Hi AIl,
Question 3 really tripped me on the PM Mock.
The investment committee job at the school is volunteer, how can it be violating Additional Compensation?
I also feel like he is more likely potentially misrepresenting his degree with respect to Mueller with his discussion… really awful question design. Can be view a bunch of ways here.
There is an employer conflict as there is a connection between his committee job and his potential employer. Re-read about the connection.
The question asks which one is least likely a violation with respect to the school.
The answer is saying Misrepresentation is is the least likely.
Conflict of Interest is not the correct answer, i agree there is potential conflict of interest between the school and new employer.
I guess CFA is saying the school allowing him to use the gym would fall under being consider an Additional Compensation violation?
I don’t view of the use of a gym to be a material compensation.
It just seems he was more likely that he is misrepresenting that he did not graduate from the school when asked.
If they give you a dollar value and specifically refer to it, then they probably consider it material.
Misrepresenting his graduation isn’t relevant to this question because it specifically asks “with regard to his relationship with the Mueller School.” The next question references his conversation with Pena.
So the question becomes: is it more likely that he violated additional compensation with his gym access or he violated misrepresentation with his relaying that the committee chair said he added the most value?
Thanks ya agree with your logic here.
CFA really reaching here with materiality of using a gym, especially with respect to noting he gets 50 per game which would be on par with a monthly rate of 41/month but oh well. Also does not state he uses the gym.
Where I messed up was assuming the Mueller School is where Pena and the Martinez went to school, this is not stated. Maybe this would have been the case if they that was stated.