开发者:上海品职教育科技有限公司 隐私政策详情

应用版本:4.2.11(IOS)|3.2.5(安卓)APP下载

77 · 2021年08月03日

opinions

NO.PZ2016032801000007

问题如下:

Willier is the research analyst responsible for following Company X. All the information he has accumulated and documented suggests that the outlook for the company’s new products is poor, so the stock should be rated a weak  "hold." During lunch, however, Willier overhears a financial analyst from another firm whom he respects offer opinions that conflict with Willier’s forecasts and expectations. Upon returning to his office, Willier releases a strong  "buy" recommendation to the public. Willier:

选项:

A.

Violated the Standards by failing to distinguish between facts and opinions in his recommendation.

B.

Violated the Standards because he did not have a reasonable and adequate basis for his recommendation.

C.

Was in full compliance with the Standards.

解释:

B is correct.

This question relates to Standard V(A) –Diligence and Reasonable Basis. The opinion of another financial analyst is not an adequate basis for Willier’s action in changing the recommendation. Answer C is thus incorrect. So is answer A because, although it is true that members and candidates must distinguish between facts and opinions in recommendations, the question does not illustrate a violation of that nature. If the opinion overheard by Willier had sparked him to conduct additional research and investigation that justified a change of opinion, then a changed recommendation would be appropriate.

所以自己发出的错误recommend叫做没有区分opinions 与fact, 而从别人那听来的opinions 就不叫没有区分opinions 与fact??

2 个答案

王暄_品职助教 · 2021年08月04日

所以也违反了没有区分opinions 与fact这条吗


没有违反,因为文中明确了这是别人的opinion

王暄_品职助教 · 2021年08月03日

首先本题主人公是通过【overheared】的方式听来的别人opinion,首先第一步,是要验证这个opinion是否合理,但事实却是恰恰与自己的分析结论相反。

所以他直接改变了投资建议违背了reasonable basis这条。