I receive more Pm than I post, pm away 

---

Added on June 11, 2009, 4:50 pm

Previously Chow Kim tai is the one who taught P5 at Mco but when he stop teaching, Ian Lim takeover. He is like a substitute teacher.
I am also taking P4 & i think if you have tine to read BPP text book thats already an achievement by itself since there are so many area to focus.
Maybe you need CFA books ?
If I am not mistaken ratio is deemed insignificant in P3 since figures just serve as supporting notes, do they explicitly put requirement on ratios calculation ? If it is i think irs a bonus mark.
he also skip leadership in my sitting & it never came out (maybe spot) but leadership its more relevant to T5 in CAT. Is the leadership qs on section B ?

It seems you really like andrew pang by putting P4 as a must for your selection 
Okay here is an advice a lecturer (few lecturers) gave me for P4. Do not use your F9 marks as a yardstick for P4 since both paper is very different in terms of scope & exposure. The things you need to calculate in F9 you need to be 3x times faster in P4 for example.

Please ignore pass rates for P4 as its the deadliest paper in optional if not entire acca. You can go to Mco & look at their mark for top scorer (50 I think). My advice is please complete all your core papers before doing any optionals. I had known somebody through someone else that after doing badly for P4 he has also lose confidence in core papers & squandered them as well.

Case 2 out of question since you need to complete or taking your optional paper with all due core papers. For case 1 its acceptable but are you serious about this ? Part 3 is not like part 2 anymore & taking 4 professional paper is strictly not recommended. I have never seen / heard anyone taking 4 Professional papers. & pass all of them.

However I think you are more interested in the comparison of Andrew & Daniel.
I have a classmate who have attended andrew pang class before & i always had discussion with her about both lecturer performance. Then I also approached other classmates who have attended andrew class b4 & gathered their views.

I think you are already familiar with Andrew's methods so I will focus more on Daniel for convenience sake (or else it can span more than 1000 words). First of all :
1) Student feedback from Andrew class (opinion from > 10 ex students)
- He didn't really teach the theory portion of finance (which is very important), he only highlight for student to read back at home.
- He has many fast & good techniques of the calculational portion of finance, but normally exam only required a few.
- He is not patient enough when dealing with finance questions by students during class session or break time or after class.
- His class fees is quite low compared to Daniel's.

2) Student feedback about Daniel class (opinion from > 15 ex & current student)
Personal note : I noticed a lot of students in Daniel class have attended andrew class before so i left the issued of WHY to you.
- Daniel will cover the theory portion with student by discussing the key & fundamental areas, although its not in depth but at least he will explain it in class.
- In contrast with Andrew many & fast technique, Daniel focus on format & systematic. For each question he has devised his own format which is very simple to understand & comprehend even if you have not attended his class in F9 before. He practice a step by step approach by gaining all the minimum & easy marks b4 venturing into difficult part. In that way you will at least gain some marks even if you dont understand the question.
- A very patient & friendly lecturer, I think this is the one point agreed by most of his students. He will answer every question during class sessions & during break time. You will see a very lively class in which every student will actively participate by asking questions. Actually of all the lecturers I have been through, his class is the liveliest once since you dont need to incite the phrase of "Any question b4 i move along". In Parmindar class I hear it hundreds of times & no one dare / will ask any questions.
- FTMS college is really conducive for study & the environment is really stress free (the lecturers is another issue). You dont have to grab seats or compete with another person for it. The seats & chairs are really comfortable compared to KSA. Since you have attended Phillip class you will know what I am talking about.
- Like most chinese lecturers his english is not perfect or fluent compared to the likes of Parmindar or Haneef.
- Like Parmindar (both are close friends actually) he likes to boast about himself in a funny way (why you need to pay premium for his class instead of discount.....etc) Most of my friends find it funny & relaxing but there is always one who may dislike it which is why I always put "MOST" not "ALL".

Strictly speaking in this forum most prefer Daniel class & most of my friends (both his student , ex-andrew student, none) also prefer him. I will not say who is better or perfect for the paper but it just depends on what you seek or suit your style. However Daniel will most likely quit FTMS soon which is why many on this forum are seeking where is his next destination.

but daniel ho is still at FTMS KL his name is printed on the Timetable for july 2009

and i have paid my fees already . are you all sure he is no longer there ?

i heard from friend that taylor's university college is offering acca professional level for july 09 intake. they have philip woo teaching P1 & P3, Haneef (p2), chow kim tai (p4) and ian lim (p5).

what ever they say i will fight for my money back

So let say you flung F5 then you have to sacrifice either P1 or F5.
if you choose to continue with P1, then you can take F5 next sitting with another 2 optional paper.
If you choose to take F5 instead of P1 then you need to resit P1 for next sitting with another 2 optional paper.
My advice is stick with P1 even if you did not make it for F5 since you can take optional paper P5 which is very similar with F5.

