FAE September 2014

IR1SH RANG3R

I was kind of hoping that whoever wrote the paper made the mistake with the auditor error extrapolation across the population because I really stuck it to the imaginary auditors saying we should question there competence at getting even the most basic calculation wrong :P

Anyone know when we get our scripts back/results for these things?

daisy chain

I thought the lease in Sim 2 was an onerous contract so said Tracey should have made a provision and also expensed for fit out costs.

Audit was tricky, didn't really know what to say. Thought the premium Financor could have been a strategy/ marketing indicator?

Absolutely exhausted now!

20 Times 20 Times

Anyone want to put me out of my misery and explain why the company couldn't apply for the small audit exemption?

autumnbelle

Little Pea wrote: »

Anyone want to put me out of my misery and explain why the company couldn't apply for the small audit exemption?

I never even thought of it, your not told assets value are you? Wrecked again tomorrow's lie in badly needed

20 Times 20 Times

autumnbelle wrote: »

I never even thought of it, your not told assets value are you? Wrecked again tomorrow's lie in badly needed

Turner over much less than the 8.8million threshold though!

lexluthor

Little Pea wrote: »

Anyone want to put me out of my misery and explain why the company couldn't apply for the small audit exemption?

ive not looked at all at what case this is or whatever, just looked at your question, but i'll bet a tenner you'll find your answer here:
http://www.cro.ie/ena/annual-return-audit-exemption.aspx

mark_m360

Little Pea wrote: »

Turner over much less than the 8.8million threshold though!

I would imagine it is in this list.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1999/en/act/pub/0030/sched2.html#sched2

They hold funds that are advanced to customers and require central bank approval.

Looking at the paper, it said they have bank and regulatory approval. So I would imagine that is what it is subtly getting at there.

Scania88

For sim two, did anyone mention setting up a group structure?

Looks like I'm totally off the wall with this theory lol

autumnbelle

Did anyone find it impossible to know whether to go ahead with the premium finance what did yis conclude? Or the two discounted options?

Nothin but the Truth

autumnbelle wrote: »

Did anyone find it impossible to know whether to go ahead with the premium finance what did yis conclude? Or the two discounted options?

I think the non-financial reasons for the premium finance meant that you wud advise not to go ahead with it. They were basically an intermediary who were trusted with sensitive informstion so selling this to highest bidder wouldnt look good and they wud lose a lot of customers.

For the two options it was an absolute no go, no matter what option it was. Young company with no cash, making a loss in the current year trying to take over an operation bigger themselves in a different area of catering. Discount rate used was 4% as well which was wrong, should of been at least 8% as bank overdraft was this rate which would of reduced budgeted profit drastically.

applehunter

I said that introducing a premium structure goes against the basics of the site being an open platform and that they should stick with the current model.

The company had been growing so quickly, what is the rush to change.

So that's 3 lines. I was struggling after that.

Accountant81

autumnbelle wrote: »

Did anyone find it impossible to know whether to go ahead with the premium finance what did yis conclude? Or the two discounted options?

applehunter wrote: »

I said that introducing a premium structure goes against the basics of the site being an open platform and that they should stick with the current model.

The company had been growing so quickly, what is the rush to change.

So that's 3 lines. I was struggling after that.

Isnt it just a new level of member though? I said to go ahead with it but I did note as one of my disadvantages that it would be potentially alienating them from their oldest customers as their original target market was small businesses.

I would have thought though that there is no right or wrong answer here, but feel free to correct me!! I hope that it doesn't matter which side of the line you fall down on so long as you make a recommendation and your reasons for such make sense.

In terms of the two options with Quotient I said the same as above by Nothin but the truth. Too much too soon, not a strategic fit etc.

TheDoctor

I thought selling restricted information about other clients and bids would be unethical.

Sort of insider trading

myshirt

TheDoctor wrote: »

I thought selling restricted information about other clients and bids would be unethical.

Sort of insider trading

Heard lots of people mentioning that also, but personally I'd be careful. It's overkill.

Look at a company such as LinkedFinance, they are doing well. This whole peer to peer or non bank lending, whatever you call it, it's a big mover due to mistrust in your traditional lending markets and lack of liquidity, but mostly mistrust.. They'll never get the big fish I think, but think SME lending, good scope there. LinkedFinance do this premium data access, and also mine data. They made it work legally.

BarracudaFx would be another, a lot of EIIS pumped into that baby. Very current scenario by Paul, just like personal car club last year, finger on the pulse there, seeing as GoCar and others set up in London.

LOccitane

TheDoctor wrote: »

I thought selling restricted information about other clients and bids would be unethical.

Sort of insider trading

That's exactly what I went for too... I actually mentioned 'small scale insider trading' in the answer (LOL) and said it was the equivalent to trying to purchase perfect information.

TheDoctor

Interesting to see what the suggested solutions say for all these, lots of differing ideas

Accountant81

TheDoctor wrote: »

Interesting to see what the suggested solutions say for all these, lots of differing ideas

Speaking of which... Anyone any idea when they are out? It would want to be relatively soon to be of any real benefit to us.

mark_m360

Accountant81 wrote: »

Speaking of which... Anyone any idea when they are out? It would want to be relatively soon to be of any real benefit to us.

