Current updates regarding coronavirus (Covid-19) and the precautions AAT are taking will be continually updated on the below page.

Please check this link for the latest updates:

We hope you are all safe and well and if you need us we will be here. 💚

Please check this link for the latest updates:

We hope you are all safe and well and if you need us we will be here. 💚

# Unit 31 - reporting figures over time, HELP!!

katsutlieff
Trusted RegularRegistered Posts:

**459**
I am revising for my simulation for unit 31, I have come across a question in the revision companion that isn't included in the course companion, surprise surprise.

Can someone please explain the following to me, my brain hurts too much to try and get my head around it!!!

Given are the annual income for a business covering 2002/06

2002 153,640

2003 167,040

2004 185,600

2005 201,000

2006 215,000

and the RPI to cover the same period

2002 139.2

2003 141.9

2004 146.0

2005 150.7

2006 155.1

The question asks to 'convert the figures to real terms based on 2006 and include the real annual year on year growth turnover in the analysis'.

The course companion does not cover this so I am a bit stumped, looking at the answers I can work my way back so I have worked out the formula just need some background information or it won't stick.

Can anyone help :confused1:

Many thanks

Can someone please explain the following to me, my brain hurts too much to try and get my head around it!!!

Given are the annual income for a business covering 2002/06

2002 153,640

2003 167,040

2004 185,600

2005 201,000

2006 215,000

and the RPI to cover the same period

2002 139.2

2003 141.9

2004 146.0

2005 150.7

2006 155.1

The question asks to 'convert the figures to real terms based on 2006 and include the real annual year on year growth turnover in the analysis'.

The course companion does not cover this so I am a bit stumped, looking at the answers I can work my way back so I have worked out the formula just need some background information or it won't stick.

Can anyone help :confused1:

Many thanks

0

## Comments

83Sales in current year x RPI for 2006/RPI for current year

for example 2002 restated at 2006 prices is

153,640 x 215,000/153,640 = 153,640 x 1.39 = 213,560

2002 income is now shown in 2006 prices.

Hope this is helpful

459The answer for 2002 is as follows

RPI is converted to another figure (any idea what it is?) by dividing the RPI for 2006 with the RPI for 2002,

155.1/139.2=

1.114.Then you take the sales figure for 2002 £153,640 and times it by the new RPI figure to get the 'real term figure'

153,640 x 1.114=

£171,155Then you do the same for 2003

Then you use the new real term figures to

(2003-2002)2002 x100= real annual growth

,(6.7%)I am so lost with this, it hasn't been covering in my textbook. This I suppose is the problem with being a distance learner, somethings are covered in the classroom but not the books.

Thank you for taking the time to post me an answer. Does any of the above make any sense to you? :scared:

218In Jan 2008 the same 100g bottle of coffee was sold for 264p when the RPI index was at 209.8.

Is coffee today cheaper or expensive then in 1971?

On the face of it looks that we are paying 4 time more then in 1971. (264/67)*100=394%

However, we should convert 1971 prices to today’s price to make the comparison realistic.

To do that divide 67p by 1971 index of 19.4 and multiply by 2008 index of 209.8.

(67/19.4)*209.8=724p

The bottle of coffee should be sold for 724p at 1971 prices. However, we are getting a discount of 64% at today’s prices. The coffee is cheaper today.

OR we can convert today’s prices to 1971 prices to make the comparison at 1971 prices.

To do that divide 264p by 2008 index of 209.8 and multiply by 1971 index of 19.4.

(264/209.8)*19.4=15.5p

At today’s price the coffee should have been sold for 15.5p in 1971. some 77% CHEAPER then 1971 prices.

The coffee is definitely cheaper today.

Principle:

DIVIDE price BY it’s OWN INDEX and MULTIPLY by CONVERSION year INDEX.

459You have shown me a much simpler way of adjusting sales figures. Thank you

Divide price by its own index and multiply by conversion year indexThe question in the book I am having problems with seems to use a different formula for adjusting sales figures. As below

To convert to 2008 prices

divide 2008 index by 1971 index 209.8/19.4= 10.814

multiply 1971 price by this figure to get real term price 67x10.814= 724p

Nowhere in the course companion has adjusting sales figures been taught in this way which is why I panicked. I had to work out the formula by working back though the answers. Now it seems the answers are incorrect, which is why the taught formula and your formula does not work, which is where the confusion and panic has arose.

I will stick with the way you have shown me as it is much simplier then anything taught

The only thing I ask is would you be kind enough to explain the figure that is calculated when you divide 2008 RPI with 1971 RPI, what is this figure? What does it represent?

I hope this all makes sense to you.

Katherine

218The book is woking out how much has the index grown by from the required point in time to today's date.

the 2002 index was 139.2 and it has grown to 155.1 at today's date (2006)

there fore 155.1 divide by 139.2 times 100 = 111.422 %

therefore year 2002 =100% and to convert the 153 640 to today's price you must multiply it by 111.422% giving a figure of

171 189(the book way concerntrataing on the increase of index). (your figure is 171,155 - a difference of 34 due to decimal values- an insignificat value)I have used a simple logic. If 153 640 = 139.2 then 155.1 must equal 153640 divide by 139.2 (to find value of 1) and multiply by 155.1

hence 153 640 / 139.2 * 155.1 =

171 189same thing but one looking the index point of view, while I am doing the same thing but from the price point of view

I hope this helps.

459I have emailed my learning provider and clarified the question and equation used. They have told me to use the equation that you kindly showed me, confirmed the equation that has taught within the course book is very confusing. Why teach it then?

Anyway, thanks again, had been going around in circles with this one which is why I ended up so confused, and stupid :tongue_smilie:

Katherine

2,034Could be restated as:

.........................

conversion year index..............................

its own indexThis would give a value, probably a 1.something or a 0.something

and is called the INDEX FACTOR

[email protected]

www.sandyhood.com