Material information Question

CFA Level I
#21

Well, for the exam I’m going with – > Analyst conference call = public information (unless the information regarding the engine in this particular case was deemed to be not material but was non-public, in which case I am confused and screwed)

#22

For confirmation sake, if, from the information provided in the question it is clear what information is material and what is non public: for the code to be violated, does the information have to be BOTH “material” AND “non public” or will the analyst be in violation if the information is just ONE of the two?

#23

chad17 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For confirmation sake, if, from the information > provided in the question it is clear what > information is material and what is non public: > > for the code to be violated, does the information > have to be BOTH “material” AND “non public” or > will the analyst be in violation if the > information is just ONE of the two? It has to be both material + non-public = violation material + public = no violation non-material + public = no violation non-material + non-public = no violation

#24

Cheers for that

#25

for the second question, why wouldn’t Omitting relevant facts from a research report not be misrepresentation? You’re aloud to just take important facts that are relevant to the report out?? Doesn’t that seem wrong? XYZ is coming out with a new product that should raise their sales thru the roof, however the battery dies after using the product for an hour. Then, me being analyst decides, you know what? I don’t like that last sentence about the battery dying, I’m taking it out. Wouldn’t that change the whole recommendation and misrepresent XYZ? Maybe I’m just looking too much into this question.

#26

nevermind that last post, I just read that part in Ethics and I’m wrong. It prob is a violation just not a violation of misrepresentation

#27

JP_RL_CFA Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > nevermind that last post, I just read that part in > Ethics and I’m wrong. It prob is a violation just > not a violation of misrepresentation Yes. Leaving out information is related to presentation/communication with clients.