As far as I know, about 3-4 weeks. Mock review is on the 16th so I imagine we will get the solutions before then!

applehunter

Mocks are really a month too late IMO.
I mean I can imagine a lot of people getting a huge wake up call today.

It would be nice if it was 3 months to go and not 2 months when it happened.

autumnbelle

I think timing is good before study leave but would have rathered a few weeks off to get prepared for it, tomorrow will be pointless for me I have looked at elective and was to tired this eve to do anything

TheDoctor

Nice sleep in tomorrow

20 Times 20 Times

autumnbelle wrote: »

I think timing is good before study leave but would have rathered a few weeks off to get prepared for it, tomorrow will be pointless for me I have looked at elective and was to tired this eve to do anything

Take your competency statement and try to map the indicators to the ISA - Then pull open your FRC book and jot critical issues down ! Least you should be able to apply something to the case :-)

Dellboy2007

TheDoctor wrote: »

I thought selling restricted information about other clients and bids would be unethical.

Sort of insider trading

Yeah I basically treated it as a business ethics indicator. Using that hodgson's 3 step model and concluded that it wasn't a good idea to go ahead with it.

20 Times 20 Times

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Yeah I basically treated it as a business ethics indicator. Using that hodgson's 3 step model and concluded that it wasn't a good idea to go ahead with it.

4 step approach :-)

myshirt

Little Pea wrote: »

4 step approach :-)

3 step, don't believe the hype

20 Times 20 Times

Hah !

Always thought step 4 involved how great delboy was for getting a C in the AAFRP and how ****e the rest of were :-D

Dellboy2007

myshirt wrote: »

3 step, don't believe the hype

You gots my back!

http://www.sme.ie/articles/business_ethics/decision_making_frameworks.pdf

Dellboy2007

Little Pea wrote: »

Hah !

Always thought step 4 involved how great delboy was for getting a C in the AAFRP and how ****e the rest of were :-D

Don't be trying to deflect your mistake now little penis

TheDoctor

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Don't be trying to deflect your mistake now little penis

Nice

20 Times 20 Times

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Don't be trying to deflect your mistake now little penis

Burn :-)

TheDoctor

BAN HIM!!!!!!!

autumnbelle

Little Pea wrote: »

Take your competency statement and try to map the indicators to the ISA - Then pull open your FRC book and jot critical issues down ! Least you should be able to apply something to the case :-)

Doing tax so It'l be fun but if I can apply anything to the case I will be happy

acastudent

Email received from CGS this morning

Aidodub87

acastudent wrote: »

Email received from CGS this morning

about the audit elective?

Debs23

Just wondering; for audit, are people makeing notes or just highlighting areas in the standards book?

Mark1916

Hi all,

Is anyone aware of anyone that does private grinds for Financial Reporting? Unfortunately due to working for the next few weeks I can't get to the CGS.

Thanks for any help.

Glas134

Mark1916 wrote: »

Hi all,

Is anyone aware of anyone that does private grinds for Financial Reporting? Unfortunately due to working for the next few weeks I can't get to the CGS.

Thanks for any help.

Looking for the same too Mark! .. don't seem to be easy to come by... if I hear anything I will let you know.

acastudent

Aidodub87 wrote: »

about the audit elective?

Audit for this weekend not the elective

cson

That was a handy enough audit paper imo.

I'd love it for the real thing tbh.

bikeman1

Thank God those three days are over! Shattered from them.

I did the Tax paper. Thought it was fair enough, without any nasty surprises like the Paul Monahan Core Mock! Need to boost my tax notes from virtually nothing!

A worthwhile learning experience anyway.

TheDoctor

Audit was nice. Would be disappointed if I didnt pass that

LOccitane

TheDoctor wrote: »

Audit was nice. Would be disappointed if I didnt pass that

Agreed. Although I would say the suggested timings were off.. There was a lot in Sim 1.

Sim 3 also seemed very much 'out of the book' and it was hard to make it very case specific.

TheDoctor

Agreed with the timings Case 1 and Case 3 were pushed for 75 mins

Case 2 if I took 90 minutes at it I would have been writing absolute drivel by the end of it

Who writes the mock for audit, Sean Murray?

acastudent

I thought Audit was ok paper . Having said that I don't think I did well on it . Def need to invest more time

cson

Sim 1 should have been the 90min Q.

Good whack of FR in it. Rookie mistake of not bringing in my notes on the standards, didn't hold me back much, but would have been nice to have them. Lesson learned for the real thing.

And for anyone reading this from next year (which will likely include myself ) definitely do the mocks. I know a lot of people didn't do them/left early but I found them to be a real eye opener and great practice.

autumnbelle

I done very badly with tax

TheDoctor

Yeah audit and FR material are definitely needed for the audit elective.

This week has been an unbelievable asset, don't know why you wouldn't do it.

2 months to go!

autumnbelle

This week was brilliant definitely even with being nowhere near ready it was brilliant help. Anyone who done the tax today where is the part in the book about the branches and subs in the uk? Just so I can go well over it:( couldn't find it today but I remember doing it

Dellboy2007

Anyone care to explain how the elective is marked. For example, if there's 10 indicators and you got c in 5 but missed one or two and got a few RC's is this enough?

TheDoctor

Say you get 3 points for a HC, 2 for a C, 1 for a RC.

They just tot them up and between themselves decide what the number is for a pass once everyone has been corrected.