V
vik1947
Member
Hi,
I have some trouble understanding the role of managing costs in the question. The question says that the continuously compounded costs of managing the asset are 100x% (let's say 100x% instead of x% as in the question to make calculations easier!) of the value of the asset.
Now, if there is no further income from the asset, the value of the asset after T years will be S(0)*e(-xT) where S(0) is value of the asset at time 0.
However, according to the solution if there is an income y from the asset at time 0, its accumulation at time T is given as y*e^((x+r)T).
Does the managing cost play a reverse role in the income from the asset? That is to say the managing costs declines the value of the asset while it increases the rate of accumulation of any income from the asset.
Does this mean that there are no managing costs like commission, fund management etc on any income from the asset?
Thanks in advance.
I have some trouble understanding the role of managing costs in the question. The question says that the continuously compounded costs of managing the asset are 100x% (let's say 100x% instead of x% as in the question to make calculations easier!) of the value of the asset.
Now, if there is no further income from the asset, the value of the asset after T years will be S(0)*e(-xT) where S(0) is value of the asset at time 0.
However, according to the solution if there is an income y from the asset at time 0, its accumulation at time T is given as y*e^((x+r)T).
Does the managing cost play a reverse role in the income from the asset? That is to say the managing costs declines the value of the asset while it increases the rate of accumulation of any income from the asset.
Does this mean that there are no managing costs like commission, fund management etc on any income from the asset?
Thanks in advance.