FAE September 2014

PhilipLuke

TheDoctor wrote: »

Cant see it being a NC, got some stuff right.

Looks like a good old RC, would put money on it.

What a Joke, had I another half an hour I reckon I could have got 80% of that exam right

Dellboy2007

Didn't the board report for 2013 state that PM had been poor in that year. Looks like they are purposefully trying to bring up the standard of it. My issue is that they didn't increase the difficulty, they just increased the volume which is not a true reflection on someone's ability to produce correct journals.

cian twomey

PhilipLuke wrote: »

Same here, I came through Cap 1 and Cap 2. Kind of reminds me of the way I felt after the Cap 2 Financial Reporting assessment last year. That was a complete joke too, I only got two thirds of that completed in the time allotted. Thankfully I passed but it was like todays, not in any way appropriate to the time allotted!!

ya its the same rubbish this time around, is it really worth getting a qualification if that's the way its earned, I guess like cap 2 we will have to kick up a fuss with the institute and hope its marked a bit easier

TheDoctor

What happened with this Cap 2 assessment and what was the end result?

cian twomey

TheDoctor wrote: »

What happened with this Cap 2 assessment and what was the end result?

a bit like today the time allocation was terrible and the exam itself a bit of a joke, a lot of the lecturers, students and cassi complained to the institute about it and it seem to have been marked a lot easier, most people passed

PhilipLuke

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Didn't the board report for 2013 state that PM had been poor in that year. Looks like they are purposefully trying to bring up the standard of it. My issue is that they didn't increase the difficulty, they just increased the volume which is not a true reflection on someone's ability to produce correct journals.

I agree, but by increasing the volume they increased the difficulty. They made it impossible to do well

PhilipLuke

cian twomey wrote: »

a bit like today the time allocation was terrible and the exam itself a bit of a joke, a lot of the lecturers, students and cassi complained to the institute about it and it seem to have been marked a lot easier, most people passed

We had three questions to do. Q1 was Ias 1 and the other two were basic consolidation and leases. The Q1 was an exam in itself, I think we had to produce a SPLOCI and SOFP and we had only an hour and a half for the whole exam. Most students got most of Q1 done and left it, rushed through the rest of exam to get some extra marks

I reckon a good percentage failed and they decided because there was such a high failure rate if you were in the 40 - 50% BRACKET you passed

TheDoctor

PhilipLuke wrote: »

We had three questions to do. Q1 was Ias 1 and the other two were basic consolidation and leases. The Q1 was an exam in itself, I think we had to produce a SPLOCI and SOFP and we had only an hour and a half for the whole exam. Most students got most of Q1 done and left it, rushed through the rest of exam to get some extra marks

I reckon a good percentage failed and they decided because there was such a high failure rate if you were in the 40 - 50% BRACKET you passed

Need the same again today

cian twomey

TheDoctor wrote: »

Need the same again today

write a fairly strongly worded email to the institute and cassi, they do take the cassi comments on board so it might help

sodabread

does anyone remember what answer they got section 1 question 1?

littlemiss123

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Didn't the board report for 2013 state that PM had been poor in that year. Looks like they are purposefully trying to bring up the standard of it. My issue is that they didn't increase the difficulty, they just increased the volume which is not a true reflection on someone's ability to produce correct journals.

Completely agree. Had I had more time I would have aced that exam, it was not technically difficult. However, as I was under such pressure I'm fairly sure I made silly mistakes and I definitely didn't have time to write out all my workings. Best of luck to the examiner trying to read my script anyway!

Shorty11857

sodabread wrote: »

does anyone remember what answer they got section 1 question 1?

No adjustment, if I'm thinking of the right question

littlemiss123

sodabread wrote: »

does anyone remember what answer they got section 1 question 1?

Think I put no adjustment required. I had 3 minutes left at the end of the exam, read it fast did a quick calc and my figures were ballpark what they had so I just took a chance.

TheDoctor

I said no adjustment

Only one I said in the exam

Debs23

I adjusted for the deferred tax asset. I said that there no future profits so it cod not be recognised.

**** is that wrong

TheDoctor

I think it was that they werent expected to use the profits if they stayed seperate but not they are bought out

qwabercd

The joint operations question was tricky too. Thought I had it right, but I credited 300 from bank and debited 150 to receivables, should have just credited the 150 from bank. Messed up the cattle question too, put it as no adjustment as thought it was measured at fair value less cost to sell at point of harvest, mixed it up with produce.

So many bloody boxes in section 2. Didn't have a clue what to put in for the extra lines in related parties - most people seemed to put in prior year comparison. Was gonna do this but didn't!

Comparatively speaking section 3 wasn't too bad. There was a lot in the turbine question but think I got the guts of it right.

TheDoctor

The bloody ages in the cattle question bogged me down

Nothing to do with accounting

IR1SH RANG3R

With that joint operations one do you not completely derecognise the payable and just recognise 1100000 in Cost of sales?

TheDoctor

Couldnt get the joint operation question, guessed it in the end

IR1SH RANG3R

Yeah that payable was the only thing that messed me up couldn't think if I should recognise it or not because it was a debit, in the end I just reversed it and recognised everything 50/50!

LOccitane

IR1SH RANG3R wrote: »

With that joint operations one do you not completely derecognise the payable and just recognise 1100000 in Cost of sales?

That's what I did, but it was a case of having literally a minute and getting the journal to balance. I credited the Payable to get it to balance.

I just guessed an answer for the Cattle question - far too much info and I had 2 minutes left. The volume of info was unreal.

