In their article "The subprime lending crisis and reliable reporting", Foster and Shastri explain that neither fair value or historical cost are likely to be both wholly relevant and reliable and that there is often a trade-off between the two.

In practice, which measurement method, historical cost or fair value would provide the 'best' accounting information? Use your knowledge of accounting scandals and the financial crisis.

Student A will argue in favour of relevance and fair value measurement method. Student B will argue in support of reliability (faithful representation) and historical cost measurement method.

I am student B