Au C 520 Case Study

BBGP Case 8.3: In this case study, you are asked to do work related to performing a substantive analytical procedure for ticket revenues. AU-C 520 will be helpful in completing this assignment. You were previously assigned to read this standard but it would be helpful to review it before beginning the assignment to understand some of the factors that affect substantive analytical procedures, particularly forming an expectation. Please complete the following table AFTER reading the case.
Below you will be performing activities related to substantive analytical procedures to test ticket sales. List and discuss two alternative ways you could test ticket sales and the potential advantages of these alternatives. (NOTE: This is consistent
This would be a simple approach but would not take into account that different seats may be more popular.
A second way to test ticket sales would be to obtain a weighted average between weekdays and weekends of the sales mix and then apply it to the attendance. You could then multiply the projected seats sold by price. This information has an element of reliability since it’s from a 3rd party but discrepancies could still exist.
When forming analytical procedure expectations, it is important to consider non-financial information (e.g., see AU-C 520, .A3 and .A18). Even though extensive non-financial information is not available for this case, list two types of non-financial information you believe would help you form a more precise expectation in this case. The public opinion of the team
Tickets R Us reputation of reliability
Complete Requirement 2. Show your work in detail. Weekday/Weekend: 44/72= 0.61 28/72= 0..39
Club seats: 25(.61)+26(.39)= 25.39% # seats sold= 516,783*.2539= 131,211.2
Box seats: 30(.61)+29(.39)= 29.61% # seats sold= 516,783*.2961= 153,019.45
Adult seats: 23(.61)+24(.39)= 23.39% # seats sold= 516,783*.2339=