Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

AIWMI CCRA-L2 Exam - Topic 2 Question 61 Discussion

Posted by Ezekiel on Nov 18, 2022 at 04:14 PM

''Following four entities operate in the Indian IT and BPO space. They all are into same segment of providing off-shore analytical services. They all operate on the labour cost-arbitrage in India and the countries of their clients. Following information pertains for the year ended March 31, 2013.

The year FY13, was typically a good year for Indian IT companies. For FY14, the economic analysts have

given following predictions about the IT Industry:

A) It is expected that INR will appreciate sharply against other USD.

B) Given high inflation and attrition in IT Industry in India, the wages of IT sector employees will increase more

sharply than Inflation and general wage rise in country.C) US Congress will be passing a bill which restricts the outsourcing to third world countries like India.

While analyzing the four entities, you come across following findings related to Glowing:

Glowing is promoted by Mr.M R Bhutta, who has earlier promoted two other business ventures, He started

with ABC Entertainment Ltd in 1996 and was promoter and MD of the company. ABC was a listed entity and

its share price had sharp movements at the time of stock market scam in late 1990s. In 1999, Mr. Bhutta sold his entire stake and resigned from the post of MD. The stock price declined by about 90% in coming days and has never recovered. Later on in 2003, Mr. Bhutta again promoted a new business, Klear Publications Ltd (KCL) an in the business of magazine publication. The entity had come out with a successful IPO and raised money from public. Thereafter it ran into troubles and reported losses. In 2009, Mr. Bhutta went on to exit this business as well by selling stake to other promoter(s). There have been reports in both instances with allegations that promoters have siphoned off money from listed entities to other group entities, however, nothing has been proved in any court.''

Based on your findings in the case of Glowing, how will you handle the same as a credit rating analyst:

Suggested Answer: D

Get Premium CCRA-L2 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF Real Exam Format Detailed Explanations Instant Access Get Your Practice Test
35 comments · newest first
RI
Ricki 12 months ago
Wages in IT are definitely going up, that's a fact!
TE
Teresita 1 year ago
I think corporate governance is key here.
ME
Merissa 1 year ago
Wait, are we really trusting this guy again?
MY
Myra 1 year ago
Totally agree, past issues raise red flags!
CE
Cecilia 1 year ago
Glowing's promoter has a sketchy past.
KI
Kiley 1 year ago
I think denying the assignment might be too extreme. We should at least consider the current corporate governance before making a decision.
HA
Harris 1 year ago
This situation reminds me of a similar practice question we did on corporate governance. I feel like we should focus on the governance aspect, but I'm not confident.
LI
Lili 1 year ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think option A makes sense. The past issues with Glowing could really impact their credibility.
BE
Bernardo 1 year ago
I remember discussing the importance of management risk in our last class. Given Mr. Bhutta's history, I think we should be cautious.
KR
Krissy 1 year ago
Okay, let's see. Locking the laptop down, keeping track of inventory, securing the OS, and encrypting sensitive data - those all seem like good protective measures to me.
JE
Jesusita 1 year ago
I'm feeling pretty confident about this one. Option D, enabling VPC Peering with strict firewall rules, seems like the most comprehensive solution to the problem.
IL
Ilda 1 year ago
Okay, I've got this. Based on the uniform capitalization rules, I believe the correct answer is Option C. The image shows the relevant costs, and I'm confident that's the right choice here.
BA
Barabara 1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the steps here. Do I need to select the entire range of data for each student, or just the homework scores? I want to make sure I get this right.
ET
Ethan 1 year ago
This looks like a tricky one. I'll need to think carefully about the principles of service-oriented design to figure this out.
YV
Yvonne 1 year ago
With a promoter like that, I bet Glowing's financial statements are about as transparent as a brick wall. Better bring a flashlight and a magnifying glass to this one!
AL
Alva 1 year ago
Well, you can't judge a book by its cover, right? Let's focus on the facts and see if Glowing's current operations are on the up-and-up. As long as the corporate governance checks out, I don't see why we can't give them a fair chance.
LA
Lashon 1 year ago
↳ replying to Alva
User 3: I believe we should deny taking up assignment for Glowing to avoid any potential risks.
GL
Glenna 1 year ago
↳ replying to Alva
User 2: I think we should be cautious and skeptical about Glowing based on their promoter's history.
KR
Kristian 1 year ago
↳ replying to Alva
User 1: I agree, we should focus on the facts and not just the past.
RA
Raymon 2 years ago
Sounds like the promoter has a knack for making money... disappear. I'll have to keep a close eye on the books and make sure nothing fishy is going on. Can't be too careful with this one!
AR
Arlene 1 year ago
↳ replying to Raymon
Let's make sure to thoroughly check the corporate governance aspect of Glowing. We can't ignore the past allegations.
NO
Noel 1 year ago
↳ replying to Raymon
I would go with option A and be skeptical about any information from Glowing. Better to lower the credit ratings.
IV
Ivan 1 year ago
↳ replying to Raymon
I think we should deny taking up assignment for Glowing. It's better to be safe than sorry.
QU
Quinn 1 year ago
↳ replying to Raymon
I agree, we need to be extra cautious with Glowing. The past history of the promoter is concerning.
LE
Lemuel 1 year ago
↳ replying to Raymon
True, we need to consider all options before making a decision.
AL
Aliza 1 year ago
↳ replying to Raymon
B) Any of the three.
DE
Delpha 1 year ago
↳ replying to Raymon
Sounds like a wise approach. We can't overlook the past history of the promoter.
SA
Salome 2 years ago
↳ replying to Raymon
A) Be more cautious and skeptical on any information received from Glowing and give negative marks in management risk and use it as an overriding factor to lower the credit ratings.
DO
Dominque 2 years ago
Hmm, a promoter with a shady past like that? I'd rather not touch this one with a ten-foot pole. Better to just deny the assignment and avoid the headache.
LO
Lovetta 1 year ago
↳ replying to Dominque
I think being cautious and skeptical is the way to go. Negative marks in management risk could be crucial for lowering the credit ratings.
ER
Ernest 2 years ago
↳ replying to Dominque
I agree, it's better to steer clear of any potential trouble. Denying the assignment seems like the safest option.
WE
Wenona 2 years ago
I'm definitely going to play it safe with Glowing. Those past red flags are too much of a risk to ignore. I'll have to be extremely thorough and skeptical in my analysis.
KE
Kenneth 2 years ago
I believe option A is the best approach to handle Glowing as a credit rating analyst.
MA
Marti 2 years ago
I agree, we should definitely consider the management risk before giving credit ratings.
TE
Tenesha 2 years ago
I think we should be cautious with Glowing due to the past history of the promoter.
0/2000 characters

Save Cancel