<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Inventories at Net Realizable Values</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html</link>
	<description>accounting, audit, internet, technology, linux, photography, chess, etc.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Deuts.NET - Deuts.net No. 100</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-35737</link>
		<dc:creator>Deuts.NET - Deuts.net No. 100</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:19:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-35737</guid>
		<description>[...] feedburner, 2 via feedblitz, Val De Guzman was my top commentator (maybe also my top critic, hehe), Inventories at Net Realizable Values was my most popular post (I think I should discuss more &#8220;accounting&#8221; issues to draw [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] feedburner, 2 via feedblitz, Val De Guzman was my top commentator (maybe also my top critic, hehe), Inventories at Net Realizable Values was my most popular post (I think I should discuss more &#8220;accounting&#8221; issues to draw [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: deuts</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-397</link>
		<dc:creator>deuts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:46:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-397</guid>
		<description>Whew! can't think of anything else to say! :) in your world now huh! okay, in my world today, i don't know...hehehe anyway, great insight there! you're the man!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whew! can&#8217;t think of anything else to say! :) in your world now huh! okay, in my world today, i don&#8217;t know&#8230;hehehe anyway, great insight there! you&#8217;re the man!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-396</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:38:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-396</guid>
		<description>I forgot the my IAS already, but what i can still recall is that in IAS, inventories should be stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value so to disclose in general that “Inventories are stated at net realizable value,” is misleading. Unless, there is a reason why the entity use such disclosure. What is the nature of business of the entity ba?

In my world now (hehehe), we are using US GAAP, inventories are carried at cost unless there is a decline in market value of the inventory - in such a case - LCM rule will apply. Another exception to the cost rule is that if inventory is damaged or repossesed - in this case inventory should be stated at replacement cost. Also, other types of inventories can be carried at sales price - which maybe due to inability to determine approximate cost or there is an immediate marketability of quoted market prices. Example of inventories valued at sales price includes precious metals &#38; agriculture products</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I forgot the my IAS already, but what i can still recall is that in IAS, inventories should be stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value so to disclose in general that “Inventories are stated at net realizable value,” is misleading. Unless, there is a reason why the entity use such disclosure. What is the nature of business of the entity ba?</p>
<p>In my world now (hehehe), we are using US GAAP, inventories are carried at cost unless there is a decline in market value of the inventory - in such a case - LCM rule will apply. Another exception to the cost rule is that if inventory is damaged or repossesed - in this case inventory should be stated at replacement cost. Also, other types of inventories can be carried at sales price - which maybe due to inability to determine approximate cost or there is an immediate marketability of quoted market prices. Example of inventories valued at sales price includes precious metals &amp; agriculture products</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: deuts</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-394</link>
		<dc:creator>deuts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:45:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-394</guid>
		<description>haha! langya, inikot mo n ata lahat ng entries ko ah. anyways, impairment of assets? I have one in the drafts about it actually. Matagal na un nasa draft. I just don't have time yet to elaborate on it. I'm planning to discuss the effect of income tax on the disposal of impaired assets.

Just watch out for it...hhe</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>haha! langya, inikot mo n ata lahat ng entries ko ah. anyways, impairment of assets? I have one in the drafts about it actually. Matagal na un nasa draft. I just don&#8217;t have time yet to elaborate on it. I&#8217;m planning to discuss the effect of income tax on the disposal of impaired assets.</p>
<p>Just watch out for it&#8230;hhe</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-393</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:38:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-393</guid>
		<description>HAHAHAHAHA. Ayos kayo! 

Good job. Hope to read blogs like this - very educational and mind stimulating. 

Deuts request - i-discuss mo naman tungkol sa Impairment of assets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HAHAHAHAHA. Ayos kayo! </p>
<p>Good job. Hope to read blogs like this - very educational and mind stimulating. </p>
<p>Deuts request - i-discuss mo naman tungkol sa Impairment of assets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamal</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-248</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Sep 2006 02:31:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-248</guid>
		<description>In the first statement, I am referring to the notes to the financial statements, because the statement did not specify which is cost and NRV, hence they are interchangeable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the first statement, I am referring to the notes to the financial statements, because the statement did not specify which is cost and NRV, hence they are interchangeable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gmcmanalo</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-204</link>
		<dc:creator>gmcmanalo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2006 07:12:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-204</guid>
		<description>In Comment #3, you said that and I quote:

"Well, inventory carried at cost is also considered at its net realizable value. Because the standard says so, it is understood, the accountant and the auditors have done an approach that shall present the inventory at NRV."


