对刚才的说法深表歉意,但学费确实不低,只是希望大家都能来讨论下。
-- by 会员 moffy (2012/8/23 17:06:54)
相互理解,相互理解。
学费的确不低,事实上在历次会议上我个人都是提反对涨价的,但成本运营的确有压力,毕竟教授就那些。很多学校,顶级的教授是不教MBA的,有的是因为有行政工作,有的是因为EMBA/EDP支付的薪酬更高,资源更好,不愿意教MBA。我们的课程定位就是教金融专业知识,所以只要能教的好教授,支付高薪也要他们来教。
节日快乐哦,呵呵。。。申请也要过节。。。
-- by 会员 SAIFMBA (2012/8/23 17:56:05)
薪水高的不代表水平高啊,比如张春,他就根本不懂金融啊,次贷已经爆发了他还30块去买花旗银行,说是“因为花旗多年来都坚持支付股利”
你说这不一傻逼么,呵呵
-- by 会员 ctoi (2012/8/23 20:49:02)
张春在中欧是副院长, 在高金也是副院长, 回国前是Minnesota大学讲席教授.
买股票赔钱算不了什么. John Paulson 2011年赔了5亿, 但2009赚头20亿, 2007年37亿, 2010年50亿. 胜败乃兵家常事, 何况教授也不是基金经理.
Mr. Paulson was fourth on the 2009 annual ranking of top earners in the hedge fund industry by AR: Absolute Return+Alpha magazine. He came in second in 2008 with reported gains of $2 billion.
And Paulson & Company’s performance in 2007 was estimated to be the best of any hedge fund, according to several publications. According to Institutional Investor’s Alpha magazine, Mr. Paulson himself made $3.7 billion, at the time considered the richest bounty in Wall Street history.
Mr. Paulson
personally made about $5 billion in 2010, according to two investors in his company. While he made $4 billion betting against newfangled mortgage investments, he made even more betting on gold.
But newer investors have watched their accounts erode. While the performance of a number of big hedge funds has been held flat in 2011 by choppy markets, Paulson & Company began experiencing big losses early on. The firm lost nearly $500 million on a failed investment in a Chinese timber concern after a researcher betting against the stock accused the company of fraud. Later, as the markets fell on European debt concerns, Paulson & Company’s portfolio tumbled along with it.
-- by 会员 newboyss (2012/8/24 5:47:31)
这可不是赔钱不赔钱的问题,是有没有基本金融常识的问题。从绝对数字来看他肯定亏的不如什么保尔森(总量不可比),但从比例来看呢?张春可是30块不到2个月亏到几毛钱。这也不要紧,亏钱要找原因嘛。在次贷危机发展脉路已经非常清晰情况下,还在根据过去几年股利支付情况判断股价,这难道是懂金融的吗?此人人不错,挺和蔼。但水平没有。很多教授也一样问题:水平不行。现在中欧搞在职项目的某教授也是不懂资本市场的(自己上课承认的)。