What did you think of the PCR exam
Comments
-
The % was question 2.2
There was still question 2.3 to complete after that.
did anybody value the closing stock at cost price in part 1 for the operating statement?0 -
for cost of subcontracted testing i multiplied 6250 hrs(125000 x 3 mins) x 13.23 to give the amount saved on o/t, since you wouldn't be testing the 5,000 extra you're paying for that don't exist. then take that off the £182,000to give a net cost of subcontracting to be £99,312. does that ring any bells with anyone??? hope so!!! :blushing:0
-
Just want to blow off some steam, I thought that exam was complicated, lots of data to absorb & the wording of the questions different. Section 1 was a bit of a muddle expecially the "revised" bit, probably failed that section. Felt better about Section 2, hopefully have passed that. if I do fail how do you go about getting feedback.0
-
jeskimosdad wrote: »for cost of subcontracted testing i multiplied 6250 hrs(125000 x 3 mins) x 13.23 to give the amount saved on o/t, since you wouldn't be testing the 5,000 extra you're paying for that don't exist. then take that off the £182,000to give a net cost of subcontracting to be £99,312. does that ring any bells with anyone??? hope so!!! :blushing:
I worked out that 125,000 units need to be tested by sub-contractors put put it through as 130,000 as you can only do them in multiples of 10,000. It still worked out cheaper than the overtime rate of £13.23.
I recommended that all testing be subcontracted and more basic time spent on the other tasks to reduce the overtime bill.0 -
I worked out that 125,000 units need to be tested by sub-contractors put put it through as 130,000 as you can only do them in multiples of 10,000. It still worked out cheaper than the overtime rate of £13.23.
I recommended that all testing be subcontracted and more basic time spent on the other tasks to reduce the overtime bill.
ooo, i worked it out that £1.40 per unit for subcontacting and then £13.23 / 20 units as 20 units could be tested per hour so - 66p per test using hours, so overall it was cheaper to use over time hours0 -
yeah, i agree. the 125000 had to be rounded to 130000 to be outsourced but in determining net cost, the cost of the o/t to test 125000 should be deducted from the cost of subcontracting (£182,000). Then, my thinking was that the profit margin per unit was greater than the cost of paying for the testing per unit and so it was still profitable. Think if you can come up with some kind of explanation for your thinkin you get some credit with aat. All done now, get the wine on tonight and good luck everyone!!!!I worked out that 125,000 units need to be tested by sub-contractors put put it through as 130,000 as you can only do them in multiples of 10,000. It still worked out cheaper than the overtime rate of £13.23.
I recommended that all testing be subcontracted and more basic time spent on the other tasks to reduce the overtime bill.0 -
elnino2201 wrote: »ooo, i worked it out that £1.40 per unit for subcontacting and then £13.23 / 20 units as 20 units could be tested per hour so - 66p per test using hours, so overall it was cheaper to use over time hours
Damn,
Just worked it out. Yeah your right. i hope that didnt screw up too much of my section 2 mark.0 -
wasnt the point though, that the testing could not be accommodated in house? i read the question as asking whether it was still profitable to outsource the work because it wasnt physically possible via overtime?? either way, between us we've shown we've thought about it a lot and i reckon you get a lot of credit for that right or wrong.0
-
jeskimosdad wrote: »wasnt the point though, that the testing could not be accommodated in house? i read the question as asking whether it was still profitable to outsource the work because it wasnt physically possible via overtime?? either way, between us we've shown we've thought about it a lot and i reckon you get a lot of credit for that right or wrong.
I think i used the assembly time rather than the testing time to work out the cost with overtime staff.
I did meantion agency staff in the memo though, so i know i will get some points for that.0 -
I found it so hard, i could have easily of walked, I gave it my best shot, but dont hold out any hope of passing. I could'nt believe section, it was much harder tahn the previous years. Im now studying for PTC, got that tomorrow, not holding out much hope either.0
-
Whilst I thought that the paper was a little complicated and there was an awful lot of information to take in, I quite liked the way it tested you by making you really think, instead of just being able to bang out answers. I much preferred the fact that there were more calculation questions and less theory, partly because after PEV on Monday, I've had no motivation to revise PCR!