Better off not getting into too much detail either I feel in terms of the specifics of questions. We can just hope that the marking scheme is adjusted to reflect what virtually everyone seems to feel about the exam!

qwabercd

The correct answer i think was:
Dr Revenue 1.25m
Cr Cost of sales 900k
Cr payables 200k
Cr bank 150k

cian twomey

can anyone remember what the answer they put for question 5 section 1

Nermal

qwabercd wrote: »

The correct answer i think was:
Dr Revenue 1.25m
Cr Cost of sales 900k
Cr payables 200k
Cr bank 150k

I had this also.

qwabercd

Nermal wrote: »

I had this also.

Unfortunately I didn't.

Credited bank by the 300 and debited receivables by 150. Another 2-3 minutes to mull over it and reckon I would have cracked it. Wasted a lot of time on the start on it.

Stated in my assumption that it was assumed none of the money had been received from the bank account but highly doubt that would cover me. Frustrating as I had the bulk of it correct, that's the nature of section 1 I suppose.

Nermal

I have to ask about the IFRS8 one again - were there literally NO calculations involved?

Just copying the profit/assets etc by segment into the disclosure?

qwabercd

Nermal wrote: »

I have to ask about the IFRS8 one again - were there literally NO calculations involved?

Just copying the profit/assets etc by segment into the disclosure?

Think so. I said that the prior year was restated because one of the segments (the fourth one I think) wasn't a reportable segment in the previous year but was in the current. Fairly sure that was wrong though!

Very strange question, not a test of knowledge at all more of a fecking race. Could say the same for the exam as a whole!

TheDoctor

Put in a disclosure about the customer not being over 10%

Only thing I could think off

ASOT2012

cian twomey wrote: »

can anyone remember what the answer they put for question 5 section 1

I reclassified it to advertising costs I think. So I think the question said they had capitalised the 3m, so I was thinking 1m would have been amortised in the P/L at year end because the first installment to the footballer was on 1 Jan 2013.

So I think the journals I put down were

CR Intangibles 2m
CR amortisation P/L 1m
DR Advertising costs P/L 3m

Havn't a clue if that's right - same as the rest of the paper really I was trying to write/think so fast to get it done!!

TheDoctor

Has anyone thrown up a sneaky scanned copy of the paper?

sodabread

TheDoctor wrote: »

Has anyone thrown up a sneaky scanned copy of the paper?

We had to hand the copy of the exam questions back with the exam script- don't ask me why!

TheDoctor

Yeah I was just wondering is there anyway to see the paper

Dellboy2007

sodabread wrote: »

We had to hand the copy of the exam questions back with the exam script- don't ask me why!

Did we? I never handed mine up

autumnbelle

Has anyone email addresses for who we email?

autumnbelle

And I never handed back the copy of the questions invigilator said I didn't need to

sodabread

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

Did we? I never handed mine up

Ye but you won't lose any marks if you didn't.

TheDoctor

Scan it up Delboy when you get the chance. Like to read it again in my own time

autumnbelle

sodabread wrote: »

Ye but you won't lose any marks if you didn't.

Why would they want them back?

cian twomey

autumnbelle wrote: »

Has anyone email addresses for who we email?

info@cassi.ie is the cassi email, I think you have to go through chartered accountants website to contact them

autumnbelle

cian twomey wrote: »

info@cassi.ie is the cassi email, I think you have to go through chartered accountants website to contact them

Thank you

sodabread

autumnbelle wrote: »

Why would they want them back?

No idea- it doesn't make sense. I asked the invigilators at the end. They wanted it back as they officially should be handed back but if I hadn't handed it back it wouldn't matter and no marks would be lost!

Reddzer2002

Hi all,

Found that very tough today and to be honest I am very disheartened about the final now. I feel I will do very well to get a RC in it.

I had to repeat exams in Cap1 and Cap2 but know that is not possible this year.
Does anybody know of any grinds for FAE? There is obviously the CGS but could do with a few one to one sessions to see what I have to change.

Any help appreciated.

cian twomey

sodabread wrote: »

No idea- it doesn't make sense. I asked the invigilators at the end. They wanted it back as they officially should be handed back but if I hadn't handed it back it wouldn't matter and no marks would be lost!

your welcome have just sent an email now, it helps to air your frustrations a bit

TheDoctor

Everyone email, doing mine now

PhilipLuke

The invigilator handed us out our scripts at 9.40am and kept the second script until 5 to. The person on my left had books on his desk and put the script into one of them and i could see him reading it and jotting stuff down 10-15 minutes before the exam. They then forgot to give the line I was in the second copy and I was the last in the exam hall to get it! I was sitting there with my hand up wondering what the **** is the second script everyone is getting.

How professional was that!

TheDoctor

What was the point of the second script?

autumnbelle

I'm doing one now too, I think it could be my only hope to even get rc as I did most things wrong looking at the paper, the question saying to ig:( nore the depreciation I never even read that right defered income I entered 750:( turbine never got to do. The related party trans I put the restructuring as a provision. So disappointed. Realistically is it possible to pass the exam in total with an nc in this?

Dellboy2007

autumnbelle wrote: »

The related party trans I put the restructuring as a provision?

I did this as well. It was announced in a formal plan so I assumed it met the criteria of IAS 37.

Quote:

"Closure or reorganisation: recognise a provision only after a detailed formal plan is adopted and has started being implemented, or announced to those affected. A board decision of itself is insufficient."

sodabread

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

I did this as well. It was announced in a formal plan so I assumed it met the criteria of IAS 37.

Quote:

"Closure or reorganisation: recognise a provision only after a detailed formal plan is adopted and has started being implemented, or announced to those affected. A board decision of itself is insufficient."

What question was this in? Please say it wasn't in section 1 or 3.