[jeff]

Welcome to the Q1 2016 CPA Exam Study Group for BEC.

Some BLITZ videos to help your exams: https://www.another71.com/ninja-blitz

Jeff Elliott, CPA (KS) | Another71 | NINJA CPA | NINJA CMA | NINJA CPE

[Anonymous]

Maybe…I saw Roger use it in his videos as well. I wish I knew what it was! Making me crazy!

[FAR_WARS]

here: https://youtu.be/ovcWFQzm6yU?t=9m

FAR- 80
BEC- 75
AUD- 78
REG- ?

[monikernc]

Farwars, if i had to learn it from that video i would be confused, too. Hopefully, it gets better when he actually calculates the variances. this is why i stay away from becker. I think all he is talking about are the OH variances. I think roger does a better job and there are separate, shorter videos on types of variances. I like other miles videos but did not watch his on variances.

FAR 7/25/15 76!
AUD 10/30/15 93
BEC 2/27/16 82
REG 5/23/16 88!
Ninja Book and MCQ and the forum - all the way!!!
and a little thing i like to call, time and effort!
if you want things to change, you have to do something different

[Anonymous]

Feeling like I have been hit by a truck. Just finished going thru the OH variances and think I understand what you guys have been saying here. I think I am going to be stuck on that material for a while till I feel I can understand the logic and purpose behind the 4 way, 3 way and 2 way analysis.

[Anonymous]

Can someone explain Ninja MCQ #1312? The diagram says that on the V point there is more actual Fixed OH applied compared to the budgeted amount. What I do not seem to get is why more OH applied compared to the budgeted is a good thing. I get that if you have more volume then you can spread over more the fixed OH and that is a good thing,but why is more OH applied a good thing?

[FAR_WARS]

It would be like going out to dinner expecting to spend $50, and only spending $40. You applied $50, but only had to spend $40.

FAR- 80
BEC- 75
AUD- 78
REG- ?

[monikernc]

Cortes – you've got it. Fixed OH Volume variance = budgeted fixed OH – Applied OH, where Applied OH = POR * actual volume.

A factory that sits idle still has to cover its fixed overhead costs, like rent and insurance. At 0 level of production, applied overhead would = POR * 0 = 0 meaning none of the fixed OH was offset by production. Increasing level or volume of production to > 0 means they can apply that volume to fixed OH costs. If they could run at full volume, or capacity, at all times, they could apply all of that volume to fixed OH, and their fixed OH costs are more likely to be covered in full by the volume produced. However, they estimate a POR by estimated costs/estimated volume, they apply with POR * actual volume. If actual costs = estimated costs then the applied OH amount will be = fixed OH. if actual fixed OH costs are greater than estimated then they may have under or over applied depending on actual volume. When actual volume is greater, as in this question, it would help cover any amount of fixed OH costs that are greater than estimated.

FAR 7/25/15 76!
AUD 10/30/15 93
BEC 2/27/16 82
REG 5/23/16 88!
Ninja Book and MCQ and the forum - all the way!!!
and a little thing i like to call, time and effort!
if you want things to change, you have to do something different

[Anonymous]

Farwars thanks for the reply. I think I finally got it. I think that when the explanation and the diagram say that more OH is applied they are saying that the standard (predetermined) OH was applied more times because there was more output. From what I got yesterday the volume variance is part of the Fixed OH and in terms of Fixed OH more volume does not equal more cost, the overall cost remains the same.no matter how much volume there is. That is why actual greater volume is looked as a positive variance, bc at some Fixed OH cost there was more volume, and more volume means that you can spread over the fixed cost between more units therefore yielding a lesser per unit fixed cost. In an example I THINK it looks like this:

Budgeted or standard volume : 10,000
Budgeted or standard Fixed OH : 10,000 ($1 per unit bc there was 10,000 budgeted volume)

Actual volume :11,000
Actual FIxed OH: 10,500 (at 1$ standard or budgeted rate)

In this example we would have applied more OH since there was more volume:
Volume Variance = Fixed budgeted OH 10,000 – Actual applied OH 11,000 (11,000 * $1)
= 1,000 favorable

