View Full Version : Pev
LEEDSBROOKIE
03-12-07, 14:32
How did everyone find the PEV exam this morning?
And which machine did you recommend they purchase in section2?
Not a bad exam but alot more written work required than previous papers.
Roll on February and the results!!
I thought the exam paper was quite tricky, especially the first section. Section 2 was much easier, more of what i was expecting.
I chose to purchase machine 2, the higer cost machine but brought in more operating profit and increased your net assets.
I thought the memo's were ok, fingers crossed that ive done enough in section 1 to pass :001_unsure:.
Question 1.3 was tricky :thumbdown:. How did everyone else find it?
Agree about the written part today - I took 3hrs to finish it. Section 1 was quite tough, I hope I did enough to pass? It just wasnt what I was expecting?
I recommended Machine 1, in Section 2. I wrote about a page of reasons why, just to try and justify it :001_smile: - overall I think Section 2 was ok, but Section very tough and long.
I thought it was horrid horrid horrid :(
I think Section 1 was tricky but manageable, but I am sure I failed section 2. Maybe there is a tiny chance I will pass if they look at my workings.....
I thought it was alright. Section 1 was a little tricky at first but then I got the hang of it and it was fine.
I recommended machine 2 as gave a better return on net assets and higher operating profit margin. I couldn't think of any reasons why you'd want to choose 1? At least not from what I calculated!
In the first section where you did the reconciliation ... for actual cost of actual production did you take off the closing stock of 50,000 x 0.033? I did and got it to balance so pretty sure it was right but just checking.
Yeah Cortez, i did the same as you with the stock for the actual cost of actual production and got it to reconcile. Because it wasn't stock of finished goods it was just materials that they didn't use in the production. Never seen a question like that before, hopes its alright.
Yeah Cortez, i did the same as you with the stock for the actual cost of actual production and got it to reconcile. Because it wasn't stock of finished goods it was just materials that they didn't use in the production. Never seen a question like that before, hopes its alright.
Ah that's good then, it should be fine.
What about the question where you had to suggest reasons for the variances ... it said that there were 2 operators still training, pay rise still outstanding and old machines.
I said:
Favourable labour rate = pay rise
Adverse efficiency = trainees
Adverse material usage = old machines (old machines not working 100% may damage the material so there's wastage)
I wasn't sure on the last two because I thought they might go the other way around .... old machines not working so quickly and trainees might waste the material :001_unsure:
And for section 2 when you had to do the P&L and net assets for the two proposals ... for net assets was it literally just 935,500 (or w/e the figure they said net assets were at year end) + your profit figure? Didn't have to add in the cost of the machines or anything?
mustangsalli
03-12-07, 16:25
I have to agree with current post. This exam was horrid, horrid, horrid. The exam setters are evil. I couldn't remember how to do the index number question. Sure I have completely fluffed everything, dont feel confident about any of it. I suppose I shall to re-sit this exam for the fourth time next June. I'm sure one day I get an exam I can understand.:thumbdown::thumbdown:
chappy1987
03-12-07, 16:25
I Did Same Cortez With The Explanations Of The Variances.
As For Section 1 I Wasn't Sure On The Bit Re Stock I Just Used The Figure It Said They Produced.
Section 2 I Chose Machine 1. As I Understand Machine 2 Gave You A Mere £1,000 Extra Net Profit At An Expense Of £560,000 And The Return On Asset Was Increased By 0.05% Explained Why I Chose It In Great Detail So Hopefully Wont Be Marked Down Heavily On It.
As For Assets I Put The 935k Plus The Profit For Year
I Did Same Cortez With The Explanations Of The Variances.
As For Section 1 I Wasn't Sure On The Bit Re Stock I Just Used The Figure It Said They Produced.
Section 2 I Chose Machine 1. As I Understand Machine 2 Gave You A Mere £1,000 Extra Net Profit At An Expense Of £560,000 And The Return On Asset Was Increased By 0.05% Explained Why I Chose It In Great Detail So Hopefully Wont Be Marked Down Heavily On It.
As For Assets I Put The 935k Plus The Profit For Year
That's a good point actually, I didn't think of that.
If the machines were going to last 10 years then that's only an extra £10k or so profit.
I based my recommendation purely on the GP%, OP% and ROCE% :001_unsure:
I think I have really screwed up. The first part was fine with the variances and reconciliation. But section 2 was horrible - I have added onto the net assets the profit and the value of the 8 machines after depreciation - It gave a net assets figure and said to add in the profits
Also, the discounted cash flow - I couldnt remember anything about that - was that from ECR? I just made something up for that one!
