Phew! ECR done

16791112

Comments

  • *Jo
    *Jo Registered Posts: 509 Epic contributor 🐘
    Mog17 wrote: »
    We good!!!! Must say if you did the same as me taking the variable bit of semi-variable out before calculating absorption rates that was wrong. I checked and same came up last june - not meant to take it out. Poo. But hey, only 2 questions wrong there and will still get marks for principle on calculations even if the rates were wrong. Wine is good but really gone to my head!!!!!

    I can't properly remember but i think out of the 90,000 i took fixed costs of 30,000 out and allocated these and then did the apportioning with the variable.
  • mrspnut
    mrspnut Registered Posts: 70 Regular contributor ⭐
    Vidya_r wrote: »
    Of wht I remember:
    FIFO as it increases stock valuation in times of rising costs...

    Break even I calculated by using the PV ratio(5/8 = 0.625)...
    so break even sales revenue= 312500/.625= £500,000

    Margin of safety in terms of sales revenue= 875,000-500,000 = £375,000

    Margin of safety as %= (375,000/875,000) x 100 = 42.86%

    Graph 1 : semi variable cost

    Graph 2: Stepped fixed cost

    Normal loss = 12 tonne abnormal loss= 28tonne

    expected output = 388 tonnes

    Cost of unit output : (73960-240) / 388 = £ 190

    In the process account Dr side = 73960

    Cr Side
    Normal loss = 240
    Abnormal loss 28 x 190 = 5320
    Finished output 360 x 190 = 68400
    Total =73960

    Pay back period: 2.125 yr ~2yrs 2 months

    NPV IN £000 = 39.72

    Same here, so either we're both right or we made the same mistakes. :001_smile:
  • jozz73
    jozz73 Registered Posts: 5 New contributor 🐸
    Vidya_r wrote: »
    Of wht I remember:
    FIFO as it increases stock valuation in times of rising costs...

    Break even I calculated by using the PV ratio(5/8 = 0.625)...
    so break even sales revenue= 312500/.625= £500,000

    Margin of safety in terms of sales revenue= 875,000-500,000 = £375,000

    Margin of safety as %= (375,000/875,000) x 100 = 42.86%

    Graph 1 : semi variable cost

    Graph 2: Stepped fixed cost

    Normal loss = 12 tonne abnormal loss= 28tonne

    expected output = 388 tonnes

    Cost of unit output : (73960-240) / 388 = £ 190

    In the process account Dr side = 73960

    Cr Side
    Normal loss = 240
    Abnormal loss 28 x 190 = 5320
    Finished output 360 x 190 = 68400
    Total =73960

    Pay back period: 2.125 yr ~2yrs 2 months

    NPV IN £000 = 39.72


    this is what i got also:001_smile:
  • pirate
    pirate Registered Posts: 469 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Andypandy wrote: »
    Did anyone else get £500,000 for break-even , with a MOS of £375000 - 42. something%?
    Yes I got 42%
    I did 375000/875000 to get the % margin of safety
  • Mog17
    Mog17 Registered Posts: 91 Regular contributor ⭐
    *Jo wrote: »
    I can't properly remember but i think out of the 90,000 i took fixed costs of 30,000 out and allocated these and then did the apportioning with the variable.

    Oh I i did all that too - not worried about the allocation/apportionment bit. It was the next question where you had to do the absorption rate that I messed up. I took the variable part out of the total overheads figure before calculating the rate. Which apparently isn't right. darn it.
  • Andypandy
    Andypandy Registered Posts: 526 Epic contributor 🐘
    Did anyone notice if the paper said how many marks each question was worth?
  • Mog17
    Mog17 Registered Posts: 91 Regular contributor ⭐
    no....
  • *Jo
    *Jo Registered Posts: 509 Epic contributor 🐘
    Mog17 wrote: »
    Oh I i did all that too - not worried about the allocation/apportionment bit. It was the next question where you had to do the absorption rate that I messed up. I took the variable part out of the total overheads figure before calculating the rate. Which apparently isn't right. darn it.

