06-11-2009, 02:16 PM
|
#13
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London
Studying:
F7
F8
Posts: 9
|
Originally Posted by fahim2006
|
yeah those 2 year questions simply meant that the examiner didnt want you to attempt the question number 5 and leave th 4th in half. WTF i mean, financial instrument,leases,construction contracts, fair value adjustments with all their depriciations, wrong sale in consolidation means alot of separation in SFP and IS. i knew everthing and yet the paper went bad, I dont think that all the calculations were correct but I placed them properly never the less in the sfp etc. lets hope i get 50.
I am a CA student actually, I am used to complications of higher catagory but quick to solve, ACCA disgust me forcing same calculations by giving 2 year old data, giving material in grams when output is given in tons, test you on maths aswell, thats plain stupid. if they wanted to test whether we can get current year balances with the 2 year old balances given, it was totally unfair to test that with leases,fv adj,construction contract and financial ins at the same question.
I was surprised to see that the examiner didnt want the income statement for that damn question
|
He didnt want the income statement??? please dont tell me he asked for SOCIE
Last edited by naddu200; 06-11-2009 at 02:27 PM.
|
|
|