The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

AQA BUSS3/BUSS4 Revision Thread

Scroll to see replies

Original post by nick_dyne14
what was the calculation for gearing? what numbers did people use because i'm trying to remember what i calculated


Original gearing
[700/(700+1000] x 100 = 41.18%

New gearing
[1000/(1000+1000)] x 100 = 50%
Original post by miacat
Can someone please clarify this? Surely going from -0.9 to -0.7 means the service is becoming more price elastic?!

0 = perfectly inelastic so the closer to 0 the more inelastic, falling from 0.9 to 0.7 means its more inelastic
Original post by miacat
But that doesn't make sense. The demand is already inelastic, I know that, but because the figure is getting closer to 0 it is becoming more elastic...surely


The closer to 0, the more inelastic. If it gets above 1, that's when it gets elastic. In theory, if you had a coefficient of 0, there would be no change at all which can be described as perfectly inelastic.
Original post by JoshFlySon
0 = perfectly inelastic so the closer to 0 the more inelastic, falling from 0.9 to 0.7 means its more inelastic


****.
did anyone manage to use Ansoff's matrix?
Original post by BusinessLover18
I spoke about threat of substitutes for Porter's Five Forces, but I realised that wasnt an appropriate part of the model to apply, have i lost a lot of marks because I referred to it a lot but still made valid points, I was meant to use intense rivalry and threat of new entry :s-smilie:


Someone please tell me whether you would think I'd lose marks? I was so nervous in that exam because of the questions
Just realised on the front of the aqa answer booklets i forgot to pit how many booklets i used. I only used one bit will it matter?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by cfheaarrlie
ARR was done wrong by almost everyone, the figures they gave you were net, you didn't need to add anything up or take it away. 197 was the CCF / 4 / 300 = 16% NOT 15.16%


You still had to take off the cost of the initial investment - they did not take this into account otherwise they would have began negative up until payback point.
Original post by cfheaarrlie
ARR was done wrong by almost everyone, the figures they gave you were net, you didn't need to add anything up or take it away. 197 was the CCF / 4 / 300 = 16% NOT 15.16%


??
I have totally screwed up on this exam! Please if i said demand is price elastic would i lose lots of marks? And if I said the threat of substitutes rather than intense rivalry will i lose marks again?
Original post by BusinessLover18
Someone please tell me whether you would think I'd lose marks? I was so nervous in that exam because of the questions


All depends on the strength of the argument you related this theory to. What was your original point?
Original post by JoshFlySon
??


15.16% is right no?

(profit/number of years) / initial investment = Ans x 100 = ARR
I did workings out but for some reason I crossed it out because I thought it was wrong then I realised it was right, but then I realised I didn't have enough time to rewrite it again I just made a little note to ignore the crossing outs. Will the examiner still mark my working out.
Original post by Joejj2183
15.16% is right no?

(profit/number of years) / initial investment = Ans x 100 = ARR


yeah that's what I put
Original post by ryanroks1
All depends on the strength of the argument you related this theory to. What was your original point?


So I was basically making a point about how there is more competition and with budget airlines, this would mean there would be an increased threat of substitute products available and in brackets I put (Porter's Five Forces)

Then for one of the questions, I believe Q2, I discussed about how the demand is becoming price elastic, but thinking that it was bad, I then said this is again because of the competition??
Original post by vickyife1
I did workings out but for some reason I crossed it out because I thought it was wrong then I realised it was right, but then I realised I didn't have enough time to rewrite it again I just made a little note to ignore the crossing outs. Will the examiner still mark my working out.


Did you still use the calculation's result in your answer? Regardless of what calculations you do, if you haven't used them to support a line of analysis then they'll still not score GAp. Providing you just crossed out the working out and still had the value in your answer, and it was utilised, then you'd get full credit.
Original post by ryanroks1
Did you still use the calculation's result in your answer? Regardless of what calculations you do, if you haven't used them to support a line of analysis then they'll still not score GAp. Providing you just crossed out the working out and still had the value in your answer, and it was utilised, then you'd get full credit.

Yes I did
Original post by BusinessLover18
So I was basically making a point about how there is more competition and with budget airlines, this would mean there would be an increased threat of substitute products available and in brackets I put (Porter's Five Forces)

Then for one of the questions, I believe Q2, I discussed about how the demand is becoming price elastic, but thinking that it was bad, I then said this is again because of the competition??


You'd still gain analysis marks for the strength of that first point. I don't think they'd credit the use of Porter since the situation doesn't really relate to substitutes (unless you explained it in a very crafty way), but you don't have to use theory to get full analysis marks anyway.

As it was price inelastic, they'd probably ignore that particular point but you'd still get recognition for putting forward a balanced argument. So, if your first point was strong, you don't need to worry too much about this :smile:
Yes I did, I said that they should go with the proposal as the current market they are in is declining.
The new market is growing by 23% allows them to increase there customer base. This means that they might be able to scope some market share and benefit from rising revenue which will ultimately allow them to achieve the objective of profit growth l.
Original post by ryanroks1
You'd still gain analysis marks for the strength of that first point. I don't think they'd credit the use of Porter since the situation doesn't really relate to substitutes (unless you explained it in a very crafty way), but you don't have to use theory to get full analysis marks anyway.

As it was price inelastic, they'd probably ignore that particular point but you'd still get recognition for putting forward a balanced argument. So, if your first point was strong, you don't need to worry too much about this :smile:


Thank you for your help! Made me feel a bit more calmer now, but it all depends on results day :smile:

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you