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

杨舒芃 · 2022年02月13日

A也可以啊 就是没有区分事实和观点

NO.PZ2016040301000007

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.  

A也可以啊 就是没有区分事实和观点

2 个答案

王暄_品职助教 · 2022年02月14日

但不是其他分析师的观点只是一个opinion而不是fact吗 他把别人的opinion当成fact来用不是吗

同样,其他分析师得出的结论也仅仅是结论,只是推荐客户去买。

这题的点不在于他找到一个观点,然后把观点当做事实披露给自己的客户,重点在于他偷听了别人的最终结论,直接仿照别人的结论改正自己的结论。这属于没做好尽职调查,对于这个偷听来的结论他自己没有理论证据。

王暄_品职助教 · 2022年02月14日

本题区分了事实和观点,他通过收集资料认为是hold,这个完全可以。大家都是靠资料去判断的,如果股价的涨跌有确定的事实的话,那么股票市场就不成立了。

  • 2

    回答
  • 0

    关注
  • 387

    浏览
相关问题

NO.PZ2016040301000007 问题如下 Willier is the researanalyst responsible for following Company X. All the information he haccumulateancumentesuggests ththe outlook for the company’s new procts is poor, so the stoshoulratea we\"hol\" ring lunch, however, Willier overhears a financianalyst from another firm whom he respects offer opinions thconfliwith Willier’s forecasts anexpectations. Upon returning to his office, Willier releases a strong \"buy\" recommention to the publiWillier: A.Violatethe Stanr failing to stinguish between facts anopinions in his recommention. B.Violatethe Stanr because he not have a reasonable anaquate basis for his recommention. C.Win full complianwith the Stanr. B is correct.This question relates to StanrV(–ligenanReasonable Basis. The opinion of another financianalyst is not aquate basis for Willier’s action in changing the recommention. Answer C is thus incorrect. So is answer A because, although it is true thmembers ancantes must stinguish between facts anopinions in recommentions, the question es not illustrate a violation of thnature. If the opinion overhearWillier hsparkehim to conaitionresearaninvestigation thjustifiea change of opinion, then a changerecommention woulappropriate. 框架图上面在Communication with Clients写了要区分fact和Opinion,用的例子就是halo effect,那什么时候要选“没能区分fact和opinion”呢?

2024-06-20 12:12 1 · 回答

    老师这题我选对了 ,但是为什么A不能选,他是没有区分事实和观点

2019-05-22 01:16 1 · 回答