I recommended machine 1 which is probably wrong too
Definitely going to fail :crying:
Reminder that we should not discuss exam papers and possible answers and content till all countries in later time zones have sat the exam.
AAT usually remind students of this.
Sorry just seen the announcement that after 3pm is ok.
chappy1987
03-12-07, 16:37
Ive Never Heard Of That Discounted Cash Flow Anyone No What We Needed To Do?
I Thought Id Done Quite Well But After Hearing What Other Students Have Done Starting To Have A Little Doubt.
Yazi Aint Aat Papers Just For England And Wales Far As Am Aware Wales Are Same Time Zone As England Am Not 100% Sure Though.
I thought Section 1 was a pig, totally different format to past papers, which were all a lot easier.
Section 2 was OK, I said buy the second machine because although the initial outlay was more, and Year 1 profit margins were lower, it yielded savings on Labour and Admin costs over the ten year period.
The question implied you should ignore the net book value of the machines in the net assets - because it stated that the net assets were 935500 + op profit - anyone else take this meaning from that part of the question?
I did at first - but then changed my mind but then realised afterwards that there are no trick questions so it wouldnt say it like that if you had to work out the net book value (which I unfortunately did and added on)
80sGuitarSolo
03-12-07, 16:46
I thought Section 1 was a pig, totally different format to past papers, which were all a lot easier.
Section 2 was OK, I said buy the second machine because although the initial outlay was more, and Year 1 profit margins were lower, it yielded savings on Labour and Admin costs over the ten year period.
The question implied you should ignore the net book value of the machines in the net assets - because it stated that the net assets were 935500 + op profit - anyone else take this meaning from that part of the question?
Grrrr, i think i am rather positive on the exam, i definitly missed taking off the closing stock in task 1.1, but aside from that think it went well.
For section 2 the questions were quite ambiguious especially when there was reference to the net assets, i dont see how you could make a correct decision without adding on the NBV of the new machinery. I chose machine 2, mainly becasue over time as the NBV decreases the ROCE will increase, also if there are more poor weather seasons the lower administation costs were a consideration as well.
I think i did the rest ok, but again people need to remember that gettting little figres or formulas incorrect here and there dont neccessaraly mean that the exam is failed, as long as you can justtify your results in the memo's/reports even if they are not ideal you should be ok. I HOPE!!!
I had the PEV this morning and agree with most of the comments on here in regards to the first part being harder than the second, in fact i ended up wasting far too much time on the first part. I unfortunatelt ran out of time on the second half! I completed the first section, completed the questions on the second half and reworked the P&L + Assets however, i ran out of time and could not recommend which machine etc.
To summarise, i completed all of the data tasks and written andfeel confident these were correct but the very last section of the last question i had no time to do. Will that be a fail?
Thanks.
It was totally disgusting! looks kije ill be doing PEV for the 10 millionth time in june :thumbdown:
Also, my mind went completely blank with the index numbers? I dont want to say what I did incase it is ridiculous. Does anyone want to say what should have been the answers for those?
It was totally disgusting! looks like ill be doing PEV for the 10 millionth time in june :thumbdown:
Also, my mind went completely blank with the index numbers? I dont want to say what I did incase it is ridiculous. Does anyone want to say what should have been the answers for those?
I didn't do a thing cos I had no damn idea!!. I was even going over dec 2006 in my head to see if I could miraculously make some kind of connection with how they got their index numbers.:mad2:
What did you get for standard cost for actual and actual cost for actual?
Section 1 was the one i felt more confident about it was Section 2 I most feared. Today that all changed, section 1 was diabolical :crying:
on the question where you had to put the reconciliation of costs i couldnt get this to work out correctly, this was horrible, also i couldnt work out the last question in the indexing but i thought section 2 was okay, i cant help feeling that i failed! section one really threw me!!!!!the exam was awful!!!!
What variances did you all get?
It was a nightmare!! Teabags? I ask you!!
well I think section 1 was worse than section 2. I chose machine 2 because of the percentages (wally).
Anyway my indice percentage was 8. sumfing?
Roll on PCR maybe I'll Have better luck with that
Boo Hoo
where you had to make the new cost card what did you put, i had 15 pound for the materials, 2 pound for the labour cost and 2 pound for the fixed production overheads, with a total cost of 19 pound
What did you get for standard cost for actual and actual cost for actual?
