ACCA考试报名时间已公布，报名前吉林省考生要这么备考！

正确答案：

 

正确答案：
(c) The investment in Wireless is currently accounted for using the equity method of accounting under IAS28 ‘Investments in
Associates’. On the sale of a 15% holding, the investment in Wireless will be accounted for in accordance with IAS39. Router
should recognise a gain on the sale of the holding in Wireless of $7 million (Working 1). The gain comprises the following:
(i) the difference between the sale proceeds and the proportion of the net assets sold and
(ii) the goodwill disposed of.
The total gain is shown in the income statement.
The remaining 10 per cent investment will be classified as an ‘available for sale’ financial asset or at ‘fair value through profit
or loss’ financial asset. Changes in fair value for these categories are reported in equity or in the income statement respectively.
At 1 January 2007, the investment will be recorded at fair value and a gain of $1 million $(23 – 22) recorded. At 31 May
2007 a further gain of $(26 – 23) million, i.e. $3 million will be recorded. In order for the investment to be categorised as
at fair value through profit or loss, certain conditions have to be fulfilled. An entity may use this designation when doing so
results in more relevant information by eliminating or significantly reducing a measurement or recognition inconsistency (an
‘accounting mismatch’) or where a group of financial assets and/or financial liabilities is managed and its performance is
evaluated on a fair value basis, in accordance with a documented risk management or investment strategy, and information
about the assets and/ or liabilities is provided internally to the entity’s key management personnel.

正确答案：
(b) Separation of the roles of CEO and chairman
Benefits of separation of roles
The separation of the roles of chief executive and chairman was first provided for in the UK by the 1992 Cadbury provisions
although it has been included in all codes since. Most relevant to the case is the terms of the ICGN clause s.11 and OECD
VI (E) both of which provide for the separation of these roles. In the UK it is covered in the combined code section A2.
The separation of roles offers the benefit that it frees up the chief executive to fully concentrate on the management of the
organisation without the necessity to report to shareholders or otherwise become distracted from his or her executive
responsibilities. The arrangement provides a position (that of chairman) that is expected to represent shareholders’ interests
and that is the point of contact into the company for shareholders. Some codes also require the chairman to represent the
interests of other stakeholders such as employees.
Having two people rather than one at the head of a large organisation removes the risks of ‘unfettered powers’ being
concentrated in a single individual and this is an important safeguard for investors concerned with excessive secrecy or
lack of transparency and accountability. The case of Robert Maxwell is a good illustration of a single dominating
executive chairman operating unchallenged and, in so doing, acting illegally. Having the two roles separated reduces
the risk of a conflict of interest in a single person being responsible for company performance whilst also reporting on
that performance to markets. Finally, the chairman provides a conduit for the concerns of non-executive directors who,
in turn, provide an important external representation of external concerns on boards of directors.
Tutorial note: Reference to codes other than the UK is also acceptable. In all cases, detailed (clause number) knowledge
of code provisions is not required.
Accountability and separation of roles
In terms of the separation of roles assisting in the accountability to shareholders, four points can be made.
The chairman scrutinises the chief executive’s management performance on behalf of the shareholders and will be
involved in approving the design of the chief executive’s reward package. It is the responsibility of the chairman to hold
the chief executive to account on shareholders’ behalfs.
Shareholders have an identified person (chairman) to hold accountable for the performance of their investment. Whilst
day-to-day contact will normally be with the investor relations department (or its equivalent) they can ultimately hold
the chairman to account.
The presence of a separate chairman ensures that a system is in place to ensure NEDs have a person to report to outside the
executive structure. This encourages the freedom of expression of NEDs to the chairman and this, in turn, enables issues to
be raised and acted upon when necessary.
The chairman is legally accountable and, in most cases, an experienced person. He/she can be independent and more
dispassionate because he or she is not intimately involved with day-to-day management issues.

