manhattan 逻辑~~ 问两道题~~~ 不太懂啊~~~~

irisfrance

many managers of mutual funds proclaim that they have been able to generate consistently higher rates of return on their investments than the general stock market by buying shares of undervalued companies. Classical economic theory, however, proposes the "effecient capital markets hypothesis," which indicates that stock prices accurately reflect the value of the underlying investments, incorporating all information available to the public. If the effecient capital markets hypothesis is correct, then it should be expected that?


A. mutual fund managers, in order to compete with each other, will bid up the prices of certain stocks beyond their true values.

B. mutual fund managers use insider information, an illegal practice, to generate higher rates of return than the general stock market

C.stock prices will rise over time

D. given public information alone, companies cannot reliably be labeled undervalued or overvalued relative to the general stock market

E.some mutual fund managers are better than others at generating a  higher rate of return on investments



这题选D  可是我不太明白 能不能给我详细解释一下~



另外还想问一句话：
In 1984, network television commercials accounted for 80% of all network and non-network television advertising revenue. In 2004, that figure was 60%. During that same period, operating costs for the networks remained steady, and in 2004 every major network announced record-setting profits.

想问一下第一句的具体解释是什么 我感觉我对network和non-network的收入构成理解有误。。。
还有最后那个announced record-setting profits是社么意思~~~~

落薇裳

想了想明白的，自己回答吧
Premise: 基金经理宣称他们通过购买被低估的股票来获取高于市场平均收益的收益
classical economic theory认为在有效市场假设下，一切的公开信息都能在股票价格上得到反映。如果有效市场假设成立，那么可以退出下列哪一项？

注意，这里基金经理的说法和ｔｈｅｏｒｙ不一样，可以有很多种可能
利用内幕消息只是其中的一种；也可能是基金经理觉得这些股票被低估了，实际上并没有；也可能是基金经理撒了谎，他们并不能找到被低估的股票。
所以Ｂ不一定正确

但是Ｄ，
given public information alone, companies cannot reliably be labeled undervalued or overvalued relative to the general stock market
是由文中的ｐｒｅｍｉｓｅ直接推出来的结论，有点类似于中间结论，并没有直接说为什么基金经理说的与传统经济理论的结论不一致，但是却是由原文一定可以推出的

落薇裳

没人回答么，自己顶一下

落薇裳

可是没有理解B选项为什么错呢。文中第一句话用的是现在完成时，说明在不可能的情况下，基金经理已经获得了比一般股票更高的收入，那么他们应该是利用了内幕消息呀，B为什么不是must be true呢？求NN解答呀

rikihsu

谢谢楼上清晰的解释啊。。。

colasama

你是说题目的第一句？
many managers of mutual funds proclaim that they have been able to generate consistently higher rates of return on their investments than the general stock market by buying shares of undervalued companies.

这是说基金经理声称，在投资时，他们能够寻找到被低估的股票，来获得高于市场平均回报率。
后面的有效市场理论其实是在批判基金经理说的话，因为在有效市场里，用公开信息是找不到低估的股票的，所以没人能战胜市场。

irisfrance

楼上不是学金融的吧...理解错了

incorperate的不是stock prices 和 all information available to the public

而是incorperate  "all"  information available to the public.不过这不是问题关键~~

----------------------------------------------------
有效市场理论认为：股票的市场价格，是已经完全反应了各种public information的因素而得出来的价格.

所以（答案）,仅凭public information，是没有办法说一个股票是被低估还是高估的。（因为，如果有效市场成立，根据public information估算的价格一定等于市场价格，也就是一定是fair valued）

-- by 会员 colasama (2011/6/12 0:43:02)

不是 我想问一下第一句和后面的什么关系啊。。。我感觉没有一点关系就放上去了。。。。第一句准确什么意思。。。

colasama

因果颠倒？不太懂...好像弄得有点复杂了~

个人觉得，回到有效市场理论比较好理解..

股票价格已经反映了所有公开信息（题目告诉的）

所以，试图通过公开信息去寻找被低估或者高估的股票是徒劳的（跟答案选项“只用公开信息，没法……”意思差不多意思）

MarsTOF

哈~~说得有点拗口
第一行是题目告诉的，第二行是答案的选项

两个说的是一件事情，只是从不同方向出发。所以是答案嘛~

-- by 会员 colasama (2011/6/12 1:01:54)

colasama

哈~~说得有点拗口
第一行是题目告诉的，第二行是答案的选项

两个说的是一件事情，只是从不同方向出发。所以是答案嘛~