The 1$ budgeted rate was applied more times (1,000 more) and the fixed OH was spread over more units without necessarily increasing the Fixed OH by the increased output. At least I think that is the analysis of the MCQ #1312

[Anonymous]

So is there anyone that can actually tell me what the 3 way and 4 way variance mean? I can calculate them but have no idea how to interpret it. Is it calculate the flexible budget variance? Sorry for all the questions, the variance section kills me…

[Anonymous]

Someone please tell me that I am not going to see crazy Becker-length problems on the actual exam?

[FAR_WARS]

Im going to have to skip the insane Becker questions and do wiley/ninja instead if I am actually going to make it through everything before my test. I will still use the becker text/notes for reference however as they are the best I have found.

Its got to be just different ways we could go about calculating variances for OH. Variance analysis is for internal use, so mgmt can decide which variance model is most appropriate for making a certain decision.

1 way = Net Overhead Variance
2 way = Budget, Volume
3 way = Spending, Efficiency, Volume
4 way =Spending, Efficiency, Budget, Volume

FAR- 80
BEC- 75
AUD- 78
REG- ?

[Anonymous]

Basic question, but this has screwed me up before. I googled it but becker always has terms in their material the internet wont include. So…

Current Ratio = current assets/current liabilities.

Please list off a # of accounts found under both that are in fact current and not long term. Thanks!

[monikernc]

Farwars – i went back and ninja refers to 2 way, 3 way variances for OH but i do not recall any questions asking with that terminology. If they want an overhead variance they ask for it by name/type. I am not bothering to remember what is a 2 way, etc. I just know the variances.

FAR 7/25/15 76!
AUD 10/30/15 93
BEC 2/27/16 82
REG 5/23/16 88!
Ninja Book and MCQ and the forum - all the way!!!
and a little thing i like to call, time and effort!
if you want things to change, you have to do something different

[monikernc]

i know many of you are waiting for scores tonight and wish the best for all of you. i have admired your ability to move onto next exam's review while waiting. that is something i don't think i could do!!!

75s for all!!!!

FAR 7/25/15 76!
AUD 10/30/15 93
BEC 2/27/16 82
REG 5/23/16 88!
Ninja Book and MCQ and the forum - all the way!!!
and a little thing i like to call, time and effort!
if you want things to change, you have to do something different

[Perkunas]

@ KLMCPA and others:

I posted on here 4 weeks ago to piss and moan that my actual BEC exam seemed much more difficult (and *different*) than what I prepared for by using Becker.

I'm happy — and a little confused — to report that I scored higher on BEC than any other exam with a 92.

I think I scored ~82% on the 72 MCQs in the first final exam. I felt they were easy and I sped through 'em pretty quickly and was very confident like 4 days before my exam.

Then I tried the MCQs from final exam 2 just a day before my exam, and I scored maybe 70% and felt they were very different and more difficult than all the normal Becker questions.

THIS IS WHAT I POSTED 4 WKS AGO, IMMEDIATELY AFTER MY EXAM:

I took BEC yesterday and felt like reporting this to the community: my exam had a lot of material that was either A) not covered by Becker or B) was merely mentioned by Becker but definitely not anything I would have ever expected. I felt like exam did not address any of the main topics and I did not feel like Becker prepared me on this attempt.

I passed the other 3 on first attempts using Becker and creating my own study notes. My approach to this exam was no different. I came out of the exam feeling like I studied Spanish and then took a test on French. Very frustrateing to say the least.

“HelpIsHereVictoryIsNear” posted this same thing a few days ago.

I had multiple questions that addressed topics from FAR, and multiple questions that addressed stuff from REG.

I have no advice I'm mostly just venting. Perhaps just flip to the last few pages of every chapter where you have no highlighting or notes… pick the most minute detail on the page, and then memorize that little turd nugget.

A: 87 (5/15)
F: 86 (8/15)
R: 90 (10/15)
B: 92 (1/16)

[Author]

Replies