MYASCO in Lahore

capricorn_me · 06-03-2006, 11:19 PM

i think haniasif is absolutely correct, and i am with him.
Ali is just dragging the topic nothing else,though it is ended.
the query has been answered.

Abdur.Rehman · 06-04-2006, 02:02 AM

Well professionalism doesnt allow me to post on this topic as i formally quit on this topic after my concluding remarks 4 days ago. But ur too far astraying discussion has forced me to jump in again.
I shud tell u people one thing that it was pracs who never try to discuss the issue seriously. When given facts, instead of commenting on them he dragged the discussion to somewhere else. Actually he has nothing in his pocket to support his stance. I feel sory for u pracs despite u being the member of ICAP.
I acknowledge the contribution that pracs has given on this forum.
I know that Ali's remarks may be insulting, but reading this thread i personally think that a stuborn and dogged person like pracs, who has nothing to do but thrash the facts and start different points of his own concern, that are totally irrelevent to the topic, deserve this.
So, im not with u Mr. Haniasif and Mr. Capricorn me as far as this topic is concerned.
And i also remember when Ali started a very constructive topic (IFRS 5) no one of u Mr. Professionals replied on that topic, as u all people have no time to cotribute in constructive topics. I would reserve my right to comment on ur professional ability to answer technical questions, as u reserved ur right to answer them.
I think that being a junior Ali shud respect his seniors, but at the same time the senior shud acknowledge something constructive by juniors. Ali i seriously recommend u not to indulge in these petty issues and come with something professional, that test the knowledge not the temprament of the seniors (afterall u r a gold medalist in accounting). use ur brain for something constructive as i have strong hopes for u in Module E.

Ali Akbar · 06-04-2006, 02:26 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs

The topic is not closed as far as I am concerned.. since you have just pounded us with your 'opinions' and no empirical proof of your claims.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Well, I agree with Abdur.Rehman that we should not involve in the issues like this in which the other person has nothing to do than to criticize and to discourage others by the outdated/international information. People ask for facts, and if we provide the facts then poeple do not dare to accept the facts provided by juniors!

And the above quoted reply shows as the Pracs is totally not in a mood to conclude! If he is so fond of replying then ok we can have a constructive and professional chat on Financial Instruments like topics which can also be benefecial for others as well and we will also learn from Pracs. I am ready for it.

ICAPians, the unparalleled..

Pracs · 06-04-2006, 07:17 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Abdur.Rehman
 Well professionalism doesnt allow me to post on this topic as i formally quit on this topic after my concluding remarks 4 days ago. But ur too far astraying discussion has forced me to jump in again.
I shud tell u people one thing that it was pracs who never try to discuss the issue seriously. When given facts, instead of commenting on them he dragged the discussion to somewhere else. Actually he has nothing in his pocket to support his stance. I feel sory for u pracs despite u being the member of ICAP.
I acknowledge the contribution that pracs has given on this forum.
I know that Ali's remarks may be insulting, but reading this thread i personally think that a stuborn and dogged person like pracs, who has nothing to do but thrash the facts and start different points of his own concern, that are totally irrelevent to the topic, deserve this.
So, im not with u Mr. Haniasif and Mr. Capricorn me as far as this topic is concerned.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Abdur rehman, I am really sorry that Ali dragged you into this and you do not have the whole picture, or are a dear good buddy of Ali, or well just unlucky enough to get yourself into this. Ali has probably has some grudge with ACCAs (which I had seen in the ACCA vs. ACA thread) and in many other threads. Despite that, until now I have taken Ali's remarks in quite a neutral way but unfortunately he does not understand or does not want to understand, he is one of those people who think they are always right. I would suggest you take another good read of the thread and decide matters in am more professional manner before you come to your own conclusion

You don't need to be sorry for me, I have not said any thing that is unethical or un professional on this thread or in any of my posts on this forum. I have been called a person who cannot hold jobs (by Ali), ridiculed about the number of posts I have made on this forum (again by Ali), which is quite Ironic because I am one of the oldest member on this forum going back to 2002. And of recent I have been told because I am an ACCA and and an ACA I have just passed two papers.. (again an assumption by Ali) in doing so he does not realise that he is slandering ICAP because he thinks I am not worthy enough to be an ACA...

I will be professional and not respond in the way Ali has done, but I will make sure he realises what sort of a person he is.

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
And i also remember when Ali started a very constructive topic (IFRS 5) no one of u Mr. Professionals replied on that topic, as u all people have no time to cotribute in constructive topics. I would reserve my right to comment on ur professional ability to answer technical questions, as u reserved ur right to answer them.
I think that being a junior Ali shud respect his seniors, but at the same time the senior shud acknowledge something constructive by juniors. Ali i seriously recommend u not to indulge in these petty issues and come with something professional, that test the knowledge not the temprament of the seniors (afterall u r a gold medalist in accounting). use ur brain for something constructive as i have strong hopes for u in Module E.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Now this has made me laugh, Abdur Rehman, I am now convinced Ali brougt you in just because I told him there was no one else here supporting him. It is quite evident that you have not read that thread at all. Ali is ABSCONDING from that thread, he had promissed that he would

Thanks Pracs.

As I am not at home and now on ICI plant. Once I come back to land we will have discussion on it.

I was one of the few who responded to that topic. I know when Ali put in that question, all he wanted to do was ridicule other members, when he got a reply he didn't bother to come up there.