As someone said before, I'm about as confident as I can be without having the results. I think that even if I got some of the answers wrong, I was able to argue my case with the wordy bits which hopefully showed that I kind of know what I'm talking about!0 -
I'm not sure what to make of the paper yet. I'm hoping that Sandy might post some answers on here and that they may jog my memory on what I put down.
I was happy to finish the paper and found the written answers much nicer than any of the past papers.
I found some of the data confusing, when you try and look at everything all at the same time and the figures start merging into one. The part where basic hours where limited to 175,000 then the warehousing could be used for 70,000 hours and cost £75,000 a year - way too many 7's involved for my little brain. Took a bit of thinking about and deep breaths, hoping that if I've made squity mistakes that I'll get carried through on my workings.
There's nothing we can do now, but wait - just over ten weeks til the results.
:ohmy:0 -
najki_2000 wrote: »yeah it was 74 p additional cost per test...got that one right hipefully:)
I had a 66p additional cost, because I put in an extra 8p due to the the variable overheads which are based on labour hours, as we would subcontract work that would mean less labour hours.
I found the paper so much easier, i actually understood what section 1 wanted me to do, this paper wont be suseptable to 4 alternative answers.
The paper guided you through what it wanted you to do, rather than the other one which left it open to opinion.
Took me about 2 hours to do, which was longer than I was expecting, but did do all my calculations twice0 -
Yes, I commented in the report that it is likely they used lesser skilled staff, resulting in lower basic pay but higher overtime, and also the increased hire expenses. This combined with the reduced hourly rate charged accounted for the majority of it. Or that was my opinion, along with suggestions on how to improve.
I put that they must be understaffed so had to do more overtime to make up for it???????0 -
Did anyone comment much on the revenue variance ? I put it was the main cause, but didnt really go into a massive amount of detail. :ohmy:
Was a bit sick and tired towards the end so probably didn't write as much as i could have, but think i got the bulk of it down.
I put the labour down to either lower skilled workers (lower paid) or staff having left (fewer workers at basic, working more overtime).0 -
Did anyone comment much on the revenue variance ? I put it was the main cause, but didnt really go into a massive amount of detail. :ohmy:
Was a bit sick and tired towards the end so probably didn't write as much as i could have, but think i got the bulk of it down.
I put the labour down to either lower skilled workers (lower paid) or staff having left (fewer workers at basic, working more overtime).
I put that the revenue was down due to selling price down, which was the main reason.
I put that the labour was due to sickness leave, as that would lead to more overtime which was what the data showed.0 -
-
When working out how much more subcontracting would be, did people include variable overhead that would be saved by the labour hours not worked as well as the actual overtime cost? I did, but I'm not sure if I was right to.
Also, did anyone suggest 'shift working' as a possible way to meet the capacity problem of the quality control testing? I got the impression that the problem was not having enough testing machines, so working shifts day and night would help this?
Tony
I did the variable overhead thing as well - I thought the problem was staff being off sick bla bla - worried now :001_unsure:0 -
I did that as well - but it doesn't look like many people did - we're either uniquely intelligent or very silly????:001_smile:
I reduced variable overheads by the hours saved too, but it does appear that this hasn't been done accross the board talking to some after the exam. Quite a few seemed to have done it too though.garry_coombs wrote: »I put that the labour was due to sickness leave, as that would lead to more overtime which was what the data showed.
But the basic was down as well, and Im sure it said all sickness was paid somewhere. I was going to put long term sick (ie reduced pay) but I was sure I read sickness was paid at full rate, couldn't find it when I checked, but didn't want to chance it. May have been a past paper, so its possible I read that elsewhere.
My solution was to look into more testing machines. I had it saving money paying overtime versus outsourcing, but the machines weren't sufficient. Then mentioned cost dependant etc.0 -
Well the way i loked at it was that if it was paid somewhere else then it wasnt paid in labour costs0
-
I used 477,500 - 15,000 + 5,000 = 467,500 as the required quantity
467,500 / 0.85 = 550,000 required to be produced to meet the above including rejects
Material cost I had as 467,500, the rejects would be replaced free and accounted for next year ?
