Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by asha2)
    What did you get for question 4 ?
    I beasted out 3 pages, wrote about gearing, then crossed it out because there wasn't a proposed gearing level. Repeated myself often before a shatty conclusion.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    what marks do you think we will get for the calculations, in june/jan 2010 to ARR answer was worth 8marks and 2 for writing about the results. do you think this one as there was 2 equations will be about 10-12 for the answers then 6-8 for analysing?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ithinkimcool)
    what marks do you think we will get for the calculations, in june/jan 2010 to ARR answer was worth 8marks and 2 for writing about the results. do you think this one as there was 2 equations will be about 10-12 for the answers then 6-8 for analysing?
    As the calculations count as application, calculating both correctly would probably fall under "good application" giving 7 marks. Writing a statement about them would push it to "good application AND limited analysis" hitting L4, approx 10 marks, and giving a slightly more in-depth analysis, would score "both good," L5, 13 marks. Being an 18 marker, evaluation was needed for the final 5. Hope that helps somewhat.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I didn't write enough for Q2 or Q3, but I got all the calculations right and just tried to apply and analyse them.

    I wrote six pages for the last one, god knows how. I knew it was worth a lot and I always have loads of points to make, but I remembered some of the advice I'd learnt from here and did 2/3 points per bullet point (for, against, justification) but only had about 35-40 minutes for it, so my conclusion is pretty terrible! In the Jan one I only wrote about a page and a half when this one is such an important question!!

    So relieved it wasn't as bad as last time, I got an E in Jan, so any improvement on that would be brilliant, preferably C/B, but the grade boundaries are so so close!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eswift)
    As the calculations count as application, calculating both correctly would probably fall under "good application" giving 7 marks. Writing a statement about them would push it to "good application AND limited analysis" hitting L4, approx 10 marks, and giving a slightly more in-depth analysis, would score "both good," L5, 13 marks. Being an 18 marker, evaluation was needed for the final 5. Hope that helps somewhat.
    Well actually the mark scheme for june 10 when it was a 10 marker for AAR was " L5 Correct calculation expressed as a percentage, 9 marks, for just that one calculation Then for the final mark it was just, state: the ARR meets the Directorís requirements of an ARR of at least 12%.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by asha2)
    Hey everyone ,I'm new here.Im stressing so much guys because you lot are getting different answers to what I got...can someone please rensure me of weather any of my answers are right...
    For Q1.The two possible reasons I gave for decentralization was that sound vision had many stores so therefore decentralization would allow managers to make decisions on what local consumers want.This would reduce stock cost because they wouldn't be holding unnecessary product that is not needed by the local market.
    Another reason is that having profit centers would encourage managers to generate high profits because the bonuses offered by sound vision would encourage the work force to be efficient in the way they generate profit..

    Q2.I dont know what the eff I did :?But I think I got the right calculation for the NPV.But I didnt total it so therefore do I lose marks?
    I evaluated it saying that NPV isn't really realistic,because it relies on the prediction of cash flow and also other factors such as the economic growth and for the payback I multiplied eachyears cash flow with three years but I forgot to divide the Intial Investment with the profit I got which was 26.3 m I think :/ & I randomly got an answer of 2.8months??
    But I evaluted it So do I lose any marks??
    ..
    The third Q..I dont know what I was doing,but I attempted it by saying:Marketing budget was needed for reasearch and development of the online store and also I talked about how the amount spent on research developments is lower than industrial average so they need to spen more on there marketing,and for a weird reason I talked about how finiace is not the only department that needs finaicing to meet the objectives ,HR also needs it because they need to recurit.

    WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK ? AS I'M DOING ALL MY BUISNESS A-LEVELS IN JUST ONE YEAR (so dont laugh at my crappy answers)
    wats the point in stressing, u've done it now so u jus gota forget about it n focus on unit4! :P
    anyway...for q1 i got the same points as u n jus elaborated on them, hope it was enough for 10marks, i wrote 1 A4 side

    erm q2 i think u wud drop marks if u dont get the right answer, but it wud only b by a mark or 2 so dont worry. I wrote a definition of NPV and payback n a statement sayin they are realistic objectives. I also managed to evaluate payback n NPV the same way u did

    Q3 was a rubbish question, i actually forgot wat i wrote but i got confused so i jus wrote about anythin to do with marketing budgets and objectives n all that lol
    i did write a lot about promotion and advetising on the internet as well in order to promote their online store. I also said how it impacts HR as well cus they wana recruit young staff in order to attract younger customer....something like that anyway

    Hope this helps!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sally12379823)
    Well actually the mark scheme for june 10 when it was a 10 marker for AAR was " L5 Correct calculation expressed as a percentage, 9 marks, for just that one calculation Then for the final mark it was just, state: the ARR meets the Directorís requirements of an ARR of at least 12%.
    Yeah, so the calculations probably would hit full application and analysis in that case, still, seeing that the question was "To what extent do you believe these to be reasonable" Im sure the evaluation is still needed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eswift)
    Yeah, so the calculations probably would hit full application and analysis in that case, still, seeing that the question was "To what extent do you believe these to be reasonable" Im sure the evaluation is still needed.
    yeah defo, not sure if it would get full application and analysis, but you would defo need to evaluate to get the further marks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    for question 4 as part of my evaluation i talked about how it depended on how much of the profits the mobile leader would want in exchange for their expertise , would this reduce their competitivness blah . do you think that is valid ??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i hate how this exam forces you to rush and panic!

