The majority of people got under 50% on that section (including most who passed)… that’s crazy: http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?13,595036
that’s encouraging …at least everyone was in the same boat; so I wont feel bad if the same thing happens this year, but could screw your confidence.
we will do much better then them james, much better 
The funny thing about that question is I think it was totally the hardest RR calculation I’ve seen since 2000 on an exam, that was probably a pretty big swing question, just by it’s weight.
What? Quant and Econ? Am i missing something here guys?? Were’nt these taken out for 2008???
Worth about 10% each… don’t you read?
jamespucyk Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The funny thing about that question is I think it > was totally the hardest RR calculation I’ve seen > since 2000 on an exam, that was probably a pretty > big swing question, just by it’s weight. Just redid it. Yeah, it RR is pretty tough i agree, i think it is tough because of subtle points like “immidiate need” and “currently our spendings are…”, not because it is hard RR in general. in 2005 with that Malasian lady it was much harder IMHO
I would argue that 2005 was more complex, but if you did it systematically you would get a decently close RR… 2007 with the time value stuff, IMO made it harder, plus it was sufficiently intricate, plus the 2007 scores are lower there than the 2005 ones… but we are splitting hairs between which ones is harder