I think standard was £386400 and actual was something like £389--- if I see someone elses figures I will remember what I had exactly
where you had to make the new cost card what did you put, i had 15 pound for the materials, 2 pound for the labour cost and 2 pound for the fixed production overheads, with a total cost of 19 pound
I have definitely failed - I thought that bit I had done right but I had a total of £87!!
I shouldnt read posts on here, it makes me feel even worse :crying:
I've got £33 for the cost card
I think standard was £386400 and actual was something like £389--- if I see someone elses figures I will remember what I had exactly
I got £360 :confused1:
This is making me want to be sick! :mad2:
This is making me want to be sick! :mad2:
Me too. I feel really down and embarrassed - my boss has paid for this and will want to know how I did tomorrow!
i got 360 too
I think I read the question wrong, what was this for? I thought joyride was asking the total standard cost for actual production
i didnt get the 389--- i had 360--- for the actual cost at actual production
I think your right Emma and there was a 5k difference in variances?
Also, my mind went completely blank with the index numbers? I dont want to say what I did incase it is ridiculous. Does anyone want to say what should have been the answers for those?
This is what I did ... not sure if it's right or not but here goes.
Jan 07 .. 4.80 .. I set the index at 100.
June 07 ... 4.95 ... to work out the index I did 4.95/4.80 * 100 (Jan index) = 103.13
Nov 07 ... 5.10 ... index = 5.10/4.80 * 100 = 106.25
Then they said in Jan 08 the index would be 108.25 so I did (4.80 * 108.25)/100 = 5.196 .. I rounded up to 5.20.
To calculate the % rise from Jan 07 to Jan 08 I go (5.20-4.80)/4.80 * 100 = 8.33%. I nearly scribbled it out and put 8.25% (increase in index) but it specifically said increase in price so hopefully 8.33% is right!!
Anyone else get that or am I completely wrong? :001_unsure:
I think the Std cost was 386'400 and there were variances which accumulated to 5'000A so 386400+5000 = 391499 as the Actual costs? But i'm not sure my heads fried!
This is what I did ... not sure if it's right or not but here goes.
Jan 07 .. 4.80 .. I set the index at 100.
June 07 ... 4.95 ... to work out the index I did 4.95/4.80 * 100 (Jan index) = 103.13
Nov 07 ... 5.10 ... index = 5.10/4.80 * 100 = 106.25
Then they said in Jan 08 the index would be 108.25 so I did (4.80 * 108.25)/100 = 5.196 .. I rounded up to 5.20.
To calculate the % rise from Jan 07 to Jan 08 I go (5.20-4.80)/4.80 * 100 = 8.33%. I nearly scribbled it out and put 8.25% (increase in index) but it specifically said increase in price so hopefully 8.33% is right!!
Anyone else get that or am I completely wrong? :001_unsure:
Thats exactly what I put.
I also got £33 for the cost card.
This is what I did ... not sure if it's right or not but here goes.
Jan 07 .. 4.80 .. I set the index at 100.
June 07 ... 4.95 ... to work out the index I did 4.95/4.80 * 100 (Jan index) = 103.13
Nov 07 ... 5.10 ... index = 5.10/4.80 * 100 = 106.25
Then they said in Jan 08 the index would be 108.25 so I did (4.80 * 108.25)/100 = 5.196 .. I rounded up to 5.20.
To calculate the % rise from Jan 07 to Jan 08 I go (5.20-4.80)/4.80 * 100 = 8.33%. I nearly scribbled it out and put 8.25% (increase in index) but it specifically said increase in price so hopefully 8.33% is right!!
Anyone else get that or am I completely wrong? :001_unsure:
Ooh, I may have done this right then - I thought I was completely on the wrong track
I did everything the same as you but didnt round until the end so I had £5.196 which gave 8.25%
I think your right Emma and there was a 5k difference in variances?
There was one which was 5k, cant remember which now, plus I had a £10k one in the opposite direction to the 5k
I've got £33 for the cost card
Tea was 3kg @ £5 = £15
Tea bags 1000 @ £0.006 = £6
Fixed overheards 0.2 hours @ £50 = £10
Was labour 0.2 hours @ £10 then? I can't remember what rate it was per hour but £10 would make it £33 total.
Tea was 3kg @ £5 = £15
Tea bags 1000 @ £0.006 = £6
Fixed overheards 0.2 hours @ £50 = £10
Was labour 0.2 hours @ £10 then? I can't remember what rate it was per hour but £10 would make it £33 total.
Well I know what I did wrong there then - I had £60 for the tea bags cost! Which is why my standard cost card was £54 over. I read it as £0.06 per bag. That pretty much guarantees my fail
The variances I got were 5000 and 10000.
