Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > SoA > Modules 1-5
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Search Actuarial Jobs by State @ DWSimpson.com:
AL AK AR AZ CA CO CT DE FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA
ME MD MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NH NJ NM NY NV NC ND
OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 10-19-2017, 07:14 PM
gcact gcact is offline
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Studying for ERM
College: FSU
Posts: 1,434
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyConsultant View Post
Hi everbody!

I still confused about Task3.
They are asking whether the addtionala marketing dollars is a sufficient mitigation strategy on company value. From the table it is obvious that it is not a sufficient mitigation strategy. In addtion, I try to explain why it is not according to illustrate the calculation of company value. More precisely, addtional marketing dollars may possibly protect net income, but it can not protect distributable cash flow......, due to the impact of food poisoning the trend lines that is used to calculate distrbutable cash flow is likely to be changed from positve to negative......(all above calculation of company vlue are cited from segal's book)

Do I dig so deeply about this question?
Looks like its done... You said, "no, marketing is not enough." You supported that claim. If you feel that you've written enough supporting arguments for your claim, then you should be good to move forward.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-20-2017, 03:59 AM
yyConsultant's Avatar
yyConsultant yyConsultant is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Favorite beer: No Alcohol
Posts: 152
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcact View Post
Looks like its done... You said, "no, marketing is not enough." You supported that claim. If you feel that you've written enough supporting arguments for your claim, then you should be good to move forward.

Thanks a lot!
I think my explanation is sufficient to prove my claim.
However, I just worry about whether I have explained too much.
__________________
No Plan B, Just Do It!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
eom4

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.13209 seconds with 11 queries