A
asingh
Member
I think the answers work if it is a 2 year European call but the question says asks to value a 1 year European call. Is that just a typo in the paper?
-
We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
D
didster
Member
I think the wording on this question is terrible.
Most of the question relates to a two-period model. Then out of nowhere comes the 1 year call.
Presumably, the examiners expected you to deduce that each period was half a year, because
Most of the question relates to a two-period model. Then out of nowhere comes the 1 year call.
Presumably, the examiners expected you to deduce that each period was half a year, because
- why else would they have mentioned 2-period if they didnt want you to use it
- the marks available
A
asingh
Member
That makes sense now. Thanks.
R
Revelation
Member
Isn't the point that it still doesn't make sense? 
Generally when I find a misleading question I just put a disclaimer on my answer explaining how I've interpreted it.
Generally when I find a misleading question I just put a disclaimer on my answer explaining how I've interpreted it.
Rebecca Lawless
Made first post
Sorry to bring this discussion up again, i had no idea if a period was 6 months or 1 year - i thought that it should be 6 months based on part (i) but thought the examiners meant it was a year. How would they go about marking it in this case? Could full marks be awarded anyway or is it very strict? Thanks in advance