Acfi2080... (1 Viewer)

[SoCal]

No, I have never heard of the name. Should I have?

 

[baker182]

No, I have never heard of the name. Should I have?

She is the hottest chick in the course!!!!!!!!

 

[SoCal]

Hmm, not in my opinion. There is another girl that I think is the hottest and her name isn't Anna (I won't say her name on a public forum). However, there is another girl that comes close and another one I only just noticed a few weeks ago that is probably just as hot but I don't know them. My opinion changes a fir bit though.

 

[baker182]

Hmm, not in my opinion. There is another girl that I think is the hottest and her name isn't Anna (I won't say her name on a public forum). However, there is another girl that comes close and another one I only just noticed a few weeks ago that is probably just as hot but I don't know them. My opinion changes a fir bit though.

Mind you, the 2 ACFI2080 tutors are hot

 

[SoCal]

Well I can only speak of my tutor and as I have said before, yes she is very nice.

 

[em_516]

Well I can only speak of my tutor and as I have said before, yes she is very nice.

haha SoCal, so polite..'she is very nice '

 

[baker182]

haha SoCal, so polite..'she is very nice '

Natasha the spunk

and Louise the blonde bimbo

 

[SoCal]

haha SoCal, so polite..'she is very nice '

Always.

Natasha the spunk

and Louise the blonde bimbo

How do you know both of them, let alone both their names? I don't even know what my tutors name is but from your description I am assuming she is Natasha.

 

[baker182]

Always.



How do you know both of them, let alone both their names? I don't even know what my tutors name is but from your description I am assuming she is Natasha.

I know Louise through friends at boarding school. Heard a few stories about her. I know Natasha because she took her class once and she said her name was Natasha

 

[UGFighter]

haha, tell us the stories about Louise.

 

[em_516]

edit: just thought i'd add another

 

[SoCal]

The last two weeks have been so boring and repetitive. Everything has revolved around the same principles. OK, we get it, everything moves to equilibrium!

 

[UGFighter]

EMH? haha, it's such useless theory... the market is driven by emotion. EMH only applies on a very small scale.

M&M, EMH, bullcrap... *yawn*, it's all the same

 

[SoCal]

All that stuff was a few weeks ago.

 

[baker182]

haha, tell us the stories about Louise.

My mates told me that she is a blonde bimbo and easy to get with when she is drunk So take some beer to class and you might get a hook up

 

[SoCal]

Oh, I just realise UGFighter is Cyph.

 

[SoCal]

OK, question time. For week 12, tutorial problem 10 (a), does anyone know why you use the interbank rates?

Edit: For part (b) I don't understand why the "implied" forward rate is not as good as the equilibrium forward rate. For the "home-made" hedge you should have to exchange the $A 2,571,082 for XDL 100,000,000 which is a better situation than if the forward rate was in equilibrium at $A 1 = XDL 33.373 because then you would have to exchange (100,000,000/33.373) = $A 2,996,434.24 for the XDL 100,000,000 and you would lose money.

Edit: Err, I don't know what I was thinking when I asked the question about part (b), please ignore it.

 

[em_516]

Of course he is better than Janet. You would be hard pressed to find a lecturer worse than Janet.




That average mark is quite possible. As I said before, according to one of my mates who did the course in second semester last year, the average mark in one of the in-class tests was supposedly about 30%. They won't scale the mark, however, they may give you the option of it not counting if you do better in the final exam or something, at least that is what I recall him saying they were thinking of doing.

sorry to bump an old post, and to change the topic to macro again..but we all did ridiculously shit in the second macro test and i just saw this post..what do you mean they might not count it if you do better in the exam? like, overlook that you failed a component??

 

[SoCal]

sorry to bump an old post, and to change the topic to macro again..but we all did ridiculously shit in the second macro test and i just saw this post..what do you mean they might not count it if you do better in the exam? like, overlook that you failed a component??

Yeah, they were thinking of just cancelling all the marks for that class test and effectively giving it a weighting of 0%. So if it was originally going to be worth 20% of the final grade and the final 50%, then the final would now be worth 70%. I don't know if they ended up doing that though and if they haven't mentioned anything like this to you then I highly doubt they will be doing this for you guys this semester.

 

[baker182]

Yeah, they were thinking of just cancelling all the marks for that class test and effectively giving it a weighting of 0%. So if it was originally going to be worth 20% of the final grade and the final 50%, then the final would now be worth 70%. I don't know if they ended up doing that though and if they haven't mentioned anything like this to you then I highly doubt they will be doing this for you guys this semester.

Macro is fucking easy