I noticed after I posted that it was real GDP, but didn't bother editing. Unless you're talking about something else?
InTrade has a new Depression Trade!
- Thread starter Random.Capital
- Start date
I checked back on the site to see what it was priced and it had actually increased. I figured that if it was that obvious then it should have went the other way.
Oops.
I actually went to the table 1.1.1 to look at what #s they are using and it looks like the only error on that is how they are adding up the four quarterly percentage change #s.
If they applied the same logic to 2006 it would be:
4.8 2.7 0.8 1.5 +
which would come out to an incorect +9.8% real gdp
Oops.
I actually went to the table 1.1.1 to look at what #s they are using and it looks like the only error on that is how they are adding up the four quarterly percentage change #s.
If they applied the same logic to 2006 it would be:
4.8 2.7 0.8 1.5 +
which would come out to an incorect +9.8% real gdp
Bond_Trader's an idiot. If he posts something wrong...he meant it. He's a moron
I suppose this thread is an interesting indicator of intelligence on ET.
On the one hand, maybe a lot of people spotted it but couldn't be bothered to point it out.
The mistake is here:
If these annualised figures add up to more than -10.0% over four consecutive quarters then the contract will expire at 100.
On the one hand, maybe a lot of people spotted it but couldn't be bothered to point it out.
The mistake is here:
If these annualised figures add up to more than -10.0% over four consecutive quarters then the contract will expire at 100.