FAE September 2014

TheDoctor

The last audit indicator was Paul realising, oh crap I need another audit indicator......... tell me about some controls

20 Times 20 Times

TheDoctor wrote: »

The last audit indicator was Paul realising, oh crap I need another audit indicator......... tell me about some controls

But he didnt need another indicator - that last one made it 4 Audit indicators over the 2 days.

Blarney92

cson wrote: »

That audit indicator in Sim 2 was the only indicator out of both Sims that was screaming at you. The rest took a lot of thought imo.

Serious wake up call.

Thought Sim 1 was fine for obvious / semi-obvious indicators although maybe I missed some indicators:

1. Debtor circulisation (heavily hinted at with own appendix) / auditor relationship (explicity asked)
2. IT System (explicitly asked)
3. DD points (explicitly asked)
4. Premium Financor idea (explicitly asked)

20 Times 20 Times

Did anyone spot a marketing pricing indicator ? or was this just me going mad ?

LOccitane

In terms of the Marketing indicator, I just picked up the Marketing strategy indicator in Sim 2?

Also maybe it was just me but did anyone else spot an error in the Debtors extrapolation work done by the auditors in Sim 1?

Dellboy2007

Paul said there was 3 audit indicators in the mocks overall.

Surprised at the little amount of MA

Mark1916

LOccitane wrote: »

In terms of the Marketing indicator, I just picked up the Marketing strategy indicator in Sim 2?

Also maybe it was just me but did anyone else spot an error in the Debtors extrapolation work done by the auditors in Sim 1?

Yea I thought the calculation was wrong!

TheDoctor

I just had the one marketing indicator, whats the pricing one?

Also how did people approach the premium financor indicator?

TheDoctor

Mark1916 wrote: »

Yea I thought the calculation was wrong!

FFS and I added every other set of figures

katieanne56

Blarney92 wrote: »

Thought Sim 1 was fine for obvious / semi-obvious indicators although maybe I missed some indicators:

1. Debtor circulisation (heavily hinted at with own appendix) / auditor relationship (explicity asked)
2. IT System (explicitly asked)
3. DD points (explicitly asked)
4. Premium Financor idea (explicitly asked)

Got those too for the first SIM but was really confused about how to deal with Revenue Recognition - I knew it wasn't right somehow but didn't know what to do about it!

For the second SIM for indicators I thought:

Incorporation Decision and associated tax issues - esp can't carry over sole trade losses
Agree/Disagree with Marketing Strategy or proposed lack thereof
Quotient Entertainment plc opp
Sublet to coffee shop
Payroll & Purchasing controls
Need for Finance expertise with errors made by book-keeper (and possibly HR as a knock on effect of this and number of potential staff across units and desire to expand)

What did others think?

Dellboy2007

That stupid b1tch Tracey was incorrectly capitalising marketing costs as well. Will she ever learn?

LOccitane

TheDoctor wrote: »

FFS and I added every other set of figures

For Sim 1 we (the company) ultimately did not bear most of the credit risk in any case as per the terms of business. It took me a while to work out an approach to that indicator.

TheDoctor

So how many of the six subjects do we think we passed?

IMP indicators weren't too hard. Maybe that one

Mark1916

LOccitane wrote: »

For Sim 1 we (the company) ultimately did not bear most of the credit risk in any case as per the terms of business. It took me a while to work out an approach to that indicator.

Yes I definitely missed that! Damn! Financial reporting needs an immense amount of work!

autumnbelle

Was it just me or should the wip have been excluded altogether

20 Times 20 Times

Anyone else apply the small company exemption ? to the issue with dealing with the auditors ?

myshirt

How did you all find the open book nature of the exam? Of any benefit?

katieanne56

autumnbelle wrote: »

Was it just me or should the wip have been excluded altogether

I thought so too! I excluded it along with the dispute errors when re-calculating the auditors extrapolated error as well

Nermal

LOccitane wrote: »

For Sim 1 we (the company) ultimately did not bear most of the credit risk in any case as per the terms of business. It took me a while to work out an approach to that indicator.

Those amount in the appendix are not the invoices being discounted, they're the EUR120 and 1.2% finance fee we charge the financee, as far as I can see. We do bear credit risk for that.

I agree the auditor has got the calculation wrong, I can't for the life of me see where they got EUR67,130, it would be nice if they left out one invoice entirely but I don't think they did.

katieanne56

LOccitane wrote: »

For Sim 1 we (the company) ultimately did not bear most of the credit risk in any case as per the terms of business. It took me a while to work out an approach to that indicator.

I really struggled with this bit. As the facilitator, don't we bear the risk until the whole transaction is completed, regardless of terms of business? I wasn't sure that they shouldn't recognise any revenue at all until the transaction had totally completed.

Blarney92

Nermal wrote: »

Those amount in the appendix are not the invoices being discounted, they're the EUR120 and 1.2% finance fee we charge the financee, as far as I can see. We do bear credit risk for that.

I agree the auditor has got the calculation wrong, I can't for the life of me see where they got EUR67,130, it would be nice if they left out one invoice entirely but I don't think they did.

Was it not just the sum of every invoice that didn't say agreed next to it?

katieanne56

Nermal wrote: »

Those amount in the appendix are not the invoices being discounted, they're the EUR120 and 1.2% finance fee we charge the financee, as far as I can see. We do bear credit risk for that.

I agree the auditor has got the calculation wrong, I can't for the life of me see where they got EUR67,130, it would be nice if they left out one invoice entirely but I don't think they did.

The 67130 was the no responses and disputes total. It was an erroneous total on the auditors part

Dellboy2007

Did anyone say for the issue regarding the sacking of auditors that they should get big4 auditors as these are the best?

