[gennatay]

I had a question about an MCQ, so I asked a Gleim professor and their response left me with a bad feeling like they were tapping me on the hand for asking. Take a look, am I being overly sensitive about their comment…

Fact Pattern:
The estimated unit costs for Cole Co. using absorption (full) costing and planning to produce and sell at a level of 12,000 units per month are as follows:

Estimated
Cost Item
Unit Cost
Direct materials
$32
Direct labor
20
Variable manufacturing overhead
15
Fixed manufacturing overhead
6
Variable selling
3
Fixed selling
4
Product Question:
Cole’s estimated conversion costs per unit are

a: $35
b: $41
c: $48
d: $67
Your Answer: b
Correct Answer: b

Your Question: If the company was using absorption costing, why wasn’t direct materials taken into account?

Response:
Please note that the answer explanation says that conversion costs are costs spent converting the direct materials. Conversion costs include direct labor and manufacturing overhead. Direct labor and manufacturing costs are costs that *convert* raw materials or direct materials into finished goods.

***

The goal at Gleim is to position all of our candidates for success. One of the many ways we do this is by giving our customers access to Gleim accounting experts via this Question and Answer service.

The Gleim self-study method is designed to prepare you to pass your exam under actual exam conditions. Part of this preparation includes independently working through our materials and the questions that they generate for you so that you develop an ability to problem solve on your own, just as you will have to do during the exam. Therefore, although we want to answer your questions, we also want to refrain from providing you with a level of support now that will inhibit your ability to function independently on exam day.

As a result, this service is designed to provide you with the ability to submit a reasonable number of inquiries about Gleim materials. It is not an unlimited service. However, most candidates find that our materials and study method provides them with all of the information they need to be successful and therefore submit very few questions.

In keeping with all of the above, the types of inquiries that we will not answer are:

1. General accounting questions or requests for in-depth explanations of general concepts
2. Questions already answered in the FAQ.
3. Questions on information outside of the scope of the exam
4. Hypothetical questions
5. Questions on material not produced by Gleim
6. Questions that disclose any information covered in a nondisclosure agreement

If you have any questions about this policy, please contact your Personal Counselor at …

 

 

[Jaane]

Sorry that you had to go through this. I don't think you are being overly sensitive at all.

You paid your money for a review program that includes a Q&A type of service, so being chastised for actually using the service would leave a “bad taste” in my mouth as well. In the future, maybe you could post your questions about MCQs on A71. I'm sure others here will be much kinder than whoever wrote that response on Gleim's behalf.

Good luck.

[Justdoit2014]

Gleim tends to react in this manner. Their personal counselor's do not add any value, but I must admit their material is good and prepares you well. Don't dwell too much about it, jut move on.

FAR - 80 (Roger + Wiley TB) May 2014
AUD - 82 (Roger + Gleim TB + Wiley TB) August 2014
REG - 79 (Gleim + Gleim TB) November 2014
BEC - 85 (Gleim + Gleim TB) January 2015

[Tux]

I also had a bad experience with Gleim and would NOT recommend them because of it.

A few years ago, I purchased their course to prepare for the Enrolled Agent exam.

When I asked questions about why certain answers was incorrect, the responses I received were very brief and non-explanatory.

I was told that they were not here to teach me the material.

Yes, I was offended.

I never took the EA exam because I had too much confusion about why certain answers were right or wrong.

**** I was highly disappointed in the level of support that I received from Gleim. ****

I had already taken college courses in individual tax, corporate tax and tax research, so I wasn't totally clueless, but I still needed help.

So, instead, I went back to school to prepare for the CPA exam. And, here I am studying for the CPA and SOOOO grateful for the support that I've found along the way!!

FAR - 86 - 2/27/14
AUD - 75 - 5/29/14
BEC - 80 - 8/31/14
REG - 89 - 2/27/15
Praise Jesus! I'm done!!

Study resources:
Becker
Wiley test bank

[nicole2035]

Gleim is very good in my opinion, but they do have a ton of jargon that makes it hard to interpret their explanations. They send that response to everyone haha. On their questions, when you go to ‘feedback/question' (forget exactly what it's called but it's linked under the question), you can see if other candidates have asked about the question. They'll have a FAQ on some specific questions, and that's when you get that response, when someone has already asked your question and the further explanation is already available.

Don't take it personally. Also you can always look up the exact question in google, Gleim originally wrote the Wiley books so a lot of times you can find the original Wiley explanation that tends to be a bit friendlier. Gleim doesn't cost that much and it shouldn't be expected any material basically has a personal counselor ready to answer any and everything. Thsoe personal counselors are just sales people/customer service with no accounting background. It's called self study for a reason, you have to break down the explanation given and look up things you don't know occasionally. Trust me, I know your frustration 100%

[sdcat23]

I think Gleim's answer was fine. Conversion costs include raw materials and overheard not direct materials. what else do you need them to tell you?

[gennatay]

It wasn't the answer to my question that I had issue with, it was all the extra commentary afterwards. This isn't the first time I've received a short answer from them basically saying “read the answer explanation”.

[sdcat23]

I used Gleim also. i just checked all my Q&As and the answers they gave me were one or two sentences. that extra commentary seems like some generic language they added recently, i wouldnt sweat it if i were you.

[Excel14]

I've had experience with both Gleim and CPAExcel. CPAExcel has mentoring from actual professors, so if you need feedback from subject matter experts, they are good in that regard. As some have mentioned on this thread, Gleim's “personal counselors” are NOT subject matter experts, hence the pat response you received.