Tea was 3kg @ £5 = £15
Tea bags 1000 @ £0.006 = £6
Fixed overheards 0.2 hours @ £50 = £10
Was labour 0.2 hours @ £10 then? I can't remember what rate it was per hour but £10 would make it £33 total.
Yep £33 looks correct, I also hadn't heard of discounted cashflows but I just wrote the first sensible thing that came into my head!
Overall I think section 1 was OK once I got my head around it, I managed to get the reconciliation to work. Task 1.3 was reasonably straightforward.
I found section 2 OK but it was the report writing where I think I fell down on, the calculations were OK. I recommended machine 2 based purely on GP margin, OP margin and Return on net asset figures.
Hopefully I have done enough to pass.:thumbup:
Hi
does anyone think its possible to pass section 2 if i've added the cost of the new machine to the net assets? I picked machine 1 on the back of this and wrote a long explanation of why!
Yes you can still pass, they would base it on all the calculations from task 2.1and they would look at your written reasoning behind why you chose machine 1, which presumably you did so through the calculations of GP, OP margins and return on net assets.
I got £1,640 (A) for tea bag usage variance. I know one of the others was £10,000 (F) but not sure which one.
Hi
does anyone think its possible to pass section 2 if i've added the cost of the new machine to the net assets? I picked machine 1 on the back of this and wrote a long explanation of why!
I called my tutor to ask him and he said it would probably just been seen as a misinterpretation of the task. Unfortunately I have since found out I did the cost card wrong so I will fail now - I doubt they will accept two misinterpretations
mowzer, i did this too. Do you think if you added the purchase less depn to net assets and used this figure (incorrectly) to get to the ROCE it would be a sacking offence?
Hi
does anyone think its possible to pass section 2 if i've added the cost of the new machine to the net assets? I picked machine 1 on the back of this and wrote a long explanation of why!
Thanks, i hope so!
Don't they look at both sections separately, you might be ok if it's your only big mistake
every single pev is like this - includes something really easy to misconstrue gggrrr. i think it is silly as it isn't really a test of what you know, just how you read the english
mowzer, i did this too. Do you think if you added the purchase less depn to net assets and used this figure (incorrectly) to get to the ROCE it would be a sacking offence?
I hope not. I think it was a bit unfair because the net assets would obviously include the machines in a real situation, so the only relevant ROCE would include them. However it isn't what the question asked so i'm really scared!!!!!!
Everyone else seems to have done well. I messed up on the cost card, the net assets and just guessed the cash flow question
I have no chance of passing have I as they are all in section 2. I feel terrible - especially as I was pleased with how I did on section 1
every single pev is like this - includes something really easy to misconstrue gggrrr. i think it is silly as it isn't really a test of what you know, just how you read the english
I agree its silly because you get worked up about it. I've seen quite a few old questions that i've had to look at really closely, so i suppose we'll just have to hope for the best and hope they're sympathetic
I have just realised that I forgot to multiply the depreciation for both machines by 8, which in turn has made both my gross profit, net profit and ROCE wrong adn hence also the explanantions.
Can you be penalised that much for missing something out?
Hi Emma, I got £386400 for the Standard cost of actual production and think it was £391400 for the Actual cost of Actual production can't remember but feel better that someone else got that!!!
Everyone else seems to have done well. I messed up on the cost card, the net assets and just guessed the cash flow question
I have no chance of passing have I as they are all in section 2. I feel terrible - especially as I was pleased with how I did on section 1
I hate that it isn't just all marked as one paper. i suppose if you think the worst you'll either be prepared or pleasantly surprised. I know i'm not being too hopeful, just forget about it for now, but that's easier said than done!!
Hi Emma, I got £386400 for the Standard cost of actual production and think it was £391400 for the Actual cost of Actual production can't remember but feel better that someone else got that!!!
Did your reconciliation still work?
Yes it worked I had a 5000 Variance can't remeber which way though so Actal could have been different but I definatley got £386400 for one of them!
Hi Emma, I got £386400 for the Standard cost of actual production and think it was £391400 for the Actual cost of Actual production can't remember but feel better that someone else got that!!!
I don't recognise those figures but at the same time I can't remember what I had - I just know it balanced with all the variances on there!
The production was 84,000 right so did the standard cost card show £4.60?
For the actual cost of actual production did you take out the closing stock of 50,000 tea bags @ £0.033 each?
I definitely didnt get 391400 for the actual - Im sure it was 389 something or 398 something. doesnt matter anyway though as I have failed
Oh well, onto PCR revision
Emma, you may not have failed if you reconciled, oh well we'll find out soon enough!!
