<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid20060218122128.088faa03.andrew@farwestbilliards.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:20:24 -0700
Mark Johnson <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mrj001@shaw.ca"><mrj001@shaw.ca></a> wrote:
</pre>
</blockquote>
[...]<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid20060218122128.088faa03.andrew@farwestbilliards.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">True. What about the possibility of reports based upon the pricedb
entries? Eg. a graph of the price history. Such entries would produce
unwelcome blips. I'm just thinking here about possible future features,
and, I suppose, the meaning of pricedb entries.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
In thinking on this more, as I understand the way the report currently
works, that shouldn't necessarily cause a blip. The report takes the
txn and converts it from whatever commodity it is currently represented
in to the final display commodity(currency). Frankly, I don't
understand the currency exchange function well enough yet to know, but
it may be that it correctly shows a conversion. so for example if you
have 10 units stockA @ $10 and trade it for 5 units stockB @ $20, then
the value should line up at $100 either way. What if your trade is not
1:1. hmmm. 10units A @ $10 becomes 7 units B @ $20. well your value
jumps from $100 to $140. but this is still accurate as that is what the
stock is worth. What am I missing here?
</pre>
</blockquote>
The bit that you are missing is that the conversion from one fund to
another uses the cost basis rather than the market value as the dollar
amounts. Suppose I bought the fund some years ago (true), and suppose
it has gone up in value significantly since then (sadly not true). Now
if the conversion from one fund to another at original cost places an
entry in the pricedb, that entry will be the cost of the mutual fund,
not the current market value. Since the cost and market value are now
significantly different, this entry would produce a large, short,
downward blip in a (hypothetical) graph of the prices in the pricedb. <br>
<br>
The point I am trying to make is that we should not automatically
create entries in pricedb for transactions that do not reflect the
current market value.<br>
<br>
Mark<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>