FAE September 2012

thisguy

supernova84 wrote: »

Anyone mention that they could do with a marketing manager and Ken Stanley could be the man?

So much to get through. Barely got a chance to look through notes. I think I'll need a big day tomorrow to pull this out of the bag

Ah ****e I spotted that they didn't have one then didn't put anything in about it, i'd say that's a good recommendation!

I think that was probably only one indicator for IMP so people who think they missed it should get another crack at it tomorrow, knowledge management would have caught a few people out id say

was under time pressure near the end, tomorrow will probably be even worse with at least 10 indicators to answer!

Saint Sonner

notanocelot wrote: »

Saint Sonner wrote: »

Got those all bar IMP knowledge management? What's that about hopefully I mentioned something about it without knowing!

I also put in some change management re the acquisition - waste of time then I take it!

Not sure of the quality of my answers though. Think my ias parts where sketchy!
Gonna hit the tax hard this evening!

What valuation range did u get for the company? Anyone?

Knowledge management was their new intranet for sharing info better and their agreement that they needed to be better at capturing, storing, protecting and sharing data.

I'm sure the change management stuff you put down will count towards the strategic fit indicator.

Valuation range was something like 1.8m to 3.5m (adjusted net assets to 10xEBITDAx60%)

****e I actually spotted that issue on knowledge management (not that I knew that's what it was called) and totally forgot to put it in until there now!!!

There's a fine line between success and failure in these bitches!!!!

EveT

Didn't like today at all.had same indicators, missed knowledge management. Planned for way too long and then paniced.make a mess of mgt, and ifrs 3. Found the case very long with tonnes of appendices.dont feel I answered one indicator well :-(

Accrual Intentions

Well that was absolutely ****ing horrible.

I'm actually angry, that was a disgraceful paper. 7 appendices? I haven't seen any comprehensive case as intense as that. Took half an hour to get through the ****ing software jargon before I could even answer.

Completely missed the IMP, means I need another IMP indicator tomorrow and I have to get it right, even then it probably won't be enough. Ugh that was just awful.

Oh and my valuation range is way from yours notanocelot - I was way up in the £4m range.

froggatt2011

Grr at the knowledge management thing, didn't get that at all and had no clue about software licensing. Wrote a little bit of waffle about IP protection. Not gonna be enough.

Totally ballsed up the profit analysis - didn't really understand the requirement so wrote a load of ****e. Fail.

Did anyone else restate the P&L / B/S figures after the intangible adjustment and do the valuations based on that?

Totally raging I didn't pick up on the IMP indicator. If we don't get another crack at it tomorrow that's a big fat red for me

Username2011

Ex 88 wrote: »

IMP was awful I didn't have a clue pure waffle! Do u think that they will treat the IMp today as one indicator? Hopefully there will be another imp indicator tomorrow

I treated it as one

froggatt2011

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

Well that was absolutely ****ing horrible.

I'm actually angry, that was a disgraceful paper. 7 appendices? I haven't seen any comprehensive case as intense as that. Took half an hour to get through the ****ing software jargon before I could even answer.

Completely missed the IMP, means I need another IMP indicator tomorrow and I have to get it right, even then it probably won't be enough. Ugh that was just awful.

Oh and my valuation range is way from yours notanocelot - I was way up in the £4m range.

My valuations ranged from £2.5m to £4.2m

I also got totally muddled up with my appendices :eek: - far too many!

Accrual Intentions

froggatt2011 wrote: »

Grr at the knowledge management thing, didn't get that at all and had no clue about software licensing. Wrote a little bit of waffle about IP protection. Not gonna be enough.

Totally ballsed up the profit analysis - didn't really understand the requirement so wrote a load of ****e. Fail.

Did anyone else restate the P&L / B/S figures after the intangible adjustment and do the valuations based on that?

Totally raging I didn't pick up on the IMP indicator. If we don't get another crack at it tomorrow that's a big fat red for me

Me too, even then I'm not confident because Paul was right - they have definitely put IMP up a standard here.

For net asset valuation I didn't adjust because we were using fair value anyway? I didn't adjust for P&L either in the earnings valuation because it was an exceptional item. Happy to be corrected there, can't feel worse than this.

Szewinska

froggatt2011 wrote: »

Grr at the knowledge management thing, didn't get that at all and had no clue about software licensing. Wrote a little bit of waffle about IP protection. Not gonna be enough.

Totally ballsed up the profit analysis - didn't really understand the requirement so wrote a load of ****e. Fail.

Did anyone else restate the P&L / B/S figures after the intangible adjustment and do the valuations based on that?

Totally raging I didn't pick up on the IMP indicator. If we don't get another crack at it tomorrow that's a big fat red for me

alot are missing the knowledge management indic including me. i didnt include the intangible adjustment as i had done the valuation indicator first. i should of planned it better. I just put in a caveat that my valuations were based on the given adjustments and that they didn't include the intangible issue adjustment

Szewinska

in asset based valuation are intangibles ignored albeit unrealistic. i said that the asset based valuations were an absolute minimum price and price likely be much higher

froggatt2011

Post mortems are bad for my nerves!!!

Crappity crappity crap. I don't feel so good.....

BESman

Not sure what to make of that. Bit too long, 7 appendices like!

What exactly did people say for knowledge management? I identified it but didn't really know it was an IMP indicator! Waffle really.

Also, CPA stumped me. Didn't know what we were supposed to do. Just kind of commented on it, like analytical review.