I have just realised that I forgot to multiply the depreciation for both machines by 8, which in turn has made both my gross profit, net profit and ROCE wrong adn hence also the explanantions.
Can you be penalised that much for missing something out?
No, you can only lose 1 mark for not multiplying the depreciation by 8, aslong as you calculated gross profit, net profit and ROCE using the figures which you calculated as being correct then you shouldn't lose too many marks.
The AAT aren't looking for 100%, they are looking for correct application of knowledge.
I agree the PEV exam was a complete nightmare, i have been revising for the past month trying to get this right as i failed in the summer.
the paper was too long and unfair!
Thanks AAT for giving us an awful paper - now i dont know if i have the motivation to sit this exam yet again!
i am supposed to start the ACCA exams in June but if i fail this then i cant do them and all the classes and work i have done so far will be a waste of time.
You sound like I feel. What parts do you think you did wrong?
chappy1987
03-12-07, 18:54
i had 386 standard and 391 actual. all i can remember was i had capacity as £10,000 favourable.
I agree the PEV exam was a complete nightmare, i have been revising for the past month trying to get this right as i failed in the summer.
the paper was too long and unfair!
Thanks AAT for giving us an awful paper - now i dont know if i have the motivation to sit this exam yet again!
i am supposed to start the ACCA exams in June but if i fail this then i cant do them and all the classes and work i have done so far will be a waste of time.
I have failed for sure! I got so confused by the first section, I paniced!!! I can't even spell that now! I messed up the tea bag usage variance, my reconciliation didn't balance! I didn't multiply the depreciation by 8! The score card is completely wrong, due to the tea bags! I did not like that paper! but I think if I sat it again now and thought about it logically, I think it would be ok! but I didn't! I'll be resiting in june!
chappy1987
03-12-07, 19:11
as for this stock people are talking about taking it out of costs why?
am struggling to grasp it.
i left it in as it was actual cost of production not cost of sales.
as for this stock people are talking about taking it out of costs why?
am struggling to grasp it.
i left it in as it was actual cost of production not cost of sales.
Well took it out because it asked for actual cost of actual production and the closing stock wasn't used in production of the 84,000 boxes. It balanced ok with it out.
If I left it in I was £1,650 out and the only variance I had for that amount was tea bag usage (£1,650 (A)). If I took that out it made the difference worse!
chappy1987
03-12-07, 19:19
ye 3330 adverse. but it said they produced 8500000 which ment 85000 boxes anyway sure that wont mean it a fail either way
Finlaysdad
03-12-07, 19:24
ye 3330 adverse. but it said they produced 8500000 which ment 85000 boxes anyway sure that wont mean it a fail either way
I'm with you on this one Chappy, 3330 adverse.
I'm not convinced you were supposed to leave the stock in the actual cost of actual production ... I can't see how you would have been able to reconcile it. I'm fairly sure my fixed overhead variances were right as I did the volume = efficiency + capacity agreed and the only other one we had to calculate was material usage variance which I go £1,650 adverse ...... anyone else get that?
I know my total favourables were £10,900 but can't remember what my total adverse was.
i think I got 386200
391200
giving a variance of 5000.
I think we are confusing to different things with stock.
Closing finished stock has been through the production process, and therefore it would be included in any operating statement.
Closing raw material would not be as it has not been used at all, therefore it is not part of finished production.
chappy1987
03-12-07, 19:51
sure it said had been produced meaning finished bags which i pressumed nothing had to be done with it neway it reconciled shud be marked down much on it.
I'm not convinced you were supposed to leave the stock in the actual cost of actual production ... I can't see how you would have been able to reconcile it. I'm fairly sure my fixed overhead variances were right as I did the volume = efficiency + capacity agreed and the only other one we had to calculate was material usage variance which I go £1,650 adverse ...... anyone else get that?
I know my total favourables were £10,900 but can't remember what my total adverse was.
I agree with you - the closing stock was not used in production so I counted the number used for production as 8450000 (think it was that figure anyway!) Do you remember what your total actual cost was?
I agree with you - the closing stock was not used in production so I counted the number used for production as 8450000 (think it was that figure anyway!) Do you remember what your total actual cost was?
No I don't I'm afraid :( I can hardly remember anything from that question, I just know it reconciled!
If you leave some of the paper in pencil is that ok?
i no that is says "we strongly recommend pen is used instead of paper"
Ema
I've got the same figures as you
I was fanatically trying to erase my pencil at the end!