I wish you had read that thread and not relied on Ali's testimonial... Here is the link for every one to see and to make up their own mind.

http//www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3672&SearchTerms=ifrs,5

Pracs · 06-04-2006, 07:27 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Ali Akbar
 <blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs

The topic is not closed as far as I am concerned.. since you have just pounded us with your 'opinions' and no empirical proof of your claims.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Well, I agree with Abdur.Rehman that we should not involve in the issues like this in which the other person has nothing to do than to criticize and to discourage others by the outdated/international information. People ask for facts, and if we provide the facts then poeple do not dare to accept the facts provided by juniors!

And the above quoted reply shows as the Pracs is totally not in a mood to conclude! If he is so fond of replying then ok we can have a constructive and professional chat on Financial Instruments like topics which can also be benefecial for others as well and we will also learn from Pracs. I am ready for it.

ICAPians, the unparalleled..

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Ali come back on the IFRS 5, issue first,.. and then brag about other areas of your expertise,. I am no expert,, but I think there is a gold medal that you have got on some where which has made you head quite big.... I hope you go on to pass the final exams and become an ACA.. all the best in your life.

And get this kid, you have not provided facts that prove KPMG is at no.2 on a Pakistan level,.. just because it audit top something KSE companies (and most of them joint audits) doesnot convince me,.. shouting at the top of your voice make me believe in your opinion and get this early here,, that is some thing that will not get you on in life either.

Ali Akbar · 06-04-2006, 08:06 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
I have been called a person who cannot hold jobs (by Ali),

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Pracs, the professional, can you show me the reference of the quoted reply? I hope you are a professional and your statements should be based on some facts. Please tell me its reference??

And as far as the ACCA vs CA is concerned, yes I again say ACCA and CA has no comparison atleast in Pakistan.

And as far as knowledge is concerned, why you people were silent on the issue of IAS 32/39? http//www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/topic.asp?topic_id=3570

You replied on IFRS 5 issue that substance over form doesnt allow you to classify asset to be sold and lease back under IFRS 5.

http//www.accountancy.com.pk/forum/topic.asp?topic_id=3672

So please put the arguments against the following points

1) If we are recognising the gain on asset, then there are two different transactions (sale and lease back).

2) Normally we treat this arrangement as two different transactions.

3) In case of sale and lease back transaction carrying amount is recovered through sale (one of the conditions of IFRS 5), because the entity requires funds which is recovered through sale proceeds (IFRS para6) and the liability against asset arises on the other side!

4) In case of sale and lease back transaction, normally entity is in the need of immediate funds so there is usually proper advertisement of asset(one of the conditions of IFRS 5), and if the entity could not find a leasing company to purchase the asset they may sell it in normal way and bring on an other asset on lease.

5)Had this arrangement not been covered by IFRS 5, this would have been specifically excluded from the scope of IFRS 5.

6)Furthermore, paragrph 2 states that measurement requirements of this IFRS apply to all recognized non-current assets and disposal groups , except for those assets listed in para 5 which shall continue to be measured in accordance with the standards noted. Standards noted and excluded from the scope are

IAS 12, IAS 19, IAS 39, IAS 40, IAS 41, IFRS 4.

IAS 17 is not excluded from the scope!

Waiting for your professional reply. This time please come up with some logical arguments

ICAPians, the unparalleled..

Pracs · 06-04-2006, 08:13 AM

I guess you must now wait for my reply as I have did... read your posts again and you will find what I have said earlier..

Besides I am sure any thing I say to you will not be accepted at your end..

Ali Akbar · 06-04-2006, 08:18 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Pracs
 

Besides I am sure any thing I say to you will not be accepted at your end..
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No sir, its not the PROFESSIONAL way to ignore once queries and issues! Wont you help me and others?

Pracs · 06-04-2006, 08:36 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by hanifasif
 Ali, I must say ap bohat bad-tameez ho. You have no regard for anyone let alone the estimable Pracs who has been helping many of us with his words. You like to deal happily with the people like Turi who thrash you with the dirtiest of words.

Thatâs insult to my intelligence if I allow people like you to disregard those I respect. There is no one on this forum who has been this rude to Pracs. If you continue dragging the issue further, we will collectively report on you to the administrator or boycott you on this forum.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Thanks for your post Hanif, but don't get worked up on him, he is a trouble maker and is doing it for the fun of it.

Goodman · 06-04-2006, 08:47 AM

Pracs, kindly donot post any reply to Ali. Everybody on the forum knows that your professional standing is by far the best. You have performed and achieved what KPMG trainees dream about day and night. Please keep on helping and assisting with your knowledge and experience, people like yourself are the real wealth of our nation. guys lets respect the man who finds time despite his busy schedule to come here and share his vision with us.

I would like to request the admin to ascertain if any members have been using multiple ids, it can be easily done by viewing the log of IP addresses.

Ali Akbar · 06-04-2006, 08:48 AM

Sir please help me on the issues mentioned i.e IAS 32/39 and IFRS 5.

Ali Akbar · 06-04-2006, 08:53 AM

And yes I agree with Goodman that Pracs should keep on helping and assisting with his knowledge and experience, people like him are the real wealth of our nation.

I hope you will help me also, but imposition of ideas is highly discouraged in today's society!

Goodman · 06-04-2006, 09:08 AM

Dear Ali

Mind na karnay, but I must say that only Allah can help you with your questions. Please complete your training and your exams. Wish you all the best.

Ali Akbar · 06-04-2006, 09:20 AM

Lolzz..this time I 100% agree with you in saying that Admin should check the owners of multiple IDs Wink

Goodman · 06-04-2006, 09:32 AM

No young man,,
we dont want admin checking the owners, we want them checking the users, there's a difference between the two. so correct yourself.