TheDoctor

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Did anyone say for the issue regarding the sacking of auditors that they should get big4 auditors as these are the best?

Kiss ass

LOccitane

Nermal wrote: »

Those amount in the appendix are not the invoices being discounted, they're the EUR120 and 1.2% finance fee we charge the financee, as far as I can see. We do bear credit risk for that.

I agree the auditor has got the calculation wrong, I can't for the life of me see where they got EUR67,130, it would be nice if they left out one invoice entirely but I don't think they did.

True. But how could a 1% finance fee together with the flat charge for one invoice number amount to north of EUR 20K.. I'm sure that it may well have been but when I looked at the magnitude I wrote the assumption that they included both components, because reading the case it left it open that we would be invoicing the full amount and then paying the financor as facilitator in each case.

I found this to be the most tricky indicator across both Sims.

autumnbelle

I used my books loads as still haven't gone on study leave

Nermal

Blarney92 wrote: »

Was it not just the sum of every invoice that didn't say agreed next to it?

Yes, just noticed I was adding up the ones that we *did* get a response to, ignore me... Love post-mortems.

autumnbelle

And did it not say in the case that the amount in wip was the full vary of the invoices not yet factored

BigMawn12

Chartered Grind School: Anyone going? Haven't heard anything but it's auditing this Saturday. Better still be on!

Nermal

autumnbelle wrote: »

And did it not say in the case that the amount in wip was the full vary of the invoices not yet factored

Sales value, not full value. Would have assumed that sales value = 120 + 1.2%.

Who knows!

Dellboy2007

Anyone going to the kings of leon this week?

TheDoctor

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Anyone going to the kings of leon this week?

:pac:

ASOT2012

Nermal wrote: »

Sales value, not full value. Would have assumed that sales value = 120 + 1.2%.

Who knows!

It said it was 60k in the case.

LOccitane

BigMawn12 wrote: »

Chartered Grind School: Anyone going? Haven't heard anything but it's auditing this Saturday. Better still be on!

Hey - Yep attending most all of them. I'd say we will hear something once the exam is over tomorrow..?

acastudent

BigMawn12 wrote: »

Chartered Grind School: Anyone going? Haven't heard anything but it's auditing this Saturday. Better still be on!

Going to all of them . I hope they will be usefull as I really struggling .

Torres999

LOccitane wrote: »

Hey - Yep attending most all of them. I'd say we will hear something once the exam is over tomorrow..?

I got an email yesterday about it saying registration is on 9am and the class is 9.30-5 and to bring the core and sims papers from 2011-2013 and some APB Bulletin 2012/1

acastudent

Torres999 wrote: »

I got an email yesterday about it saying registration is on 9am and the class is 9.30-5 and to bring the core and sims papers from 2011-2013 and some APB Bulletin 2012/1

Really ? That's strange I didn't received one

Torres999

acastudent wrote: »

Really ? That's strange I didn't received one

Yeah maybe give them a buzz, could have the wrong email for you or something

PhilipLuke

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Did anyone say for the issue regarding the sacking of auditors that they should get big4 auditors as these are the best?

No way I said wait until next year and put it out to tender so I could bid for it when I had these bloody exams passed!!

cian twomey

did anyone mention about making a provision for the lease payments for the building that they were not using?

autumnbelle

Doing all grinds classes too I still haven't heard anything either about what to bring

ASOT2012

cian twomey wrote: »

did anyone mention about making a provision for the lease payments for the building that they were not using?

I said they didn't have to because it was an operating lease so just disclose. Does anyone know if you have to disclose the 1 year, 1-5 years etc if its not a finance lease?

Dellboy2007

PhilipLuke wrote: »

No way I said wait until next year and put it out to tender so I could bid for it when I had these bloody exams passed!!

That was prudent thinking. I said for the second sim that Tracey was very incompetent and mentioned how I got a C in the AAFRP and that I would be willing to help out if she cooked me 4 square meals a day and let me touch her boobs on Tuesdays.

I think I will be graded reaching on that one.

Accountant81

ASOT2012 wrote: »

I said they didn't have to because it was an operating lease so just disclose. Does anyone know if you have to disclose the 1 year, 1-5 years etc if its not a finance lease?

Oh God I didn't mention the lease really, FR not the best today. The rest of the paper I found ok tho and the audit indicator in sim 2 was a joke! Would love something like that in the real thing!

myshirt

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

That was prudent thinking. I said for the second sim that Tracey was very incompetent and mentioned how I got a C in the AAFRP and that I would be willing to help out if she cooked me 4 square meals a day and let me touch her boobs on Tuesdays.

I think I will be graded reaching on that one.

Only on Tuesdays?

You're selling yourself short.
Tracey would have conceded Thursdays if you had recommended holding out. Her specialism was double entry. You know how those ladies roll.

ASOT2012

Accountant81 wrote: »

Oh God I didn't mention the lease really, FR not the best today. The rest of the paper I found ok tho and the audit indicator in sim 2 was a joke! Would love something like that in the real thing!

That's the thing tho, everyone will pick up on different things. Who knows what we are supposed to mention!

cson

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Anyone going to the kings of leon this week?

Yeah. Warm up tomorrow night. :pac:

autumnbelle

Was there ethics too with her marketing strategy

ASOT2012

autumnbelle wrote: »

Was there ethics too with her marketing strategy

I think that was indicator number 15 in that SIM

applehunter

Below the belt with the incomeptent "public accountants" I thought.

Who are the ACA to mock considering CPA bailed them out a few years ago.