    Oh dear, no i didnt do that. Never mind, hopefully you got the rest of the paper correct. If not im also back in december for a resit by the sounds of it lol.
  • pirate
    pirate Registered Posts: 469 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Andypandy wrote: »
    I got 2 years 2 months aswell for the payback.
    Should it be 2 years and 1.5 months?
    I put 3 months coz i was blinded by the 25 and assumed it was 25% of a year - was bogged eyed but found out after itsthe amount remaining divided by amount paid x 12
    so 25/200 = 0.125 * 12 = 1.5
  • A-Vic
    A-Vic Registered Posts: 6,970 Beyond epic contributor 🧙‍♂️
    mrspnut wrote: »
    There was an input of 400 tonnes, a normal loss of 12 tonnes and an output of 360 tonnes leaving 28 tonnes as an abnormal loss.

    agrees
  • Pinkjo
    Pinkjo Registered Posts: 88 Regular contributor ⭐
    Should it be 2 years and 1.5 months?
    I put 3 months coz i was blinded by the 25 and assumed it was 25% of a year - was bogged eyed but found out after itsthe amount remaining divided by amount paid x 12
    so 25/200 = 0.125 * 12 = 1.5

    That's what I put :001_smile:
  • hell's belle
    hell's belle Registered Posts: 11 New contributor 🐸
    I agree totally! I thought this was my "better" unit so god help us on Wednesday :eek:
  • *Jo
    *Jo Registered Posts: 509 Epic contributor 🐘
    Should it be 2 years and 1.5 months?
    I put 3 months coz i was blinded by the 25 and assumed it was 25% of a year - was bogged eyed but found out after itsthe amount remaining divided by amount paid x 12
    so 25/200 = 0.125 * 12 = 1.5

    think thats what i put, need to stop reading everyone elses answers, its making me worry what i put :001_rolleyes:
  • gregory
    gregory Registered Posts: 37 Regular contributor ⭐
    I did that way.
    0.8 less 0.3 gave me 0.5 as a contribution.
    So divided fixad cost by 0.5 gave me 625000 revenue.

    Make profit: (fixed cost + expecting profit)/contribution = 1025000

    I did all losses nearly like many of You but I didnt call this abnormal and normal and I calculated cost per tonne as at: 73960/400=184,9 but then i calculated by 388 which gave me 190, but in account I put on denit 400 and on credit side 28 then 360 and then 12 and (!!!!) called as P+L. My fault:thumbdown:

    Anyway looking forward to being surprised by FRA :laugh:
  • Andypandy
    Andypandy Registered Posts: 526 Epic contributor 🐘
    I'm off to revise the numbers of the ssap's that go with the rules for Wednesday,can't seem to gt them to sink in. Good luck with FRAs everyone!x
  • numbersishard
    numbersishard Registered Posts: 12 New contributor 🐸
    cdsp1980 wrote: »
    It is semi-variable

    I put variable, the line starts at fixed costs which are the same no matter the output
  • sparkspc
    sparkspc Registered Posts: 6 New contributor 🐸
    I didn't get 2 years 1 month - I thought it was (95ish) negative with the cash flow in year 3 of 135 - therefore about .7 of a year? (95/135) about 2 years 8 months. (39K NPV ish) but with a sub note about the £50000 not coming in until the end of year 3... I think there must have been two papers!! lol...
  • HayleyM
    HayleyM Registered Posts: 63 Regular contributor ⭐
    Hi,
    I got 2.125 years for the payback or 2 year and 1.5 months for the payback period. Is this right? Could I lose marks for not rounding if it is right.....:001_unsure:
  • Mog17
    Mog17 Registered Posts: 91 Regular contributor ⭐
    *Jo wrote: »
    Oh dear, no i didnt do that. Never mind, hopefully you got the rest of the paper correct. If not im also back in december for a resit by the sounds of it lol.

