In a better instructor match, who ya got?!
I'm going with Olinto all the way. While both are very intelligent and know their stuff, I think Olinto brings more to the table to help with the exam. Gearty will tell you little things here and there and have you re-write the same thing over and over to drive home a point. It works. It drives home the point. The problem is that it often doesn't really help me. I'll remember it, but I'll never use it to help me with any questions. For example, in REG, I can't tell you how many times Gearty used the "Non-taxable, None, NBV" thing to refer to an event being non-taxable and having no income if you use the net book value as the basis. He said to remember the three N's. For whatever reason, I never once actually thought of that or applied that when doing any questions. I really honestly don't even know the relevance. If you use an item's NBV as its basis it's never taxable??? I don't even know. I never really even thought about it.
Don't get me wrong, I think Gearty is a good instructor; just slightly below Olinto.
Both are great and I wouldn't have passed the two exams I did (and hopefully the third today) without them. Gearty carried me through AUD and I thought he was great. I also thought he was great for REG especially for corporate taxes, where I generally struggled.
But with Olinto, one way or another, I'll be working the practice questions and for at least one or two, I'll be struggling with the answer and think back to a little sidenote mentioned. Perhaps Olinto looks at the practice questions and incorporates in what the lecture didn't cover? Maybe Gearty doesn't? Who knows?
Both are my best friends and have been since I started the CPA. I will gladly send them both $1.00 if I pass all four on the first try!
