Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

FAE September 2012

Options
1…2122242627…126

Comments

  • Options
    #692
    ferike1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,785 ✭✭✭ferike1


    It's the institute's way of showing us they are hip and cool and down with the homies.

    I think my all time favourite though was

    You are an aca with Charles Manson and Co.

    Charles Manson - notorius serial killer.

    Haha, came across this gem today
    It is a Monday morning. just a week after your successful FAE results and you are looking forward to some variety in your professional work following a relentless diet of sometimes messy but always demanding audits in the run up to FAE.

    They are mocking us. I swear to god!


  • Options
    #693
    upnorthchick
    Registered Users Posts: 476 ✭✭upnorthchick


    ferike1 wrote: »
    They are mocking us. I swear to god!


    That made me laugh !! sitting in work here and i am jealous of you guys off already!!!
    Evening studying for me - if i can keep me eyes open!


  • Options
    #694
    ferike1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,785 ✭✭✭ferike1


    Has anyone done the City college case?

    Nightmare!


  • Options
    #695
    Chalk_Farm
    Registered Users Posts: 84 ✭✭Chalk_Farm


    ferike1 wrote: »
    Has anyone done the City college case?

    Nightmare!

    Had a look this afternoon...how is the break even worked out for indicator one. Don't understand that in the solution!??


  • Options
    #696
    ferike1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,785 ✭✭✭ferike1


    They wanted us to draft a letter to the lecturers about tax status. WTF??

    Ah

    I got it

    They take the 560 and annualise it. Gives you 747.
    The contribution from the TEFL students is 1100 of which 20% is EU
    Meaning if they lose 100% of the Non EU students it is 880 of the 1100 (remaining 80%)
    So to break even they can still lose 747.
    747/880 = 85% of the TEFL students


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #697
    Chalk_Farm
    Registered Users Posts: 84 ✭✭Chalk_Farm


    ferike1 wrote: »
    They wanted us to draft a letter to the lecturers about tax status. WTF??

    Ah

    I got it

    They take the 560 and annualise it. Gives you 747.
    The contribution from the TEFL students is 1100 of which 20% is EU
    Meaning if they lose 100% of the Non EU students it is 880 of the 1100 (remaining 80%)
    So to break even they can still lose 747.
    747/880 = 85% of the TEFL students

    But should the contribution margin not be annualised also??


  • Options
    #698
    chursy
    Registered Users Posts: 327 ✭✭chursy


    Lads has anyone done the Firesec Case - I am struggling to understand the lease adjustments! as they havent really shown any calculations at all. Would be great if someone can clarify these for me


  • Options
    #699
    ferike1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,785 ✭✭✭ferike1


    Chalk_Farm wrote: »
    But should the contribution margin not be annualised also??

    They are just annualising the overall profit.

    But I get what you are saying. Seems like an oversight on their part.
    Annualised profits vs non annualised contribution.

    Nice spot!


  • Options
    #700
    supernova84
    Closed Accounts Posts: 972 ✭✭✭supernova84


    Anyone have the formula for the terminal growth calc in MechElec, totally forgotten how to do this? Basically what buttons on a calculator am I looking at? Thanks


  • Options
    #701
    froggatt2011
    Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭froggatt2011


    supernova84 wrote: »
    Anyone have the formula for the terminal growth calc in MechElec, totally forgotten how to do this? Basically what buttons on a calculator am I looking at? Thanks


    It's given in the solution - or so I thought?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #702
    froggatt2011
    Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭froggatt2011


    Anyone got the Victoria question? Can't find it anywhere. Thanks in advance :)


  • Options
    #703
    supernova84
    Closed Accounts Posts: 972 ✭✭✭supernova84


    froggatt2011 wrote: »


    It's given in the solution - or so I thought?

    No it just has the terminal growth amount €105,578, it doesn't give the formula

    I found my notes and entered 8,446(1.05)/0.13-0.05 and I get €110,704.

