问题如下图：
题目中当事人不是已经清晰表达了是expected 吗？为啥还是没有分清楚结论和观点呢？
选项：
A. 
B. 
C. 
解释：
NO.PZ2016040303000010问题如下Scott works for a regionbrokerage firm. He estimates thWalkton Instries will increase its vinUS$1.50 a share ring the next year. He realizes ththis increase is contingent on penng legislation thwoul if enacte give Walkton a substantitbreak. The US representative for Walkton’s home strihtolScott that, although she is lobbying harfor the bill anprospects for its passage are favorable, concern of the US Congress over the ferficit coulcause the tbill to votewn. Walkton Instries hnot ma any statements about a change in vinpolicy. Scott writes in his researreport, \"We expeWalkton’s stoprito rise least US$8.00 a share the enof the yebecause the vinwill increase US$1.50 a share. Investors buying the stothe current time shoulexpeto realize a totreturn of least 15% on the stock.\" Accorng to the Stanr:A.Scott violatethe Stanr because he usemateriinsi information.B.Scott violatethe Stanr because he faileto separate opinion from fact.C.Scott violatethe Stanr basing his researon uncertain prections of future government action.is correct.This question relates to StanrV(–Communication with Clients anProspective Clients. Scott hissuea researreport stating thhe expects the priof Walkton Instries stoto rise US$8 a share \"because the vinwill increase\" US$1.50 per share. He hma this statement knowing ththe vinwill increase only if Congress enacts certain legislation, uncertain prospect. stating ththe vinwill increase, Scott faileto separate fafrom opinion.The information regarng passage of legislation is not materinonpublic information because it is conjecture, anthe question es not state whether the US representative gave Scott her opinion on the passage of the legislation in confince. She coulhave been offering this opinion to anyone who aske Therefore, statement A is incorrect. It macceptable to base a recommention, in part, on expectation of future events, even though they muncertain. Therefore, answer C is incorrect.C为什么错误。。。。
NO.PZ2016040303000010 问题如下 Scott works for a regionbrokerage firm. He estimates thWalkton Instries will increase its vinUS$1.50 a share ring the next year. He realizes ththis increase is contingent on penng legislation thwoul if enacte give Walkton a substantitbreak. The US representative for Walkton’s home strihtolScott that, although she is lobbying harfor the bill anprospects for its passage are favorable, concern of the US Congress over the ferficit coulcause the tbill to votewn. Walkton Instries hnot ma any statements about a change in vinpolicy. Scott writes in his researreport, \"We expeWalkton’s stoprito rise least US$8.00 a share the enof the yebecause the vinwill increase US$1.50 a share. Investors buying the stothe current time shoulexpeto realize a totreturn of least 15% on the stock.\" Accorng to the Stanr: A.Scott violatethe Stanr because he usemateriinsi information. B.Scott violatethe Stanr because he faileto separate opinion from fact. C.Scott violatethe Stanr basing his researon uncertain prections of future government action. is correct.This question relates to StanrV(–Communication with Clients anProspective Clients. Scott hissuea researreport stating thhe expects the priof Walkton Instries stoto rise US$8 a share \"because the vinwill increase\" US$1.50 per share. He hma this statement knowing ththe vinwill increase only if Congress enacts certain legislation, uncertain prospect. stating ththe vinwill increase, Scott faileto separate fafrom opinion.The information regarng passage of legislation is not materinonpublic information because it is conjecture, anthe question es not state whether the US representative gave Scott her opinion on the passage of the legislation in confince. She coulhave been offering this opinion to anyone who aske Therefore, statement A is incorrect. It macceptable to base a recommention, in part, on expectation of future events, even though they muncertain. Therefore, answer C is incorrect. 从答案里知道了，will代表fact，if代表opinion。那么shoulwoulcoul表opinion吗？
NO.PZ2016040303000010 综上，以上三条都是在描述materinonpublic information，即指向A。但为什么要揪着shoulwill的用法来论证B？
Scott violatethe Stanr because he faileto separate opinion from fact. Scott violatethe Stanr basing his researon uncertain prections of future government action. B is correct. This question relates to StanrV(–Communication with Clients anProspective Clients. Scott hissuea researreport stating thhe expects the priof Walkton Instries stoto rise US$8 a share \"because the vinwill increase\" US$1.50 per share. He hma this statement knowing ththe vinwill increase only if Congress enacts certain legislation, uncertain prospect. stating ththe vinwill increase, Scott faileto separate fafrom opinion. The information regarng passage of legislation is not materinonpublic information because it is conjecture, anthe question es not state whether the US representative gave Scott her opinion on the passage of the legislation in confince. She coulhave been offering this opinion to anyone who aske Therefore, statement A is incorrect. It macceptable to base a recommention, in part, on expectation of future events, even though they muncertain. Therefore, answer C is incorrect.没看懂为什么不是内幕消息？
We expeWalkton’s stoprito rise at least US$8.00 a share the enof the yebecause the vinwill increase by US$1.50 a share \"he vinwill increase by US$1.50 a share\" 这句如果改成什么样？ 就没有违法呢？ 我记得老师讲过，但忘了具体内容了
