i got 2.19 c/lb. i hope it’s due to rounding?
asdffdsa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 1/2 to 2/3rds correct. i dont think you needed to > study this in order to know how to do it. that > being said, this obviously should not have been on > the exam. how can they have one question on bond > immunization and an entire item set on reverse > cash and carry? its a joke. Dude, stop blaming the test. The question is from the CFAI book. Except in the book it was on Gold. You’re responsible for those questions as well.
Just_Do_It Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i got 2.19 c/lb. i hope it’s due to rounding? I got about 2.2 c/lb also. You pay the lease rate to lend and ear the Risk free on your deposit.
there always is at least one obscure question on the exam. i wouldn’t say this test was any more bs than any past level III exam. if anything it was less BS, it just was longer than avg.
Damn it. I forget to subtract the lease rate when calculating the forward price. The more i read this forum, the more i feel i will fail.
is the riskfree rate 5%, lease 6%, time 0.25, 316 spot, 313 forward?
yeah with the exponential you get about 2 cents/lb difference between the correct forward and the market forward.
i don’t care if they sent a seperate flyer with the books that covered reverse cash and carry. it was a crime that they ignored the largest topics and heavily weighted some small, obscure topic on the exam. i actually did okay on that question, but the way the exam was written disrespected people who put the time in to master the major topics, only to see those topics hardly appear on the exam, if they appeared at all. you seem to enjoy the fact that CFAI obviously went out of its way to screw people who made a diligent, consistent effort to learn the material. mo34 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > asdffdsa Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > 1/2 to 2/3rds correct. i dont think you needed > to > > study this in order to know how to do it. that > > being said, this obviously should not have been > on > > the exam. how can they have one question on > bond > > immunization and an entire item set on reverse > > cash and carry? its a joke. > > > Dude, stop blaming the test. The question is from > the CFAI book. Except in the book it was on Gold. > You’re responsible for those questions as well.
asdffdsa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i don’t care if they sent a seperate flyer with > the books that covered reverse cash and carry. it > was a crime that they ignored the largest topics > and heavily weighted some small, obscure topic on > the exam. i actually did okay on that question, > but the way the exam was written disrespected > people who put the time in to master the major > topics, only to see those topics hardly appear on > the exam, if they appeared at all. you seem to > enjoy the fact that CFAI obviously went out of its > way to screw people who made a diligent, > consistent effort to learn the material. right, they kept testing those small tiny things in the textbook (which they think is the gold standard). if they keep doing this, people will just keep reading deep and miss the main concept/idea, in fact, I already knew they will do this and try to remember those tiny things in the book, but it’s just hard to get all, (I even remember what is Molodovsky Effect, which is just one sentence in the book)
Why do you feel the “right” to do well on this test based on your covering of the major topics. If I am putting a test and I want to add some parts that will differentiate between the average and the above-average preparation, do you think I’m going to ask about the main stuff covered by Schweser and Stalla and anyone remotely related to the CFA program or that I would test something more obscure. I am not enjoying anything, I don’t care if people pass or fail either way doesn’t make a difference to me. I am just annoyed at your constant complaining that the exam was “bogus” just because you have been trained all your life to think of yourself as “Excellent”, and any test that would conclude otherwise would be bogus.
no, that is your bias. anyone who put in as much time and effort as i did (which, by the way, was clearly enough to pass the first two exams), would feel cheated by the third exam. it doesn’t matter if i have done well on exams all my life. i put the time in and EARNED this and they did their best to try to take it away. i may or may not have passed, but i still feel robbed. immunization is not just some topic covered by schweser. neither is attribution. neither are the options strategies. neither are the main points in alt assets. you could use CFAI, schweser or a combination of the two and still not be on top of every subtle detail. any rational person would weight their prepration in order to spend more time on the heavily weighted topics and to master the main concepts. i’m not suggesting that you should ignore the smaller topics because everything counts, but writing a test that was obviously skewed toward minute details is bogus.
I am not sure why you feel that you have “EARNED this”. You have not earned anything in life, you have to go out and prove your worth everyday. If you can’t take care of business on exam day it’s your problem and not the exam’s problem. Until you can walk in there and say " I don’t care what they ask, I 'm acing it either way" you’re not ready for the “EARNED this” level. Reminds me of this student I had in a Mechanical vibrations class, he comes one day to my office, “I’m a senior, I got nothing but A’s so far in college, you can’t give me a “C” in your class !!” So based on his history, and for doing everything the syllabus asks for, he wants to get an A. What a joke !!
it’s not even smaller topics, they test tiny something which was only one sentence in the book.
if you studied 400+ hours you should be able to pass the exam given last sat. only learning the major topics seems like something a 100 hour studier would do.
if you do what the syllabus asks for and do it well, you should get an A. those are the expectations and you met them. most of academics does not reward you for going above expectations, so why would you? a 90% score is the same as a 70% score here – you pass, that’s it. i’m sorry that you cannot see the logic here, because it is quite simple. the exam did not accurately represent the material presented in the curriculum–there really is no way to argue that point, because it’s obvious that CFAI intentionally left out several of the heavily weighted concepts. i mastered the majority of the curriculum including a large portion of the smallest details, but there was no way to prove that on this particular exam. on another, fairer exam that accurately represents the material, people would have been able to demonstrate their knowledge of the curriculum. instead, they got a crapshoot exam that did not capture that knowledge, which is why i call the exam bogus.
asdffdsa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > if you do what the syllabus asks for and do it > well, you should get an A. those are the > expectations and you met them. most of academics > does not reward you for going above expectations, > so why would you? a 90% score is the same as a 70% > score here – you pass, that’s it. > That’s what you’re not getting. Doing everything in the syllabus will get you a B or a C depending on the quality of your work. Not doing everything in the syllabus will get you a D or an F A is for Excellent, only. So not only you’ve done everything in the syllabus, but you’ve done it in an EXCELLENT way that left no holes, no topics uncovered, no small details out. That’s an A. Sorry if you feel bad about it, but again don’t blame the messenger 
asdffdsa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > if you do what the syllabus asks for and do it > well, you should get an A. those are the > expectations and you met them. most of academics > does not reward you for going above expectations, > so why would you? a 90% score is the same as a 70% > score here – you pass, that’s it. > > i’m sorry that you cannot see the logic here, > because it is quite simple. the exam did not > accurately represent the material presented in the > curriculum–there really is no way to argue that > point, because it’s obvious that CFAI > intentionally left out several of the heavily > weighted concepts. i mastered the majority of the > curriculum including a large portion of the > smallest details, but there was no way to prove > that on this particular exam. on another, fairer > exam that accurately represents the material, > people would have been able to demonstrate their > knowledge of the curriculum. instead, they got a > crapshoot exam that did not capture that > knowledge, which is why i call the exam bogus. but they can’t test everything and must test some things that are outliers no?
but that argument is flawed oskigo. for the most part, they ONLY tested outliers (excluding the IPS, of course). the major topics were not covered.
asdffdsa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > but that argument is flawed oskigo. for the most > part, they ONLY tested outliers (excluding the > IPS, of course). the major topics were not > covered. i don’t agree. i’d say 80% of the exam was “major topics.”
What were the two steps to reverse cash and carry?