标题: Exam wacc question had 0% weight!! [打印本页] 作者: hassan 时间: 2013-4-8 17:14 标题: Exam wacc question had 0% weight!!
I got 70% in question4 even though I left the WACC question blank.
After the exam I filed a complaint to the CFAI because the wacc question wasnt covered by the LOS.
I’m pretty sure the wacc question has gotten 0% weight and that I may have passed because of this.作者: kingstongal 时间: 2013-4-8 17:14
The WACC questions was covered by the LOS作者: ayaz_mahmud369 时间: 2013-4-8 17:15
There was a whole reading dedicated to that section.作者: jim8z3 时间: 2013-4-8 17:15
The question wasnt covered.
All LOS in the section said “discuss”, but it was a “calculate” question… See old thread!
Now I am convinced that CFAI gave it 0% weight.作者: hassan 时间: 2013-4-8 17:15
You see, in order to discuss, you would have to understand the mechanics of how WACC would change in relation to pension assets. And in order to understand the mechanics you would probably need to understand the formula. This situation reminds me of Treynor-Black question from level 2 in 2007.
I am not knocking you but I think you are being very harsh. Especially since you initially said it wasn’t covered, when in fact you know it was covered in the LOS (see comment above)… your problem is with the verb describing the LOS.
In schweser, they offered the formula, and in the concept checkers one of the questions involved using the formula.
I’m not trying to be rude by the way.作者: andytrader 时间: 2013-4-8 17:16
I left it blank and got
(assuming it was the Portfolio Management - Institutional- 11 pt question)
edit- below not over!作者: Rasec 时间: 2013-4-8 17:16
“your problem is with the verb describing the LOS. ”
Yes, exactly. CFAI use different verbs because they have different meanings. Discuss means (among other things) that we are not supposed to calculate.
Anyway, since I left the question blank and still got 70, I think they listened.
Btw, I don’t think you are rude作者: malbec 时间: 2013-4-8 17:18
No akanska, of course not.
I am just saying that my score indicates that part a was weighted less than originally. I think it makes sence作者: trogulj 时间: 2013-4-8 17:18
I got 70 on this question and know that I got part A of the question incorrect. I could not remember the formula so I just wrote the ordinary WACC formula. Maybe this got me partial credit.