If you leave some of the paper in pencil is that ok?
i no that is says "we strongly recommend pen is used instead of paper"
Not sure on that one - strongly recommend does not say 'you must' I suppose it will just depend on how easy it is to read when they come to mark it maybe?
Ema
I've got the same figures as you
I did feel confident about section 1 so hopefully we are correct. Shame I totally screwed up section 2!
Please can someone put my mind at rest!! I sat the PEV exam this morning and instead of showing all my workings within the format of the answer, I put them on the back page of the answer booklet and referenced them to the question ie. for example Task 1.1 (i) W1 and showed W1 against my answer. Would this constitute a fail!!!
:001_unsure:
As long as you have shown your workings somewhere, you will be fine.
It's natural to assume because the paper was hard and people have different answers etc that you have failed. When I published my suggested answers in June for the DFS paper, I think out of all the queries/comments I received nearly all of them (certainly 80%) were convinced they had failed.
None of those who were convinced they had failed actually did fail - they passed.
Try not to dwell too much on it now - there is absolutely nothing you can do about the paper other than wait for results day.
Best regards
Steve
I would always suggest you show your workings on a separate page anyway because it makes it easier to read. If you show your workings within the body of the answer it can sometimes be difficult as you are all over the page.
You have made it easier for the marker by doing it your way.
However, those of you that didn't do it this way - don't panic - as long as you showed your workings somewhere (whether it be in the body of your answer or on another page) you will be fine.
Peugoet - thanks for that, I have been worried about it all afternoon - starting to feel rather sick!!
Regarding the paper, welll thats another thing. I have been studying by distance learning for this paper and the PCR on Thursday and I do find it hard work. I am trying not to think about the answers to the questions - part one was a bit of a nightmare, part 2 not too bad but I did manage to answer all of the questions and am just not sure that I have done enough.
I was just more worried about not showing my workings within the answer of the question.
With regard to the machine selection, and the drafting of the net assets schedule, did anyone else include the cost of the machinery less the depreciation in their net assets calculation? For me, this meant machine2 gave a lower ROCE. I then recommended machine1 one the basis that it gave a better return on each unit of shareholders investment...
Anyone else do something similar?
With regard to the machine selection, and the drafting of the net assets schedule, did anyone else include the cost of the machinery less the depreciation in their net assets calculation? For me, this meant machine2 gave a lower ROCE. I then recommended machine1 one the basis that it gave a better return on each unit of shareholders investment...
Anyone else do something similar?
I did the same as you Simon
I thought that paper was really hard.......I spent 2 hours 15 minutes on Section 1, I did not like the layout at all :confused1: I managed to balance the variances and I rang my tutor when I came back and he confirmed my calculations for the index's - that was just pure guess work. The cost card I arrived at £33 but there are so many varying answers on here I am really not sure now. I came out of the exam with only 1 minute left.
DFS tomorrow and PCR on Thursday - I hope these have been written by a different person:001_unsure:
Jackie
farmergiles
04-12-07, 10:15
I thought the paper was tough, we had rushed the end of the course due to the tutor being off ill and we weren't au fait with everything.
As Peugeot says," It's over and done with now and we can't alter anything" so lets stop worrying and get on with life. If I have to sit again then I will, c'est la vie!
Regards
Totally p'd off Pete
yellow_harley
04-12-07, 10:49
Dont worry about it, from intermediate the amount of people I have seen who are convinced they failed then returning to say they passed, so dont get yourself down.
I took PEV today, and I think I did OK. Yes, it was a horrible paper, but I got £386400. Variance- £5000 Actual cost £391400. Then £33 for cost card, I didnt include the price of the acquisitions in Net Assets, but rather annoyingly, for the asset turnover calculation i did net assets/ turnover rather than turnover/ net assets :confused1:, i realised when revising DFS last night, it is annoying, but what can i do. i hope that wont constitute a fail
What did anyone use for the absorption rate in section 1?
Fixed overhead capacity variance?
I think i got 6000 but probably wrong..
Can someone please tell me how they arrived at the figure for te tea bags 0.006 on our paper it was 0.6......... so the people that I spoke to had cost cards up inthe 600's :thumbdown:
yeah the figure in the paper was 0.6 pence per pag, x 1000 = 600p which is £6 :)
hi
I did it wrong aswell because it came up to £600 just for bags (too expensive).This was very tricky and I thought of it but you know when you have so many things in your mind you forget to do it .in paper was 0.6 pence and we did 1000 bags x 0.6 = £ 600
instead of 1000 bags x 0.06 (because 0.6 is 60 pence and 0.06 is 6 pence) = £60
so they confused me for sure.
angel_eyes_368
04-12-07, 14:34
I'm so so worried I failed, didn't get the cost card right or the reconciliation.. but think I got everything else right... it was horrid! Do you think I will be ok?
yeah the figure in the paper was 0.6 pence per pag, x 1000 = 600p which is £6 :)
OMG how stupid do we feel now :blushing:
the problem is that when you are in the exam you dont think straight you try to be clever and end up so stupid (I dont mean to ofend anybody) I am saying it for myself .
geting confused with nothing 6 pence !!!!????
