I know that the term ‘CFA’ should be never be used as a noun (as bludgeoned into our heads), and that the proper term is ‘CFA Charterholder’. However, I’m sure a few of you have realized how stupid the term ‘Chartered Financial Analyst Charterholder’ sounds. Not sure if we can claim to be Chartered Financial Analysts, but Schweser says it is a violation (it was on a practice exam). Just a thought… EDIT- I also realize I can’t claim either as I am still just a candidate.
From a language perspective, I think CFAI is a bit more catholic than the pope with their restrictions, thought of printing myself a t-shirt with big letters “CFA” on it after hopefully receiving the charter, but then I realized, this would be the reason they could take it away from me as this clearly is a noun. So I will go with “I, CFA” like “Me Tarzan” in order to not violate the rules. And yes, both “I” and “CFA” will be bold 
I would get the big CFA shirt and just make sure that in small print it references the cat fanciers association.
That is clever Ceredwyn, I think you’ve cracked the code of how to make a pub crawl t-shirt.
I totally don’t understand why CFA is not a noun. What is CFAI’s rationale ? What language is it ?
well, if it makes anyone feel any better, I’m a CFP® practitioner or CFP® professional because not only does the CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER Code not let CFP® be used as a noun, either, but it has to have the registered trademark next to it. Always.
This is something I’ve come to appreciate, believe it or not. It’s because CFA is something you have, not something you are.
That makes no sense. “Genital warts” is a noun. Yet it is something you have.
just to clarify… warts is something you have genital is an adjective…
But together, “genital warts” is a noun. Just like “hot tubs” and “18-year-old girls”.
CFA stands for “Chatered Financial Analyst” right ? “Chatered Financial Analyst” in not a noun ?
That is the point of contention. “Chartered Financial Analyst” is clearly a noun, but CFAI just decided that it should not be. No one knows why.
I agree with the whole ‘something you have argument’, but it just rubs me the wrong way. CFA Charterholder is so redundant.
I believe the reason for all this is that the CFAI wants to use the CFA as a trademark. Under trademark law, a certification mark must not be used as a title or degree. It must be used as adjectives. Further on, combining it with a noun as Charterholder is appropriate under federal law. See http://www.imca.org/cms_images/file_67.pdf for further explanation of similar designations.
Plain English which will not lead to mis-understanding and/or mis-using shall be used, according to CFAI’s spirits. Not just follow some special cases. Even CFAI have to claim that CFA is not noun, why not give the rationale behind it ? By the way, it seems that CFA is not a registered mark in every country.
Simply refer to the trademark guidelines: they do not want the name to lose its brand character and become a generic denomination for any certified analyst. Quote: The CFA and Chartered Financial Analyst trademarks must be used as adjectives, not nouns, and the marks must not be used in the plural or possessive. To refer to “a Chartered Financial Analyst” or a group of “CFAs” is improper. Proper use under trademark law and the Standards of Professional Conduct would be to refer to “CFA charterholders” or “the Chartered Financial Analyst designation.” These rules flow directly from trademark law and CFA Institute efforts to prevent genericide. Genericide is the process by which a trademark loses its ability to function as a brand name and becomes the generic name of a particular type or category of product. Marks that are generic may be used by any group to describe their product. A mark becomes generic when it is used improperly by the public, the media or the mark owner. For example, calling any type of tissue a Kleenex®, or asking for a XEROX® of the report will lead to genericide. In contrast, proper use of the marks as adjectives, such as “Kleenex® tissues” and “XEROX® copiers,” identifies both the product class and the brand name. If generic use continues without serious efforts by the owner to curtail it, the brand name may become the generic product name. Proper use of the CFA and Chartered Financial Analyst marks will prevent them from becoming generic terms for any type of financial professional.
Ummm … this is probably the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Obviously you can be a noun (I am a person), and you can also have something that’s a noun (I have genital warts). However, the conferral of a CFA charter means that you have EARNED something, not that you BECOME something. It can be revoked at any time, and a brief period of failure to pay dues will result in you no longer HAVING the charter, without any alteration in your essense of being, in terms of being a noun. That’s how I’ve learned to appreciate it, and it almost makes sense to me. I frankly don’t understand or believe the trademark argument CFAI presents, because as discussed all other types of trademarks are used as nouns without ever falling victim to genericide.
I think I can safely say that this thread has at least taught most of us a new word: genericide.
1 Like
Shouldn’t the word actually be brandicide? The “-cide” is usually preceded by what is killed (homicide, genocide, insecticide). “Genericide” sound more like the offing of something generic.