I only costed material for good production as it said faulty material was repleaced FOC so wouldn't cost them anything - hoped I was right and thought it was a bit sneaky as all the other papers say the faulty units are scrapped and have no value .........0 -
sleepysophie wrote: »Needless to say I've based all the figures on 467500 (85%) instead of the 100% production allthough I did work this out correctly earlier in the question, I must have forgotten about it later in the section.....I hope it's not enough to fail.
My tutor says you only get makred down once for using an incorrect figure - if all the calculations are correct based on the figure you have used you still get all the marks0 -
sleepysophie wrote: »if most people got 467500 units and the limitation on testing was 425000 units why is eveyone saying 130000 units needed to be outsourced.
I'm so confused now and I thought I'd done well before I've read all these posts !
Because all of the units produced would have to be tested - then 82500 would be rejected leaving the good production0 -
I reduced variable overheads by the hours saved too, but it does appear that this hasn't been done accross the board talking to some after the exam. Quite a few seemed to have done it too though.
Having checked with a tutor this is correct. However I imagine a lot of people like me forgot to do this as there were a lot of little bits to remember to do! I hope they don't mark us down too much!0 -
elnino2201 wrote: »ooo, i worked it out that £1.40 per unit for subcontacting and then £13.23 / 20 units as 20 units could be tested per hour so - 66p per test using hours, so overall it was cheaper to use over time hours
I put that overtime testing was cheaper as well ..........0 -
I too reduced the variable overheads, since they were based on labour hours and fewer hours were being worked. I ended up getting almost exactly the same profit figure for testing in-house and subcontracting out, so maybe I screwed up somewhere else! I did explain this in the email, though, so hopefully I'll pick up marks.0
-
I too reduced the variable overheads, since they were based on labour hours and fewer hours were being worked. I ended up getting almost exactly the same profit figure for testing in-house and subcontracting out, so maybe I screwed up somewhere else! I did explain this in the email, though, so hopefully I'll pick up marks.
I had a iirc £1.63 before, £1.58 after. Does that sound about right ? £9.odd cost and £11 selling price0 -
Totally Gutted! Not fair!!!
I was sooo disappointed!! After sitting this exam and finding that the format had totally changed to such a degree that hours and hours of hard revision was all for nothing!!! To those of you who found it easy, I say, "bully for you" but you my friends are definitely in the minority.
For all who are so deflated, make sure you appeal cause I am. This disregard for us student's hard work should not be tolerated!
Reggie:ohmy:0 -
For all who are so deflated, make sure you appeal cause I am. This disregard for us student's hard work should not be tolerated!
Reggie:ohmy:
Appeal against what ? It was certainly a bit tougher than previous papers but the princples were the same, just worded differently or in a different context. I'm not confident about passing but I don't think you can really have any complaints as there was nothing that I wasn't taught.0 -
Is it a bad thing i did'nt clock the entire exam as significantly different from the previous papers I went over?
I admit I did not reduce the variable overheads when looking at subcontracting, but I do not feel I can blame anyone but myself for that mistake.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.2K Books to buy and sell
- 2.3K General discussion
- 12.5K For AAT students
- 322 NEW! Qualifications 2022
- 159 General Qualifications 2022 discussion
- 11 AAT Level 2 Certificate in Accounting
- 56 AAT Level 3 Diploma in Accounting
- 93 AAT Level 4 Diploma in Professional Accounting
- 8.8K For accounting professionals
- 23 coronavirus (Covid-19)
- 273 VAT
- 92 Software
- 274 Tax
- 138 Bookkeeping
- 7.2K General accounting discussion
- 201 AAT member discussion
- 3.8K For everyone
- 38 AAT news and announcements
- 345 Feedback for AAT
- 2.8K Chat and off-topic discussion
- 582 Job postings
- 16 Who can benefit from AAT?
- 36 Where can AAT take me?
- 42 Getting started with AAT
- 26 Finding an AAT training provider
- 48 Distance learning and other ways to study AAT
- 25 Apprenticeships
- 66 AAT membership