Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

October 01, 2025, 08:29:26 am

Author Topic: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?  (Read 7910 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Bowler09

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #15 on: June 15, 2011, 03:05:20 pm »
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

To work it out, you subtract the discount expense from debtors and add everything else EXCEPT Cost of Sales. So it was (9600-750)+3000+300+5200 = 17350

I hope that clears everything up for you :)
2010 - CISCO [Pass] | Chinese SL [28] T-T At least it gets scaled to 39.4 =]
2011 - English | Methods | Specialist | Accounting | IT Software Development

ATAR - 95 to get into Commerce at Melb

geoftw

  • Guest
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #16 on: June 15, 2011, 04:16:26 pm »
99.95% sure that it's Reliability.

The purpose of the Schedule is the fact that it acts as a double-checking mechanism.

That is the sole reason you prepare it. You already have a total in the Control account, so it's not like it makes it "easier because there is only one total to report etc. etc.". The total is already there, so the REAL reason for a Schedule is to check your figures.

that's a relief! :P

lefty

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2011, 06:24:59 pm »
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

sorry to say it total
17350+750 does not equal 9600+2000+3000+300+5200

which is what they gave us
why are you adding cos 2000 into your bank

BoredSatan

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1206
  • <3
  • School: GWSC
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #18 on: June 15, 2011, 06:46:05 pm »
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

sorry to say it total
17350+750 does not equal 9600+2000+3000+300+5200

which is what they gave us
why are you adding cos 2000 into your bank
my bad :P
Master of Dentistry, Latrobe University 2011 ATAR: 99.75
ATARnotes Accounting Unit 3&4 Study Guide Author

Tren

  • Guest
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #19 on: June 15, 2011, 07:54:13 pm »
Its reliability my teacher does the solutions for the VCE exams and said that reliability is the answer as she has written the exams and its pretty obvious that it would be reliability if you went over other exams they would have probably said the same thing

Desline

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #20 on: June 15, 2011, 08:36:13 pm »
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

sorry to say it total
17350+750 does not equal 9600+2000+3000+300+5200

which is what they gave us

Bok Bok, Cost of Sales is a stock flow =P

Yea, I said Reliability for cross checking too. It's a built in checking mechanism as the balance of the Debtors Control account should equal to the total of the sum of the balances of the subsidiary ledgers.
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

sorry to say it total
17350+750 does not equal 9600+2000+3000+300+5200

which is what they gave us

You do realise you have to subtract discount expense? God I hope you didn't add it to debtors on the cash flow statement hahah
He did Bank + Discount expense.
2011 - Accounting [Unit 3 - 178/180]
2012 - Methods, Further, English, Chem, Uni Accounting

GOALS:
2011: Premier's Award: Accounting
          VN Respect: -30
2012: ATAR = >95.00

BoredSatan

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1206
  • <3
  • School: GWSC
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #21 on: June 15, 2011, 08:39:00 pm »
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

sorry to say it total
17350+750 does not equal 9600+2000+3000+300+5200

which is what they gave us

Bok Bok, Cost of Sales is a stock flow =P

Yea, I said Reliability for cross checking too. It's a built in checking mechanism as the balance of the Debtors Control account should equal to the total of the sum of the balances of the subsidiary ledgers.
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

sorry to say it total
17350+750 does not equal 9600+2000+3000+300+5200

which is what they gave us

You do realise you have to subtract discount expense? God I hope you didn't add it to debtors on the cash flow statement hahah
He did Bank + Discount expense.
WHO ARE YOU TROLL?
Master of Dentistry, Latrobe University 2011 ATAR: 99.75
ATARnotes Accounting Unit 3&4 Study Guide Author

Desline

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #22 on: June 15, 2011, 08:47:04 pm »
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

sorry to say it total
17350+750 does not equal 9600+2000+3000+300+5200

which is what they gave us

Bok Bok, Cost of Sales is a stock flow =P

Yea, I said Reliability for cross checking too. It's a built in checking mechanism as the balance of the Debtors Control account should equal to the total of the sum of the balances of the subsidiary ledgers.
it was one of those questions where it could be both I think.
Personally i put reliability though.

ANYONE ELSE SEE HOW THE CASH RECEIPTS JOURNAL DIDNT TOTAL??!! ???

sorry to say it total
17350+750 does not equal 9600+2000+3000+300+5200

which is what they gave us

You do realise you have to subtract discount expense? God I hope you didn't add it to debtors on the cash flow statement hahah
He did Bank + Discount expense.
WHO ARE YOU TROLL?
U MAD?
Nah, I'm not troll *shifty eyes*
GUESS :DDDD
2011 - Accounting [Unit 3 - 178/180]
2012 - Methods, Further, English, Chem, Uni Accounting

GOALS:
2011: Premier's Award: Accounting
          VN Respect: -30
2012: ATAR = >95.00

paulseb

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #23 on: June 16, 2011, 05:26:41 pm »
You can make a case for relevance, reliability or understandability. I said understandailbity. If you really think about it the debtors schedule breaks down the list of debtors into a clear a more easy to comprehend format, which allows easier use for non accountants. However I'm still bewildered as to why the vcaa would put a question with 3 possible answers which can all be easily justified

Desline

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #24 on: June 16, 2011, 05:53:02 pm »
I don't really think Understandability is a valid answer, as it's more Relevance why we only report 1 balance for Debtors. The "best answer" thing yea?
2011 - Accounting [Unit 3 - 178/180]
2012 - Methods, Further, English, Chem, Uni Accounting

GOALS:
2011: Premier's Award: Accounting
          VN Respect: -30
2012: ATAR = >95.00

Furbob

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1002
  • diagnosed with poo brain
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #25 on: June 16, 2011, 06:00:40 pm »
yeah the best answer was Reliability

however if you wrote Relevance + mentioned reporting 1 figure for Debtors etc, you would only lose 1 mark according to my teacher who was discussing about it with his examiner-friend
2011 : English | Accounting | MM CAS | Further | Japanese | MUEP Japanese
2012 : BA(Japanese&Chinese)/BComm @ Monash Clayton

xXjAmEZXx

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • =D
  • School: Mentone Grammar
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #26 on: June 17, 2011, 09:33:11 pm »
damn, i was tossing up between relevance, comparability and understandability... and put comparability
2010 - Greek [49] Busman [35]

2011 - Legal [44] Methods [39] FurDUR [41] Accounting [40] English [40]

2012 - BCom @ UniMelb :O!!!!

Desline

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #27 on: June 17, 2011, 10:13:36 pm »
damn, i was tossing up between relevance, comparability and understandability... and put comparability

Okay, Comparability is a definite wrong answer, and Understandability is better explained with Relevance.
2011 - Accounting [Unit 3 - 178/180]
2012 - Methods, Further, English, Chem, Uni Accounting

GOALS:
2011: Premier's Award: Accounting
          VN Respect: -30
2012: ATAR = >95.00

Hellhole

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 140
Re: for q 1.1.1 - Relevance or Reliability?
« Reply #28 on: June 23, 2011, 08:16:25 pm »
Relevance can pretty much be used in any context, so I'd have to say Reliability is a better fit.