Thank you for your kind words, Jason. Since obtaining my charter at the ripe old age of 62--I did it to escape the embarrassment of having to pay dues to the AICPA--I have strongly believed that Level I of the CFA regimen doesn't put nearly enough emphasis on the nuts-and-bolts of accounting. I know that the mechanics of debits and credits don't do much for one's intellect, but they are a real godsend when it comes to understanding bad ideas such as FVA.

In addition, accounting professors have done neither their students nor the potential employers of those young people any favors with how they now teach the basic "Accounting Principles" course. That is "course," not "courseS," the way it was decades ago when I was an undergraduate. That's right, they devour a 1,200-page book in a single semester. Why? Well, as a recovering academic, I'd bet a bunch of money that it was because accounting professors hated teaching a "boring" subject such as the principles courses, so they compressed it into a single semester. That is why I advise some of the young people that I mentor to take that course at a community college, not at a four-year institution. At the junior college, it is still a two-semester course. The pace of doing it that way ensures that they will actually learn a lot, not to have to memorize-and-regurgitate on tests a mountain of information that they probably don't understand.

In addition, when the professors jammed the two-course regimen into one, they also--conveniently, I would argue--ditched the 'Practice Set' project that capped off the two-semester principles courses. This was a soup-to-nuts exercise near the end of the second semester that required students to create a chart of accounts, make the opening entries for a new company, and then record transactions for several months with a month-end "closings," including accruals and reversing entries. Students also had to present a balance sheet and a P&L; back in those days, there was no Statement of Cash Flows, unfortunately. (If one holds a gun to my head and tells me I can have only one of the components in the financial-statement package, I'll take the SoCF every time because that's where the chickens from the accounting games played on the balance sheet and the P&L come home to roost.)

Just 2-1/2 years out of my undergraduate degree, I landed a job as the first Controller in the then-59-year history of a retailer and wholesaler of engineering supplies and art supplies; it employed 93 full-timers. And it had, for all practical purposes, no accounting system. (It did have an outside CPA who did the tax returns and who had been slumbering for many years.) I saw before the end of my first day on the payroll that it had no system, so, on my second day, I brought my accounting textbooks and my old 'Practice Set' to the office and set out to design a soup-to-nuts accounting system.

Wonder of wonders, the damned thing worked. . .on the first try. That was in 1978, a year of high inflation. I also published monthly "Expense Summaries" by department. The department managers screamed bloody murder. But a funny thing happened: SG&A went down that year. The cash-register system at the flagship retail store, which had been more than $5,000 "short" in 1977, was $7.18 long in 1978. . .on $1.5 million in sales. Of course, the guy that ran that store was also making cash advances to sales people. . .out of the cash drawer. I stopped that practice the second day I was on the payroll. But I couldn't have changed a thing--because I wouldn't have known how to change it--had I been forced to injest that gargantuan accounting principles textbook in a single semester--without the 'Practice Set'.

Luckily, various iterations of Practice Sets are available for purchase now on Amazon. I have recommended to several of my proteges that they buy one of those and work through it because it will be a learning experience that does more to prepare them for their later professional lives than any other. Several have let me know early in their careers that the Practice Set knowledge stayed with them in numerous fortunate ways.

One last comment in this vein: I think it is borderline criminal for universities to allow young people majoring in finance to graduate with only two or three semesters of accounting courses. I think they need at least five (5), including the two intermediate courses. Substantive--serious--accounting knowledge is a key requirement of careers in corporate finance or securities analysis. It is also essential, I believe, to have a gut-level appreciation of what attracts certain people to accounting as a career. IMHO, the best way to do that is to require five or six accounting courses for finance majors. I took seven of them, including four (4) (Intermediate II, Corporate Income Tax, Advanced, and Auditing) in my last semester of undergraduate school. Looking back, I don't know how I did it, but I also know that I didn't give myself a choice.

Segue: I agree with your idea about disclosure and descriptions, Jason. However, unless I am mistaken, that can be done only with intangible assets that are not already on the balance sheet. I infer that is what you meant by your reference to "contractual in nature," but I thought I'd seek clarification just in case. I should also mention that "contract-based" is one of five broad classifications of intangible assets cited in ASC 805. The other four are marketing-related, customer-related, artistic-related, and technology-based.

Hope these comments are helpful.