    Actually just checked earlier posts where Chursy and Ferike1 were getting same. At least I know the formula now.


  • Options
    #704
    froggatt2011
    Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭froggatt2011


    supernova84 wrote: »
    No it just has the terminal growth amount €105,578, it doesn't give the formula

    I found my notes and entered 8,446(1.05)/0.13-0.05 and I get €110,704.

    Actually just checked earlier posts where Chursy and Ferike1 were getting same. At least I know the formula now.


    I must have a different version of the solution to you guys. the solution I have gives the terminal value as being 110901. A tutorial note to the solution says:
    The terminal value of 110901 is calculated using the mathematical concept of a growing perpetuity: Cfn * (1+g)/(r-g)

    15562(1+0.05)/(0.13-0.05) = 204238 * 0.543 = 110901 + 47218 = 158119.

    I got this solution from the student centre - it was uploaded in May sometime.


  • Options
    #705
    supernova84
    Closed Accounts Posts: 972 ✭✭✭supernova84


    froggatt2011 wrote: »


    I must have a different version of the solution to you guys. the solution I have gives the terminal value as being 110901. A tutorial note to the solution says:
    The terminal value of 110901 is calculated using the mathematical concept of a growing perpetuity: Cfn * (1+g)/(r-g)

    15562(1+0.05)/(0.13-0.05) = 204238 * 0.543 = 110901 + 47218 = 158119.

    I got this solution from the student centre - it was uploaded in May sometime.

    Ah right that explains it so, my solution wasn't the updated one. Cheers


  • Options
    #706
    froggatt2011
    Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭froggatt2011


    supernova84 wrote: »
    Ah right that explains it so, my solution wasn't the updated one. Cheers

    You need a copy uploaded?


  • Options
    #707
    supernova84
    Closed Accounts Posts: 972 ✭✭✭supernova84


    froggatt2011 wrote: »

    You need a copy uploaded?

    Ah no it's ok, it was just that calc that was nagging me. Thanks.


  • Options
    #708
    chursy
    Registered Users Posts: 327 ✭✭chursy


    The updated solution still takes depreciation as a capital expenditure!! lol WTF!!!!

    Although they have updated the calculation now! =)


  • Options
    #709
    froggatt2011
    Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭froggatt2011


    Really regretting picking this course. Why oh why did I think this would be a better choice than ACCA? My head has never been so melted....
    The arbitrary nature of the suggested solutions, the countless errors in the materials, the random case scenarios, the bull$hit that makes up the cases, the complicated marking schemes.... all make me want to tear my hair out!!

    =======RANT OVER========


  • Options
    #710
    supernova84
    Closed Accounts Posts: 972 ✭✭✭supernova84


    Your completely right. Anybody who chooses ACA over ACCA really is A Complete Asshole.
    I've never known a client who prefered hinting at information he required from you rather than get straight to the point.
    Don't be like me anyway shamefully attempting these for the third time and try your best to nail them first time around.


  • Options
    #711
    chursy
    Registered Users Posts: 327 ✭✭chursy


    Suernova- you are not alone mate its my second attempt too!!! I have put in alot of effort this year but doing these impossible cases which are A soo time consuming b exhausting and c full of surprises. I just went through Motorvation case have you done this one?

    WTF is Ethics M2020 MAN! never heard of it! .... The case has the most complicated Cashflow statement i have ever seen in my life! LOL no way i could do that in the exam!......


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #712
    Jame Gumb
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 802 ✭✭✭Jame Gumb


    supernova84 wrote: »
    Your completely right. Anybody who chooses ACA over ACCA really is A Complete Asshole.
    I've never known a client who prefered hinting at information he required from you rather than get straight to the point.
    Don't be like me anyway shamefully attempting these for the third time and try your best to nail them first time around.

    With all due respect, the nonsense that you've posted there does nothing to help anyone.

