问题如下图：
选项：
A. 
B. 
C. 
解释：
老师，这道题那个同学认为不重要在哪看出来的啊，为啥他觉得不重要就删了啊
Yes, relating to recorretention. Yes, relating to ligenanreasonable basis. A is correct. Brecksen es not consir the multi-factor analysis a criticcomponent of the analysis or the resulting investment recommention anthus, unr Stanr V(an(C), is not requireto maintain a recorof the analysis within the completereport. Apfelbaum uses tration\"top-wn\" funmentanalysis in the investment process. The report followethe trationformof previous reports on the same company. It containea complete funmentanalysis anrecommention—incating ligenanreasonable basis. The report also containea multi-factor analysis—whiis a quantitative analysis tool. If quantitative analysis were the basis of the investment recommention, it woulconstitute a change in the generinvestment principles usethe firm. Accorng to StanrV(–Communications with Clients anProspective Clients, Brecksen anGrohl woulrequireto promptly sclose those changes to clients anprospective clients. 老师，我还想追问一下传统的基本面分析与使用何种数量模型是无关的对么？多因素模型也会分宏观或者公司层面，这个跟传统的基本面分析有什么关系么？感觉自己比较搞混了，还请帮忙解答，谢谢！
Yes, relating to recorretention. Yes, relating to ligenanreasonable basis. A is correct. Brecksen es not consir the multi-factor analysis a criticcomponent of the analysis or the resulting investment recommention anthus, unr Stanr V(an(C), is not requireto maintain a recorof the analysis within the completereport. Apfelbaum uses tration\"top-wn\" funmentanalysis in the investment process. The report followethe trationformof previous reports on the same company. It containea complete funmentanalysis anrecommention—incating ligenanreasonable basis. The report also containea multi-factor analysis—whiis a quantitative analysis tool. If quantitative analysis were the basis of the investment recommention, it woulconstitute a change in the generinvestment principles usethe firm. Accorng to StanrV(–Communications with Clients anProspective Clients, Brecksen anGrohl woulrequireto promptly sclose those changes to clients anprospective clients. B看了报告，觉得量化模型不重要，而且表现出他对这个模型不熟知，然后G本来想保留模型，但是B电话打断了。这些信息难道都是误导信息？怎么就能判断他删除模型是做了充分研究和判断呢？
Brecksen是看了G同学的报告，说同意G同学的观点。请问题干中哪里写了Brecksen用top-wn方法得出他自己的观点的？如果没有自己推导，又说看不同multi-factors模型就同意G的观点，那么也违反了R吧？
committee对量化模型很满意可以看出量化模型很重要啊，所以应该保留recor？
我们最终的报告里面都没有这部分内容，它甚至都不算记录，就更谈不上记录保存了。