I did the same thing for the net assets calculation, I revised the total with the NBV of the machines then added the revised profit. I recommended machine 1 as the ROCE was better, although it took 10 operators to run. Hopefully i'll get marks for trying :confused1:
Think everyone really cheesed off with AAT, the paper was tricky to say the very least, the first question through me and ended up spending far too long on it. I had £87 for cost card!!! prob cos I had £60 for teabags. Managed to get the index numbers after jiggling figures to give what looked reasonable. Didnt include the cost of the machines in the second section and forgot to multiply the depreciation figures by 8!! recommended machine 2 cos of higher ROCE but dont know if this will be right now. Just have to wait until February and hope AAT dont do nasty things to us on Thursday with PCR. :thumbdown:
OMG how stupid do we feel now :blushing:
arghhhhhhhh i did the same used £600. hope they dont mark me down too much.
i mean i added the machines nbv to the revised net profit to get net assets.
also- got discounted cashflow completely wrong.
i hate this unit, the most depressing thing is that i will have to retake :(
Yes I agree, everyone seems to have really struggled with it, well at least one part or another! I truly looked at the paper and wanted to cry yesterday, as it seemed all my hard work had been wasted as it hadn't asked most of what I'd revised!
I really felt like I didn't have a clue when I was doing it!
My std cost and actual cost didnt balance, as a figure I had originally I had stupidly changed! Which threw it all out and I just couldn't get my head round it in there, then as soon as I came out, I knew exactly where I'd gone wrong!! How very annoying.
Most people on here are feeling the same as I am, so maybe I didn't do as badly as I thought?? I did chose machine 1 for Section 2 and think Jan 08 price for 1.3 was £5.20, which I've seen someone else has got! Fingers crossed I have done enough!
I got £5.20 to, a group of us spent hours revising performance indicators and they hardly asked us any, and the variances in section 1 were awful, got my standard and actual costs to balance though. The amount of writing was much more than on any other past papers, infact yesterdays paper was nothing like any of the past papers at all.
Yes I agree, everyone seems to have really struggled with it, well at least one part or another! I truly looked at the paper and wanted to cry yesterday, as it seemed all my hard work had been wasted as it hadn't asked most of what I'd revised!
I really felt like I didn't have a clue when I was doing it!
My std cost and actual cost didnt balance, as a figure I had originally I had stupidly changed! Which threw it all out and I just couldn't get my head round it in there, then as soon as I came out, I knew exactly where I'd gone wrong!! How very annoying.
Most people on here are feeling the same as I am, so maybe I didn't do as badly as I thought?? I did chose machine 1 for Section 2 and think Jan 08 price for 1.3 was £5.20, which I've seen someone else has got! Fingers crossed I have done enough!
Hi, So did I Chose machine 1 aswell, coz i worked out that woz going to generate more profit than other, also the price I got for 1.3 jan 08 was £5.20 aswell.
But 1 thing i realised from section 1 just now i forgot to do the new cost card for 1000 teabags, looked at but 4got, will that ruin my chances of passing Section 1 anyone?:huh:
Think everyone really cheesed off with AAT, the paper was tricky to say the very least, the first question through me and ended up spending far too long on it. I had £87 for cost card!!! prob cos I had £60 for teabags. Managed to get the index numbers after jiggling figures to give what looked reasonable. Didnt include the cost of the machines in the second section and forgot to multiply the depreciation figures by 8!! recommended machine 2 cos of higher ROCE but dont know if this will be right now. Just have to wait until February and hope AAT dont do nasty things to us on Thursday with PCR. :thumbdown:
Hi, i had £87 for cost card too. I have recommended machine2 because on a long term decision, costs will be higher on maintaining machine 1 then machine 2
Dont worry about it, from intermediate the amount of people I have seen who are convinced they failed then returning to say they passed, so dont get yourself down.