正确答案：
(b) The three strategic goals are to become the leading premium ice cream brand in the UK; to increase sales to ￡25 million;
and to achieve a significant entry into the supermarket sector. On the basis of performance to date these goals will certainly
be stretching. All three strategies will involve significant growth in the company. Johnson and Scholes list three success criteria
against which the strategies can be assessed, namely suitability, acceptability and feasibility. Suitability is a test of whether a
strategy addresses the situation in which a company is operating. In Johnson and Scholes’ terms it is the firm’s ‘strategic
position’, an understanding of which comes from the analysis done in the answer to the question above. Acceptability is
concerned with the likely performance outcomes of the strategy and in particular whether the return and risk are in line with
the expectations of the stakeholders. Feasibility is the extent to which the strategy can be made to work and is determined
by the strategic capability of the company reflecting the resources available to implement the strategy. It is interesting to see
that the three growth related goals are compatible in that becoming the leading premium brand will involve increased market
penetration, product development and market development. If achieved it will increase sales and necessitate a successful
entry into the supermarket sector. Time will be an important influence on the success or otherwise of these growth goals –
five years seems to be a reasonable length of time to achieve these ambitious targets.
Suitability – Churchill is currently a small but significant player at the premium end of the market. This segment is becoming
more significant and is attractive because of the high prices and high margins attainable. This is leading to more intense
competition with global companies. One immediate question that springs to mind is what precisely does ‘leading brand’
mean? The most obvious test is that of market share and unless Churchill achieve the access to the supermarkets looked for
in the third strategic goal, seems difficult to achieve. If ‘leading brand’ implies brand recognition this again looks very
ambitious. On the positive side this segment of the ice cream market is showing significant growth and Churchill’s success
in gaining sponsorship rights to major sporting events is a step in the right direction. The combination of high price and high
quality should position the company where it wants to be. Achieving sales of ￡25 million represents a quantum shift in
performance in a company that has to date only achieved modest levels of sales growth.
Acceptability – as a family owned business the balance between risk and return is an important one. The family to date has
been ‘happy’ with a modest rate of growth and modest return in terms of profits. The other significant stakeholder group is
the professional managers headed up by Richard Smith. They seem much more growth orientated and may be happier with
the risks that the growth strategy entails. The family members seem more interested in the manufacturing side than the
retailing side of the business and their bad previous experiences with growing the business through international market
development may mean they are risk averse and less willing to invest the necessary resources.
Feasibility – again this is linked to how ‘leading brand’ is defined. If as seems likely the brand becomes more widely known
through increasing the number of company owned ice cream stores then a significant investment in retail outlets will be
necessary. Increasing the number of franchised outlets will reduce the financial resources required but may be at the expense
of the brand’s reputation. Certainly there would seem to be a need for increased levels of advertising and promotion –
particularly to gain access to the ice cream cabinets in the supermarket chains. This is likely to mean an increase in the
number of sales and marketing staff. Equally important will be the ability to develop and launch new products in a luxury
market shaped by impulse buying and customers looking to indulge themselves.
Overall, becoming the leading brand of premium ice cream may well be the key to achieving the desired presence in the
supermarket ice cream cabinets, which in turn is a pre-requisite for increasing company sales to ￡25 million. So the three
strategic goals may be regarded as consistent and compatible with one another. However each strategic goal will have to be
broken down into its key elements. For example in achieving sales of ￡25 million what proportion of sales will come from its
own ice cream stores and what proportion from other outlets including the supermarkets? Sales to date of Churchill ice cream
are dominated by impulse purchases but in achieving sales of ￡25 million penetrating the take home market will be essential.
Finally, what proportion of these take home sales will be under the supermarkets own label brands? Over reliance on own
label sales will seriously weaken Churchill’s desire to become the leading national brand of premium ice cream. It looks to
be an ambitious but attainable strategy but will require a significant planning effort to develop the necessary resources andcapabilities vital to successful implementation of the strategy.