    75% of people pass FAE. If this is your third attempt at the exams, the issue isn't the Institute...it's you.

    Moaning about minor errors in the materials serves no purpose at all...just put your head down and get on with it. The materials are fine, there are loads of case studies, there have been plenty of case study days and guys like Paul Monahan etc are there to help if necessary.

    I've no axe to grind either for or against the Institute but I do think that Institute bashers need to look at themselves first.

    As for the comments re the merits of the ACCA programme...not gonna go there


  • Options
    #713
    froggatt2011
    Registered Users Posts: 233 ✭✭froggatt2011


    Jame Gumb wrote: »
    With all due respect, the nonsense that you've posted there does nothing to help anyone.

    75% of people pass FAE. If this is your third attempt at the exams, the issue isn't the Institute...it's you.

    Moaning about minor errors in the materials serves no purpose at all...just put your head down and get on with it. The materials are fine, there are loads of case studies, there have been plenty of case study days and guys like Paul Monahan etc are there to help if necessary.

    I've no axe to grind either for or against the Institute but I do think that Institute bashers need to look at themselves first.

    As for the comments re the merits of the ACCA programme...not gonna go there

    Now now, let's be nice.

    Personally I don't think the materials are fine. When I'm paying nearly £3K of my own money, I think that I can expect the materials to be correct. I am an elevation student, I work in industry and I am getting 8 days study leave between now and the exams. When solutions are incorrect or unclear, it costs me an awful lot of time trying to work out if it's me or them. Time which is very precious. So don't diss me for complaining about it.

    They expect competency from us do they not? What's wrong with me expecting it from them?

    Paul Monahan has never replied to any email I've ever sent him. I get more help from people on this forum.

    I don't think it makes me or anyone else an "Institute basher" to air frustrations about the materials, the way they mark our papers and the cases which are full of superfluous nonsense. That you have no issue with those things is good for you. You obviously have a lot more patience than me.


  • Options
    #714
    supernova84
    Closed Accounts Posts: 972 ✭✭✭supernova84


    Jame Gumb wrote: »
    and guys like Paul Monahan etc are there to help if necessary.


    Paul Monahan will tell students what they want to hear, get their hopes up. I remember him saying a couple of years ago that for the core basically audit and tax should be no problem to students and not to worry about too much. Also some of the cases he writes are more destructive that helpful. That's all I'll say on the matter.


  • Options
    #715
    ferike1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,785 ✭✭✭ferike1


    Jame Gumb wrote: »
    With all due respect, the nonsense that you've posted there does nothing to help anyone.

    75% of people pass FAE. If this is your third attempt at the exams, the issue isn't the Institute...it's you.

    Moaning about minor errors in the materials serves no purpose at all...just put your head down and get on with it. The materials are fine, there are loads of case studies, there have been plenty of case study days and guys like Paul Monahan etc are there to help if necessary.

    I've no axe to grind either for or against the Institute but I do think that Institute bashers need to look at themselves first.

    As for the comments re the merits of the ACCA programme...not gonna go there


    Here, I know for a fact there are people working who have failed FAEs but I would consider them far more competant than I when it comes to actual work. They work stupid hours and do everything that is asked of them, yet they failed and I doubt it was due to lack of study, they are very diligent people.
    People think in different ways and approach things in a different manner. I bet you any amount of money you could legitimately approach a question in a certain manner and be correct but not 'correct' in the institutes eyes due to the manner they set out their exams. Case in point Mocks - they asked for an executive summary of a business plan.
    That comprises of certain things. What they actually wanted was 4 strengths and 3 opportunities. How are you supposed to mind read that? How are you meant to guess how many points you need to put down to get RC/C sometimes its 7, sometimes its 4, sometimes its this or this, sometimes this AND this and if you miss one crucial point its NC. Very very arbitrary. Also you get one red and that's it, thanks for playing come again next year. Following year despite showing competancy in the other areas, if you get a different red. Whoops thanks for playing.