    What is so wrong with giving us 2 hours and allowing us to breath and plan answers effectively, so we dont tend towards rushing answers and missing stuff from the case study.

    thats what i hate most about these exams!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cal Antan)
    i hate how this exam forces you to rush and panic!

    What is so wrong with giving us 2 hours and allowing us to breath and plan answers effectively, so we dont tend towards rushing answers and missing stuff from the case study.

    thats what i hate most about these exams!
    Yeah. I agree with this.

    I think the ability to read through the case study SLOWER will help you get a feel for the company, as opposed to the rapid skim-and-highlight technique so many people employ.

    It's amazing how much good those 15 minutes would do so many people...

    The Grade Boundaries would be, I'd imagine, much higher if this was the case... But people would do much better anyway, so I think that's justified.


    Just imagine coming out of your exam and NOT having a throbbing pain in your hand
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jesstonto)
    is it only my computer thats taking forever to open these?
    They opened very quickly thanks a lot
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    im so f**king stupid!!! I didn't even mention pay back which was so easy to calculate, totally slipped my mind. And I thought it was clever to times the discount factors by each years values!!! so my NPV was had an extra 0! Hope this doesnt effect my marks for this question to much. Literally everyone one in the exam hall were panicking on that question!! Is it right to talk about other stuff like centralisation for Q2, like saying it could effect company objectives?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This exam was a total f*ck up. Got a C last time, this time i'll be lucky even if I scrape a D.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    for question 4 i worked out ARR just as an extra calculation which turned out to be 20%. I said its a fairly good annual return on investment so that was one of my 'for the arguement' ... reckon that would be in the mark scheme or did i waste valuable time?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theghm)
    for question 4 i worked out ARR just as an extra calculation which turned out to be 20%. I said its a fairly good annual return on investment so that was one of my 'for the arguement' ... reckon that would be in the mark scheme or did i waste valuable time?
    Thats good
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by haha16)
    for question 4 as part of my evaluation i talked about how it depended on how much of the profits the mobile leader would want in exchange for their expertise , would this reduce their competitivness blah . do you think that is valid ??
    I said that in my evaluation as well
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For question 4 i wrote for my advantages that they would benefit from economies of scale. Then for my second point i said that the proposed move will see a reduction in wages, and analyzed to say it would decrease there costs and profit margins will increase in what is a competitive market. Then for my disadvantages i said that there current acid test ratio was poor so they should sort this out and not move at the moment, particularly as it was getting worse. Then for my other point i said they should not go ahead with it because they would need to shut 150 book stores, which were still competitive and in a stable market. Is that right, as I am a little unsure about what i wrote?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jdh12345)
    For question 4 i wrote for my advantages that they would benefit from economies of scale. Then for my second point i said that the proposed move will see a reduction in wages, and analyzed to say it would decrease there costs and profit margins will increase in what is a competitive market. Then for my disadvantages i said that there current acid test ratio was poor so they should sort this out and not move at the moment, particularly as it was getting worse. Then for my other point i said they should not go ahead with it because they would need to shut 150 book stores, which were still competitive and in a stable market. Is that right, as I am a little unsure about what i wrote?
    There are no right and wrongs when concluding, just whether you support it or not with the evidence. You could easily go both ways with this one, i seen it as more for, as profititability was currently declining and competition increasing, and the financial figures and market data support largely supported it. However, your points are just as valid.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jdh12345)
    For question 4 i wrote for my advantages that they would benefit from economies of scale. Then for my second point i said that the proposed move will see a reduction in wages, and analyzed to say it would decrease there costs and profit margins will increase in what is a competitive market. Then for my disadvantages i said that there current acid test ratio was poor so they should sort this out and not move at the moment, particularly as it was getting worse. Then for my other point i said they should not go ahead with it because they would need to shut 150 book stores, which were still competitive and in a stable market. Is that right, as I am a little unsure about what i wrote?
    They said they wanted to benefit from economies of scale but their unit price index was will higher than the industry average (industry average was 94)

    Their acid ratio went from 1.3 to 0.8. This was a good thing, it reflected that she had implemented JIT in her plans and she had lost 0.5 illiquid assets. 0.8 is still healthy on the acid ratio

    My final reccommendation was to keep the book stores as they had high market share, unlike with CD'S, books and technology
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: June 14, 2011

University open days

  • University of Lincoln
    Mini Open Day at the Brayford Campus Undergraduate
    Wed, 19 Dec '18
  • University of East Anglia
    UEA Mini Open Day Undergraduate
    Fri, 4 Jan '19
  • Bournemouth University
    Undergraduate Mini Open Day Undergraduate
    Wed, 9 Jan '19
Poll
Were you ever put in isolation at school?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.