PEV Mon 18 June 2007
System
Posts: 100,534 🤖 Admin 🤖
I have completed this paper.
I will ask for proof readers next week.
I thought it was a fair paper and went into the appropriate depth on the tasks.
I liked the use of narrative tasks to assess both the differences between marginal and absorption costing in a standard costing environment, and the sub-division of fixed overhead volume variances.
I noted the concerns expressed here regarding gearing but consider this is appropriate to test.
I make a couple of minor observations rather than challenges to the right to ask such questions
To sum up, this paper got my thumbs up.
sandy.hood@chichester.ac.uk
I will ask for proof readers next week.
I thought it was a fair paper and went into the appropriate depth on the tasks.
I liked the use of narrative tasks to assess both the differences between marginal and absorption costing in a standard costing environment, and the sub-division of fixed overhead volume variances.
I noted the concerns expressed here regarding gearing but consider this is appropriate to test.
I make a couple of minor observations rather than challenges to the right to ask such questions
-
I do not consider ratios based on net assets are as useful as those based on the total capital employed.
-
I also consider that gearing is really a measures of the corporate structure, and though it may be a current topic as private equity firms are scrutinised by the media, I think departmental managers rarely have any say in the way their projects are financed and as such their performance is better measured using other ratios.
To sum up, this paper got my thumbs up.
sandy.hood@chichester.ac.uk
0
Comments
-
Re:PEV Mon 18 June 2007
DFS and PCR please oh great sandy0 -
Re:PEV Mon 18 June 2007
Hi Sandy,
If you are doing PCR, I would really appreciate a copy.
Thanks
0 -
Re:PEV Mon 18 June 2007
Sandy
I got my knickers in a twist over PEV section 2. I had decided to use the capital employed figure but also did the calculations for net assets as well. I think I got all my other ratios right, but I was in such a tiswas, that I think both my reports are rubbish, I definitely did not redraft my whole report again. My lifecycle and target costings were ok I think, but maybe not very concise. Do you think with 2 rubbish reports this could be the different between competent and not competent in section 2?
Gillianne0