the paper rather than the answer book.

Disaster for me.

Though a very fair paper to be honest.

Just prepared the wrong stuff.

EDudder · 29-06-2012 03:09PM

It was a disgrace of a paper. I was confident with all the past papers for FR that I had done, and this was on a different level.

I'm just annoyed at myself for not doing section B first. Could have actually got some marks in that.

Anerak · 29-06-2012 03:17PM

Same should have started wit section b
spent to long on q1 did not expect the foreign sub to come up at all was sickened

EDudder · 29-06-2012 03:22PM

I thought the purchase of the preference shares was a cheeky thing to put in as well. Seems like it would only be put in to trip you up.

And there are sweet feck all examples that included the purchase of preference shares in the sub.

swn · 29-06-2012 03:27PM

To be honest I thought it was pretty fair. They're always going to throw a few difficult topics into the consolidation but overall section b was pretty fair. I was just delighted there no consolidated cash flow as a q1.

CAP 2 Exams 2012

Comments