Only bonus to take from today is that it was generally a tough paper so standard might be low and marking could be easier.

danko2012

Really 2 indicators IMP? i cant see that, i hope it only 1 as i need a good one in that 2moro!

was happy with FR but my god what was that customer profitability index thing???? need good PM again 2moro!

the case had way too much info, it was a complete disgrace, having said that the audit was a give away to get at least RC i imagine by saying loss of exemption in group!

anyway onwards and upwards

Accrual Intentions

froggatt2011 wrote: »

Post mortems are bad for my nerves!!!

Crappity crappity crap. I don't feel so good.....

Post mortems are horrible but thats exactly why I've come on here. I think if I'm serious about trying to make up for this tomorrow I need the post mortem to know what I messed up. Therefore I know when I see IMP tomorrow for example, I have to spend whatever time is necessary getting it right.

ferike1

Okay guys, for most weaknesses have been identified as IMP

We know tax is coming up. Focus on these two today and don't stress yourself. The exam is over and you can't change anything. Just adapt and move on. Stressing yourself is counterproductive.

Rather than doing an in-depth post mortem just find what general areas you need to address tomorrow, stressing about what specific valuation adjustment you made doesn't help.

I think some form of corporate governance issue will come up too.

Just my two cents.

Szewinska

ferike1 wrote: »

Okay guys, for most weaknesses have been identified as IMP

We know tax is coming up. Focus on these two today and don't stress yourself. The exam is over and you can't change anything. Just adapt and move on. Stressing yourself is counterproductive.

Rather than doing an in-depth post mortem just find what general areas you need to address tomorrow, stressing about what specific valuation adjustment you made doesn't help.

I think some form of corporate governance issue will come up too.

Just my two cents.

Wise words

BESman

ferike1 wrote: »

I think some form of corporate governance issue will come up too.

Just my two cents.

Ya I was surprised not to see CG somewhere. Seems to be the Institute's favourite indicator. Has to be on tomorrow.

thisguy

notanocelot wrote: »

Today was a day I was very glad I brought everything! Needed the IMP book badly for software patents. And I had no idea about loss of audit exemption for a parent/sub until I looked in the 'powers and duties of companies' directive.

@supernova: only 2 BL indics today so not a big deal if one of them went badly I'm sure.

i never even considered the parent and subsid thing i just said they lost the audit exemption cause there combined assets and turnover will be to high...wonder will that cost me much on that indicator now?

Dogshow87

Agreed, Tax is big tomorrow. I will need to pull IMP out of the bag tomorrow. I think it was one imp indicator. I think there was 8 indicators same as 2010 and 2011 today. Such a waffle exam in general. My valuation range was 3.5m to 3.8m. All about tax and IMP tonight...

Saint Sonner

thisguy wrote: »

notanocelot wrote: »

Today was a day I was very glad I brought everything! Needed the IMP book badly for software patents. And I had no idea about loss of audit exemption for a parent/sub until I looked in the 'powers and duties of companies' directive.

@supernova: only 2 BL indics today so not a big deal if one of them went badly I'm sure.

i never even considered the parent and subsid thing i just said they lost the audit exemption cause there combined assets and turnover will be to high...wonder will that cost me much on that indicator now?

Me too - was happy enough until I saw that comment! Hopefully it's not as complicated as you think notan!

Anyone any suggestions on possible tax indicators?

ferike1

thisguy wrote: »

i never even considered the parent and subsid thing i just said they lost the audit exemption cause there combined assets and turnover will be to high...wonder will that cost me much on that indicator now?

That will probably be the difference between C and HC. The general standard is Revenue, Assets and Employees

All of which would be above the limit should the acquisition happen.

LR987654

didn't remove amort. from CVA, also f**cked the valuation analysis.
tax, audit and mgt acc. tomorrow

Accrual Intentions

Szewinska wrote: »

Wise words

Very wise words.

Right this isn't over. No wallowing. Get the head in gear for tomorrow.

Username2011

thisguy wrote: »

notanocelot wrote: »

Today was a day I was very glad I brought everything! Needed the IMP book badly for software patents. And I had no idea about loss of audit exemption for a parent/sub until I looked in the 'powers and duties of companies' directive.

@supernova: only 2 BL indics today so not a big deal if one of them went badly I'm sure.

i never even considered the parent an d subsid thing i just said they lost the audit exemption cause there combined assets and turnover will be to high...wonder will that cost me much on that indicator now?

What is that exactly?

froggatt2011

notanocelot wrote: »

Looks like I'm first off the mark.

Tax: None.
Audit: Loss of audit exemption plus non-audit services.
IMP: #1: IP protection
#2: Knowledge management system
Finance: Company valuation.
BL: #1: Marketing
#2: Strategic match
PM (Mgt Acc): Customer profitability analysis.
PM (FR): Intangible assets.

Additionally we were asked about capitalising acquisition costs, which I'm not sure was a full indicator because there's hardly anything to say about it.

Wasn't there also something about capitalising research costs for Bill's new filtering software? I shoved those 2 together as a sundry item.

upnorthchick

lads stop with the post mortem honestly move on. im fit for nothing this evening so im doing nothing.
the case is staying in the car...

ferike1

I will say I was tight for time. I spent an hour planning. Will have to be more ruthless tomorrow.

notanocelot

Ah, fine, ferike, you've shamed me into action not words. Off to the library with me after I've finished this cuppa!

ferike1

I got in a nice workout before the exam started upstairs in the hall! Its hot as **** up there.

MPBC123

Couldn't believe the length of the case, 11 pages. Last yr was only 7. Spent so much time trying to read it all, didn't get chance to read it for 2ndtime as recommended by all our lecturers!! 2moro is another day! Tax gona b big topic!