C - not stand alone
second one has to be C or D…is his relative qualified? I go with C
D by elimination.
Gotta be C. Hiring relatives has nothing to do with the prudent investor rule. I think? Thanks for the questions Bannisja.
i’m guessing d. should give up after taking 2 shots at the first one and missing both.
ng30 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i’m guessing d. should give up after taking 2 > shots at the first one and missing both. I got the first one right cause I remembered seeing it before on here, but I don’t agree with it, I feel like it should have only been a violation of due diligence, not disclosure.
D
n-van, i felt the same way. like, if the relative is her great uncle warren buffet, then it sounds pretty smart! but given the choices, i bit on nepotism is probably the bad thing. Your answer: D was correct! Trustees must exercise care, skill, caution, loyalty, and impartiality. Recommending that the trustees approve her relative as new portfolio manager endangers Barnes’ ability to avoid conflicts of interest and hence her duty of loyalty. 2 more- got this one wrong, bad me. Allocation on a strict pro rata basis means each account for which the shares are suitable: A) shall receive m/n shares, where there are m shares available and n such accounts. B) and which has expressed an advance indication of interest, shall receive m/n shares, where there are m shares available and n such accounts. C) shall receive w*m shares, where w is a disportionate value for all such accounts and there are m shares available. D) and which has expressed an advance indication of interest, shall receive w*m shares, where w is the account’s proportional value of all such accounts and there are m shares available. and then the ridiculous one that i knew because i literally read this a day ago- this is ridiculous though- The Prudent Man Rule (PMR) traces its origins back to: A) the 1830 court case of Harvard College vs. Amory. B) the 1896 legislation known as the Robinson-Patman Act. C) the 1933 legislation known as the Glass-Steagall Act. D) changes in banking practices that resulted from the collapse in financial markets during the Great Depression in the 1930s.
Swan, I chose disclosure so even under that rationale I was off. I’m just thinking he had to know that regardless, which in my thinking fell under only disclosure. Guess I was half right.
B,D
B pretty sure and guessing at D. My eyes are crossing.
Not doing so hot on these. A, D
B A, and yes. this is absurd. but i might be right.
B, A. I think I got the last one. Remember something like that.
ok that last question pisses me off… wtf is this ethics or history question? so I go with D and then no clue…so i will guesssss A
key word here i guess is STRICT. pro rata as i knew it would be B for certain. but i guess if it’s strict prorata then it’s straight up stick 'em in every suitable account, indications of interest not necessary? i don’t remember reading this but will take their word? Your answer: B was incorrect. The correct answer was A) shall receive m/n shares, where there are m shares available and n such accounts. Strict pro rata means that each suitable account should receive m/n shares, where there are m shares available and n suitable accounts. the text in the CFAI books on this is riveting, let me tell you. it does have this in there though- don’t think the CFAI would get that evil. Your answer: A was correct! The PMR concept originated with the 1830 court case of Harvard College vs. Amory
Wow, ate it on both questions.
great the ones I thought I knew I got wrong, the one I guessed I got right…I should go buy a lottery or just guess on all answeres…
man. that first one would get me every time.