    Also the institute wants you to know about many many different industries and assumes you have some amount of knowledge about a lot of random things. Here is my favourite example. not sure which question. Want to upgrade IT, should I use QR's? Now I know this is IT but WTF are QR's. The IT book has NO index so I couldn't look it up. Had to go on the net. Ohhhhh QR codes. Why didn't they say that? I hadn't a fscking clue what QR's were.

    There are so many variables to these exams that despite studyingfor them for 3 months you could pass one week and fail the next. I have put in a lot of work already and don't like placing so much of my future on a gamble. At least with ACCAs you can repeat in 6 months if you heaven forbid have a bad day.

    You think you'd have a bit more empathy for your fellow student. People want to rant, let them. Gets rid of a bit of stress.


  • Options
    #716
    20 Times 20 Times
    Registered Users Posts: 6,220 ✭✭✭20 Times 20 Times


    Sorry , Can you explain what you mean by these RED Marks ?


  • Options
    #717
    Flange/Flanders
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭Flange/Flanders


    froggatt2011 wrote: »
    Really regretting picking this course. Why oh why did I think this would be a better choice than ACCA? My head has never been so melted....
    The arbitrary nature of the suggested solutions, the countless errors in the materials, the random case scenarios, the bull$hit that makes up the cases, the complicated marking schemes.... all make me want to tear my hair out!!

    =======RANT OVER========

    Dont forget the unnecessarily long exams or the fact that you've to wait a year if you have to repeat.....


  • Options
    #718
    Flange/Flanders
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭Flange/Flanders


    Jame Gumb wrote: »
    With all due respect, the nonsense that you've posted there does nothing to help anyone.

    75% of people pass FAE. If this is your third attempt at the exams, the issue isn't the Institute...it's you.

    Moaning about minor errors in the materials serves no purpose at all...just put your head down and get on with it. The materials are fine, there are loads of case studies, there have been plenty of case study days and guys like Paul Monahan etc are there to help if necessary.

    I've no axe to grind either for or against the Institute but I do think that Institute bashers need to look at themselves first.

    As for the comments re the merits of the ACCA programme...not gonna go there

    I know someone who was struggling at CAP 2 repeats, switched to ACCA and not only got exemptions that CAI wouldnt recognise from their degree but also is flying through to his final set of ACCA's now.

    Also, if you dont believe the institute are incompetant, look up here on boards comments about the SFMA CAP 2 exam in 2009 or the financial reporting exam in 2010. That'll destroy any faith you have in the institute.


  • Options
    #719
    chursy
    Registered Users Posts: 327 ✭✭chursy


    Little Pea wrote: »
    Sorry , Can you explain what you mean by these RED Marks ?

    One red in the super sixes and you are doomed for a year !


  • Options
    #720
    chursy
    Registered Users Posts: 327 ✭✭chursy


    Lads let's move on - back to the ****ty cases !


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #721
    Jame Gumb
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 802 ✭✭✭Jame Gumb


    ferike1 wrote: »
    What they actually wanted was 4 strengths and 3 opportunities. How are you supposed to mind read that? How are you meant to guess how many points you need to put down to get RC/C sometimes its 7, sometimes its 4, sometimes its this or this, sometimes this AND this and if you miss one crucial point its NC. Very very arbitrary.

    You think you'd have a bit more empathy for your fellow student

    I have plenty of empathy for my fellow student. This is a difficult process. But it's the final hurdle of a professional qualification - It should be difficult. However, 75% of people get over the line so it's clearly doable.

    FYI the number of points required to achieve competency isn't arbitrary at all - It's a function of how many points the student body put down. If the "average" student puts down 5 points, then that's what's required.

    I did not mean to offend anyone. My point is that we're 5.5 weeks from the main event. We can spend time and nervous energy giving out or knuckling down. We should be doing the latter.


Advertisement