You said that inventory carried at cost is also considered at its NRV. However, in your last comment, you said and I quote: 

"I did’t say cost is net realizable value, its either way as the statement lower of cost or net realizable value say

“Basically, inventory should be carried at the of cost or net realizable value. It’s not valued at cost, nor in net realizable value as an absolute rule. It should be the “lower” of the two”

Can you please elaborate what you meant in your two comments that I quoted above?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In Comment #3, you said that and I quote:</p>
<p>&#8220;Well, inventory carried at cost is also considered at its net realizable value. Because the standard says so, it is understood, the accountant and the auditors have done an approach that shall present the inventory at NRV.&#8221;</p>
<p>You said that inventory carried at cost is also considered at its NRV. However, in your last comment, you said and I quote: </p>
<p>&#8220;I did’t say cost is net realizable value, its either way as the statement lower of cost or net realizable value say</p>
<p>“Basically, inventory should be carried at the of cost or net realizable value. It’s not valued at cost, nor in net realizable value as an absolute rule. It should be the “lower” of the two”</p>
<p>Can you please elaborate what you meant in your two comments that I quoted above?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamal</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-203</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:59:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-203</guid>
		<description>"There is a big difference between cost and net realizable value. Cost is not net realizable value"

I did't say cost is net realizable value, its either way as the statement lower of cost or net realizable value say 

"Basically, inventory should be carried at the of cost or net realizable value. It's not valued at cost, nor in net realizable value as an absolute rule. It should be the "lower" of the two"

Correct, my explaination is only for the sake of argument. 



"Do you mean that inventory should be valued "always" at net realizable value? Nope, it's the lower of cost and net realizable value"

In a manner, inventory should be valued good as cash. Even though inventory is valued at cost, I will conclude cost is lower than NRV.  Therefore cost is more liquid under the rule of conservatism.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;There is a big difference between cost and net realizable value. Cost is not net realizable value&#8221;</p>
<p>I did&#8217;t say cost is net realizable value, its either way as the statement lower of cost or net realizable value say </p>
<p>&#8220;Basically, inventory should be carried at the of cost or net realizable value. It&#8217;s not valued at cost, nor in net realizable value as an absolute rule. It should be the &#8220;lower&#8221; of the two&#8221;</p>
<p>Correct, my explaination is only for the sake of argument. </p>
<p>&#8220;Do you mean that inventory should be valued &#8220;always&#8221; at net realizable value? Nope, it&#8217;s the lower of cost and net realizable value&#8221;</p>
<p>In a manner, inventory should be valued good as cash. Even though inventory is valued at cost, I will conclude cost is lower than NRV.  Therefore cost is more liquid under the rule of conservatism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gmcmanalo</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-202</link>
		<dc:creator>gmcmanalo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2006 17:18:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-202</guid>
		<description>Palitan mo naman Name ko sa comments, please... Isama mo na rin sina Jogar at Edwin boy.

I encourage everyone, especially our colleagues in CLMC, to participate in every topic. Let us "speak our mind," so to speak.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Palitan mo naman Name ko sa comments, please&#8230; Isama mo na rin sina Jogar at Edwin boy.</p>
<p>I encourage everyone, especially our colleagues in CLMC, to participate in every topic. Let us &#8220;speak our mind,&#8221; so to speak.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: deuts</title>
		<link>http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values.html#comment-201</link>
		<dc:creator>deuts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:28:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deuts.net/archives/2006/inventories-at-net-realizable-values/#comment-201</guid>
		<description>Very well said. 

Nagpalit ka na naman ng Name mo! Hindi n nman yan mag-a-add sa top 8 favorite visitors ko. pare-pareho lng kau ni jogar/jamal at edwin/edwinboy/edwin boy. Papalit palit ng pangalan....hehehehe:)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very well said. </p>
<p>Nagpalit ka na naman ng Name mo! Hindi n nman yan mag-a-add sa top 8 favorite visitors ko. pare-pareho lng kau ni jogar/jamal at edwin/edwinboy/edwin boy. Papalit palit ng pangalan&#8230;.hehehehe:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