However since you have preference for both P6 & P7 then need to adjust a little bit.
What I can say is it is not safe to use fundamental papers marks as yardstick or benchmark against professional papers (especially optional).
This is what I can deduce :
F5 with P5 : Both papers are very similar hence (F5 toughest in f papers & P5 easiest in P papers)

F6 with P6 : Both are very different paper as what are tested in F6 wont be tested in P6 (very minimal if did tested). What you learn in P6 is like not add-on like P2 but something totally different since examiner felt if you choose tax as option you need to be more generalised. Hence the scope of tax will get bigger which will cover unit trust, investment holding, regional hubs,.....etc.

F8 with P7 : Both are very different again but not in terms of syllabus like tax but in the format of answering & presentation. F8 examiner stress on format rather than knowledge hence student with work experience may suffer in F8 (wide difference in theory vs practical). However student with working experience in assurance line will benefit in P7. You need to have "business sense" from P3 & good grasp on financial standards from P2. A lecturer told me student who have never worked b4 or lack general knowledge should avoid taking this paper.

F9 with P4 : F9 is subset of P4 since you need all the F9 foundations to do well in P4. F9 normally focus on 1 scenario at a time. P4 brach out those scenario into a "What if" circumstances. So student need to understand everything there is to know or they wont even know how to start. Suffice to say, avoid this paper at all cost unless you are interested in banking.

---

Added on June 19, 2009, 3:58 pm

I have seen the examiner blog & most student are also confused with his objective.
However i can roughly deduce that he has used a very different book for reference (not BPP or Kaplan) which has sparked the uproar of many students. But you gotta admire those students since they are more interested with knowledge rather than passing. Most petition to have a lower pass rate. Anyway the examiner is in a cheery mood. Some of my classmates bombarded the survey with negative feedbacks about finance.

I was also at Daniel class too, where do you sit ?

Just get email reply from Philip Woo, he said will run P1 & P3 in Taylor. So it is good news for PJ student la!

haiz. i have been suffering in silence for years and now i am speaking out what i want to. though i admit i am rude, i take the initiative and risk(warning risk or ban risk) to speak out bcoz i realize all of a sudden when i contact my old buddies who also like me, a serial failure in acca, they somehow talking about those lecturers to me. 'when i attend axxxxx pxxx first class, i regretted and wish i could get a refund but it is impossible'. this is from a female ex-classmate of mine from dono where. ' sxxxxx college drink our blood'. this is from a fren of mine from jb. ' x lecturers bo yong wan'. this is from another fren of mine from penang. if i keep quiet, then no one will know what we were thinking. and many youngsters (as colleges' customer segmentation is now focus on youngsters who knows nuts) will be misled by all those unethical advertising strategy by colleges, telling a student from acca, then practical then become partner. or from acca, then practical, become cfo. or maybe 'take acca la, save money and u only need 3 years!!!' taking acca then u will be 'alive' like michael jackson and so on. or maybe only looking at the bright side, where we only talk about good lecturers and keep quiet about those lowly-rated ones by me and my frenssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss. somehow our hard earned income easily go into those irresponsible (in a polite way) lecturers' pocket, and while we are trying to move on (bcoz we have paid), they are sleeping on their pile of $$ every night and laughing all the way. 'if this sitting cannot pass, then next sitting lo'. somehow i feel it was a joke. but when this statement is kept being mentioned, i don feel is a joke anymore. i feel is a humiliation by those irresponsible lecturers (again in a polite way). i don side any of the tuition providers, i am independent. when i see shit, i will say it is smelly; when i see tau chiong soi, i will say it is nice; when i really feel a lecturer cannot teach, i will speak out. i am a normal person, and not a person where they see shit they will say weird smell; when they see tau chiong soi, they say so so, when they feel a lecturer cannot teach, they say 'it is not the lecturer fault laaaaaaa, we must not blame them as they are human too'. then might as well self-study if a lecturer does not help, what for attending his or her class?(too bad for those who have paid) therefore must do strategic evaluation on lecturers first b4 going to his or her class. i hereby submit my critics to this forum, hoping that many will think twice b4 making decision. sorry that i hurt many of the professionals here for being rude. i will go to church soon and maybe confess to the priest for being rude. cheers. AMEN!

most of my frens who attended andrew pang and sheila class failed their exam. don challenge me to provide proof. i have seen and experienced all these. that's why i am telling for those who need to know about comments on them. do u think i have so much time to create my own stories? if you don need to know then just keep your mouth shut. there are others who need to know. if u think they are good then just provide the reason why they are good. andrew sucks bcoz he teach very fast, and daniel and chow are good bcoz they teach step by step in a systematic way, that are my points! what is yours?

---

Added on June 30, 2009, 7:04 pmmiss wong paik wan from orange!

If I'm not mistake, Philip Woo class normally 7 hours. So after calculate, more or less will be around 18 class.

Ha Ha, student no need to worry too much la. As long as he can finish the syllabus, should be ok la.