EB23版 - 3 mon movement is reflects the 27% rule?? |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
p***e
发帖数: 29053 | 1 3 mon movement reflects 27% rule?
but why the cut off day for Eb2I and EB2C are the same?
can someone explain it?
thanks | j*e
发帖数: 1987 | 2 27% rule没法验证，因为法律规定27%是上限，只要小于就满足.
现在只能证明比原来更趋近于27%。
并且可以确定的是2803/12的规则被打破了。 | r********n
发帖数: 1162 | 3 2803/12打破了就是一个突破
2803除以12等到明年也到不了7月15日
猪兄的电邮可能提醒了丫
丫也许没有意识到去年第一季度只批了15%
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 27% rule没法验证，因为法律规定27%是上限，只要小于就满足.
: 现在只能证明比原来更趋近于27%。
: 并且可以确定的是2803/12的规则被打破了。
| p***e
发帖数: 29053 | 4 but to EB2C, 3 month movement only covers less than 2800. looks like it is
not relative to 27%............
what is Mr O thinking? anyone can email him to ask why?
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 27% rule没法验证，因为法律规定27%是上限，只要小于就满足.
: 现在只能证明比原来更趋近于27%。
: 并且可以确定的是2803/12的规则被打破了。
| j*e
发帖数: 1987 | 5 What will convince you it is relative to 27%? Exactly = 27%？Impossible.
【在 p***e 的大作中提到】
: but to EB2C, 3 month movement only covers less than 2800. looks like it is
: not relative to 27%............
: what is Mr O thinking? anyone can email him to ask why?
| a***n
发帖数: 665 | 6 1. Spillover, quarterly or annually, normally happens towards the end of the
period. So this early movement of 3 months in Oct VB probably is NOT
spillover (i.e. not result of the so-said 27% rule)
2. I believe, based on my understanding of Indian Q’s blog, this is the 1st
of multiple BTMs, and there probably would be further BTMs in the Nov and
Dev VB, until “enough demand is generated/collected”.
【在 p***e 的大作中提到】
: but to EB2C, 3 month movement only covers less than 2800. looks like it is
: not relative to 27%............
: what is Mr O thinking? anyone can email him to ask why?
| y**********r
发帖数: 2004 | 7 猪哥说得有道理,饭要一囗口的吃，先把27%搞定再说。 | s****g
发帖数: 149 | 8 ---why the cut off day for Eb2I and EB2C are the same?
PD is the only determining factor for any spillover.
【在 p***e 的大作中提到】
: 3 mon movement reflects 27% rule?
: but why the cut off day for Eb2I and EB2C are the same?
: can someone explain it?
: thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