BEC (2/28/16) ----- 78
FAR (09/10/16)-----
AUD
REG

CIA, CGAP, CFE

[mla1169]

I think the commentary after is probably just a boilerplate/signature that they are supposed to use and not directed at you specifically.

But that said it sure does sound like they discourage people from using their personal counselors which makes me wonder why exactly they offer the service?

FAR- 77
AUD -49, 71, 84
REG -56,75!
BEC -75

Massachusetts CPA (non reporting) since 3/12.

[Anonymous]

Don't dwell on it, and as was previously suggested, post on this board to get thoughtful analysis.

[mw798]

Wow, this is a complete opposite from Becker when even if it was a dumb question I got very prompt, thorough, and helpful responses from licensed CPAs. They even responded to me on Saturdays and Sundays. Now that was service!

[mw798]

Here's is how Becker responded to one of my questions, this is what you should expect when you are paying good money:

Thanks for contacting us. Our new system for answering questions does not necessarily include the question with the reply. So I have pasted your question down below.

There is no discrepancy here. It is just something that MANY people fail to pick up in the lecture (that I really have to emphasize in my live classes). NORMALLY, you would be correct. HOWEVER, in this case, the National Instructor specifically said that the weighted average method is used for inventories (since it is the best approximation, ie, a proxy, for the historical cost). Since the inventory is done weighted average, cost of goods sold has to be done the same way. If you go back and look at wherever you studied foreign currency (ie, Advanced Accounting), you will find several examples of this little peculiarity of the temporal/remeasurement method.

We are still trying to understand our new system. As far as I know, with our new system, login in and asking a follow up question on the same case will reopen the case (I am closing it after I finish my answer). Since I am not sure exactly what you are seeing (I think there is a skeleton email saying that I have answered OR there may be a real email that includes my answer), I am sending this response as an email ALSO. Please log in to see the answer and ask any followup questions; do not just reply to my email. If that does not work, do reply to my email and I will transfer your followup question to the system. We will eventually figure out what we are doing.

If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to ask. That is what we are here for – to help you pass the exam.

Remember that the Becker approach does work. The approach consists of the text, the MC questions on Passmaster (previously, now called the course software), the Passmaster simulations and exams, BeckerKnowledgebase (now called the Support Center), and AskBeckerAQuestion, all combined. Please take full advantage of all of these great resources.

Mike Meriwether MBA CPA MTax

Passed Levels I and II of the CFA Exam; Level III Candidate

Top 96 in US on May 1980 CPA Exam; 1st or 2nd in Texas for 1980

Becker Instructor Since 1980

Retired Senior Faculty Keller Graduate School (Accounting and Information Technology)

The Becker Academic Support Team

Question

I am using the latest Becker for my studies and the Foreign currency accounting chapter of F2 says that when using the remeasurement method on the I/S the balance sheet related items s/b under the historical rate (Depreciation/PP&E; Cost of good sold/inventory & Amortization/bonds & intangibles), however, when giving a specific example on page F2-51 there seems to be a discrepancy on this. The Depreciation expense on the IS is listed under the historical rate and so is its contra account (accum. depr.) BUT the Cost of Goods Sold on the same example is listed under the Weighted average rate and so is its related B/S account Inventories (at cost). Shouldn't both be listed under the historical rate as per the lecture on page F2-48?

[Anonymous]

I like becker but I have to say, you must have had a different instructor than I did. Replies usually take several days for me.

[Skynet]

I am curently using Gleim. Never really used the Personal Counselor. I don't believe they are accounting experts but more like customer's account support.

Never really had an issue with the review course. Helped me passed two sections so far so no complaints.

All I can say is that, just ignore it. Your main concern should be if the review course is helping you comprehend the materials enabling you to pass.

[Java230]

Like people said, don't dwell on it but I think their response is not appropriate, they advertised help with content and you paid big $$ for the course, their responses sound like they didn't want to help you at all. I tend to dwell on things, that is just me. Anyway, here is how Becker treated a similar question i had, note that the person who responded attached extra homework that i had to submit to make sure that i understood the response. Becker is very good, i was very happy with them.

MY QUESTION:

I am still confused on if we should include variable SG&A expenses when calculating the contribution margin (clearly variable SG&A is included in contribution margin). However, later on it says that the only difference between contribution (variable) and absorption method is the treatment of fixed mfg overhead (B2-4). But from that slide it is clear that the treatment of Variable SG&A is also different, absorption method the entire SG&A is an operating expense. Plus in the question CPA-05808 the answer does not include variable SG&A when coming up with the contribution margin/cost of ending inventory; while, in the question CPA-03734, the answer includes variable SG&A when calculating the contribution margin. I must be confusing something.

BECKER RESPONSE (the reply had a format i coudn't paste here- so ignore format)

Dear XXX,

I understand your confusion.

Think this way.

1. First you have to make a product

Absorption Variable

Direct Material $20 $20

Direct Labor $30 $30

Variable overhead $10 $10

Fixed overhead $15 $0

Total unit cost 75 60

2. Compute the contribution margin

Variable Sale $140

– total variable cost $65 (60 + 5)

Think Amazon…per each items sold there is shipping and handling…and this is variable. Assume $5. It was not part of making but was part of selling.

= Contribution Margin …and there you have it…. $75

3. Conclusion

a. distinguish if you are making or you are selling

b. variable selling (think postage and handling) is consider in arriving at the Contribution Margin

c. the method is called variable because ALL of the variable costs are included in arriving at the contribution margin…

but not all of the variable are not product cost

Now you know!!!

To make sure you understand when you have the chance work these attached questions and send them my way for review.

After this you will be good to test.

I hope this helps you.

Licensed WA CPA 2/2015
Government Auditor Since 2007

[Author]

Replies