    Don't worry i'm sure you'll be fine! I'm hoping I won't fail the entire paper over that mistake so hopefully won't need to resit... I don't think I made any other major mistakes (fingers crossed) so still hopeful!!!!! Stay positive!!!!
  • RAR
    RAR Registered Posts: 3 New contributor 🐸
    Study materials

    Hi guys

    Pls tell me if the study materials are valid for only 18 months ????!!!

    Is this correct?:ohmy:
  • lsavage
    lsavage Registered Posts: 2 New contributor 🐸
    I got 3 years, 2months

    I am glad u put 3ys too.
    I put 3 yrs 1 mth.

    All of my mates put 2yrs 1mth, so know therefore got it completly wrong :mad2:
  • marknotgeorge
    marknotgeorge Registered Posts: 158 Dedicated contributor 🦉
    Hmm.

    Some I found simple, and some threw me. I've munged the process T account, and I think I used the target profit sales revenue instead of the break-even sales revenue when working out the margin of safety. It's a good job I showed lots and lots of working. I think most of the rest was OK. Shouldn't be too bad - I mean, if you can pass a financial paper without getting the trial balance to balance, I should be OK with this one? Right?
  • crse2006
    crse2006 Registered Posts: 9 New contributor 🐸
    Pinkjo wrote: »
    Yes, you're right! Normal loss was 12, abnormal was 28 (so total losses were 40 x £20 = £800)

    isnt abnormal loss done at cost so 190 not 20?
  • rumcheeka
    rumcheeka Registered Posts: 6 New contributor 🐸
    I feel like crying!! I shouldn't have looked on here, I've made silly mistakes, not reading the questions properly ie breakeven/sales revenue!! Oh well can't change now what I've written.

    On a plus note, we received our sim results for the ECR after our exams and I passed, no additional questions :-)

    Not looking forward to the FRA on Wednesday at all!!! I really need a light bulb moment but can't see me getting one before then.

    Good Luck all!!
  • debihargrave
    debihargrave Registered Posts: 33 Regular contributor ⭐
    mrspnut wrote: »
    No - total losses were 12 x £20 + 28 x £190 = £5,560

    i put input of 400 at £185 normal loss 12 tonnes at £20 and abnormal loss 28 tonnes at £20 also making my output 360 tonnes at £203.33
  • Esme
    Esme Registered Posts: 711 Epic contributor 🐘
    Abnormal loss is always at the same cost as output, so 190.
  • Pinkjo
    Pinkjo Registered Posts: 88 Regular contributor ⭐
    Esme wrote: »
    Abnormal loss is always at the same cost as output, so 190.

    I thought the clue was in the question, ie ALL losses are valued at £20. If it had been just normal loss I thought it would have said just "losses are valued at £20" and not "all losses" :confused1:
  • Esme
    Esme Registered Posts: 711 Epic contributor 🐘
    On the process account, did the labour and overhead costs go on two seperate lines on the debit side?
  • Esme
    Esme Registered Posts: 711 Epic contributor 🐘
    Pinkjo wrote: »
    I thought the clue was in the question, ie ALL losses are valued at £20. If it had been just normal loss I thought it would have said just "losses are valued at £20" and not "all losses" :confused1:

    Oh no... did it say all losses? You probably are right then! Oops!!
  • chris_b
    chris_b Registered Posts: 11 New contributor 🐸
    gregory wrote: »
    I did that way.
    0.8 less 0.3 gave me 0.5 as a contribution.
    So divided fixad cost by 0.5 gave me 625000 revenue.

    Make profit: (fixed cost + expecting profit)/contribution = 1025000

    I did all losses nearly like many of You but I didnt call this abnormal and normal and I calculated cost per tonne as at: 73960/400=184,9 but then i calculated by 388 which gave me 190, but in account I put on denit 400 and on credit side 28 then 360 and then 12 and (!!!!) called as P+L. My fault:thumbdown:

    Anyway looking forward to being surprised by FRA :laugh:

    i got 625000 for breakeven and 1025000 for target profit as well.Everyone else seems to have different answers to me and you breakeven and MOS.
Privacy Policy