Nightmare PEV

Nightmare PEV

indeed it was a nightmare,i got a profit but it was just too much i dont think it was right. i didnt know what to write in the memo ended up writting alot of crap.

Nightmare PEV

DHewlett,<BR>I am happy to hear that you have similar answers in section 2!<BR>As far as I have understood reconciliations, you always need all variances except Fixed O/H Volume Variance for the reconciliation, which makes that 7 altogether.<BR><BR>In my opinion those were ALL adverse, and therefore adding them to Standard total Cost at Actual Output, you got exactly Actual total cost at actual output.<BR><BR>in the further tasks, the first manager complained that the material price v. suffered, because of inflation (basically). I reckon that by recalculating the material price at November values, that accounted for so much, that the original adverse variance was completely "used up" by that and more, i.e., if the had budgeted using the November values of the prices, the materials would have come out with a favourable (1Kodd) variance.<BR><BR>The second manager moaned about the breaking down of the machine, and therefore a part of the machine hours were wasted on washing the machine, and so were 500 labour hours. I think in both cases the hours lost were to be multiplied by their standard cost, and that made up the variance part caused by the breakdown, the rest was variance due to "other reasons" (PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT/CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG!!!!)<BR><BR>Then there was a third "moaner" making out the variance was because of too much overtime (problems with recruiting), and that to my mind could not be proven because no data concerning budgeted overtime hours or rates was available.<BR><BR>What else was there?<BR><BR>Please all people, who read this, join in and make your comments, the more, the clearer the picture????!!!<BR><BR>Conny

Nightmare PEV

I think it was getting at outputs per employee for the physical outputs question. I put that, but I couldn't think of anything else so just put some random gibberish... percentage of rejects to finished goods, labour capacity, etc, etc...

Nightmare PEV

What a nightmare! <BR><BR>Wasn't sure exactly what I was supposed to be reconciling in the first part? Can someone explain that to me?<BR><BR>Also I was stumped on the 3 physical measuring thingys??<BR><BR>And then the second part I ended up with a profit and recommended they get rid of A. Not sure why??<BR><BR>Has anyone managed to scan the paper for Sandy to see yet as I might be able to??

Nightmare PEV

i must have made a boo boo as well. it didnt say anything about reducing production so i revised the pand l on the 22000 and 30000 units. did the high low technique for selling and distribution costs came out with something like 907000 for selling and distribution expenses and an overall loss. didnt make it clear in the wording what they wanted of us never mind the ratios mighnt be enough to pass . only finished part of the memo ran out of time through trying to find the variable costs of selling and distribution .

Nightmare PEV

i also got 1 favourable variance and mine did balance but i had to go back and just managed it although didn't quite manage to answer all of the last memo and i really wanted to get the statement to balance. spent to much time on this i think

Nightmare PEV

Oh who knows....... i just did some creative accounting basically. Now I had all advers variances then re-did and got 1 advers int he FOH section.... mine did not reconcile. I spent too much time on that, and then just had to move on to section 2.

Nightmare PEV

I did get that, and at the end operating profit 180000 ish...<BR><BR>So the turnover was something like Factory B plus 40% of Factory A, then the direct labour the same way. The materials were also the same except I think you had to deduct 5% off the total as well.<BR><BR>Production O/H were what was given in the question plus Factory B, wasn't it? Same goes for Selling, I think, and also Admin, except that I added the closure costs of £250000 to that. So in the end, I think, there was less op. profit, than there was before for Factory B only, and also compared to the total A and B before, the op profit was worse.<BR><BR>I whaffled a lot as well, but can somebody comment on that you could really only use Net Pr % and Gross Pr % to make the comparisons between before and after? B/S could not be done could it?<BR><BR>We chatted today, and it seems that some of us had two favourable variances in the first part, and they still managed to balance their reconciliation.<BR><BR>Can anybody comment on if all the variances were adverse, or is it true that there were two favourable ones???<BR><BR>Jumping to the very end: what on earth are three "physical types of output" ???? (or something like that), that the director wanted to know???? And what should we have said about what the problem was with financial variances? Is it that they are based on budget, and budget can be wrong???<BR><BR>Please let me know, while I am revising away for DFS...<BR><BR>Conny

Nightmare PEV

I got a profit on the revised p&l but at first i had a loss but then i went over the sales and distr costs as they were variable to turnover whatever that means?? so i did a percentage and it got that figure down so there was an op profit in the end???? Waffled so much crap though in the memo, however i recommended that they not close coz once i did another op profit ratio on the revised p&l it was the same %......... <BR><BR>what did you get fo revised turnover £3 370,000 ish???????

Nightmare PEV

After speaking to our teacher about Section 2 of the PEV paper she thought the topic shouldnt even be on the paper and that 'factories closing' used to be in a separate unit that has been removed from the AAT when the sylabus changed recently.<BR><BR>I think I will be making a complaint about the factory closing question - that it was unfair to put it on the paper - when there is nothing in any text books to explain how to do it!