I took PEV today, and I think I did OK. Yes, it was a horrible paper, but I got £386400. Variance- £5000 Actual cost £391400. Then £33 for cost card, I didnt include the price of the acquisitions in Net Assets, but rather annoyingly, for the asset turnover calculation i did net assets/ turnover rather than turnover/ net assets :confused1:, i realised when revising DFS last night, it is annoying, but what can i do. i hope that wont constitute a fail
Hi Yellow_Harvey I got the same as you, I did think it was different but I also think I may have scraped through we'll soon see soon!!!
I have been reading all the posts since the exam and feel better because everyone seems to be in the same situation but worse because I now know where I went wrong!!
Section 1 - I'm Fairly ok with the majority of this although I didn't do anything with the stock because I was unsure. My operating statement reconciled. Think i only got 2 variances wrong because I should've considered the stock.
Managed ok on the Index thing
Completly mucked up the cost card. Think i only got the Fixed overhead bit right. I did the £60 thing!!!
RE the machines section 2. No one has mentioned the differences. When i recalculated everything there was VERY little difference in Gross/Net profit. Did anyone else find that? However i recommended Machine 2 based on the fact the Net profit was very slightly higher and the admin costs would be less over time.
I did not add the purchase of the machine into my assets as the question read to me that we were not to do that?
To summarise the things i know i got wrong
2 x variances
2 areas on the cost card
Asset Turnover (did it the wrong way round for some strange reason!)
The Machine thing - no idea wheter right or wrong as there seems to be so many variances to the answer on here!!
Can't remember if there was anything else on the paper other than the memos?
Do you think this would consitute a fail?
I, like the majority, put in 100% revision and felt as confident as i possibly could. I knew all the variances well and knew the ratios etc. I could not have done any more and feel very disheartened RE the quality of the questions and the Quantity in the paper. I'd done 6 years worth (12) past papers and been ok!!!
Anyway.......rant over......Fingers crossed AAT will take everything into consideration. Que Sera Sera. :001_smile:
I have been reading all the posts since the exam and feel better because everyone seems to be in the same situation but worse because I now know where I went wrong!!
Section 1 - I'm Fairly ok with the majority of this although I didn't do anything with the stock because I was unsure. My operating statement reconciled. Think i only got 2 variances wrong because I should've considered the stock.
Managed ok on the Index thing
Completly mucked up the cost card. Think i only got the Fixed overhead bit right. I did the £60 thing!!!
RE the machines section 2. No one has mentioned the differences. When i recalculated everything there was VERY little difference in Gross/Net profit. Did anyone else find that? However i recommended Machine 2 based on the fact the Net profit was very slightly higher and the admin costs would be less over time.
I did not add the purchase of the machine into my assets as the question read to me that we were not to do that?
To summarise the things i know i got wrong
2 x variances
2 areas on the cost card
Asset Turnover (did it the wrong way round for some strange reason!)
The Machine thing - no idea wheter right or wrong as there seems to be so many variances to the answer on here!!
Can't remember if there was anything else on the paper other than the memos?
Do you think this would consitute a fail?
I, like the majority, put in 100% revision and felt as confident as i possibly could. I knew all the variances well and knew the ratios etc. I could not have done any more and feel very disheartened RE the quality of the questions and the Quantity in the paper. I'd done 6 years worth (12) past papers and been ok!!!
Anyway.......rant over......Fingers crossed AAT will take everything into consideration. Que Sera Sera. :001_smile:
Yeah I had differences of around 1% on each of the ratios but Net profit and ROCE were slightly higher for machine 2.
Good Stuff....think i may be ok on this one then. I had the Gross profit slightly higher on Machine 1 and the Net Profit and ROCE slighley higher for Machine 2.
Thanks.
Good Stuff....think i may be ok on this one then. I had the Gross profit slightly higher on Machine 1 and the Net Profit and ROCE slighley higher for Machine 2.
Thanks.
I had the same, machine 1 was better for gross profit margin and 2 was better with net profit margin and ROCE.
The difference was very marginal for both +-£3000 at most.
Therefore for a recommendation i went for 1 based on the info in the question. In a poor harvest they could reduce the labour force. If labour was replaced with the pickmaster2, they could not simply sack the machinery... they had to continue depreciating it. I also mentioned that the cost of financing the purchase (interest on a loan etc) was likely to be greater then the additional profit it brought in.
My tutor told me to concentrate on the 2 previousm past papers as she was tipped off that it would be similar as the examiner was the same I sat a mock exam the week before the real PEV exam and got 115/5 out of 126 marks a clear pass. This put me at ease and then I get this exam section one could not have been any different in format and I spent most of the time on it that I never even completed section 2. FAIL
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.