[Anonymous]

The more I spend time reviewing the materials for FAR, the more questions I get and confuse myself. It may be the materials on Becker that’s not very consistent.

This is a too long of a problem to write down so I want to ask those of you who have the Final Becker Review. If you look at the SIMS3, part 3 Earnings Per Share; The calculation for Diluted EPS does not take in account for the Convertible Bonds which is dilutive, if it was anti-dilutive I would understand that you would leave it but the answer shows an increase in the WACSO (Denominator) of the Convertible bond amount but not in the Numerator for the amount of money they would save (net of tax) if they don’t have to pay for the Bonds Interest. I don’t understand why they are not adding that amount to the numerator yet they are adding the WACSO.

Maybe there’s some weird rule that I am not aware of if anyone can answer my question with such little description.

[MIsconnie]

I have final review for FAR and I did not use it. There were several questions I noticed that either: A. Did not adequately explain how they arrived at said answer. Or B. Was factually incorrect or had typos.

If I were you I would just keep pushing through and not buy final review for your next exam. I took FAR in October and Gleim's test bank is by far much more comprehensive and better prepares you on exam day.

best of luck!

AUD - 79
BEC - 92
FAR - 82
REG - 90

Don't get nervous, you suck when you're nervous

 

[Author]

Replies