Modeling/Excel modeling in finance

K

Kondratieff

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2026
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
kkent,

How long have you been a quant?

Kondratieff

PS. It's "goddamned" - you could work on English yourself....
 
Goddamn is a perfectly acceptable substitute for goddamned. I personally do not like to capitalize either, because I just find that the reverance shown by capitalization is gutted by taking the Lord's name in vain. In this case, it just says that kkent is conflicted.
 
Now the Jesus *ucking Christ...That's a little much for me. That '*' as wildcard gets you into some pretty disrespectful and irreverant possibilities.
 
Kondratieff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kkent,
>
> How long have you been a quant?
>
> Kondratieff
>
> PS. It's "goddamned" - you could work on English
> yourself....


I was about to point this out, but it looks like you beat me to the punch. But hey, since he is a "psuedo-quant," he probably shouldn't expected to be the strongest communicator.
 
oooh... people are getting a little punchy here... does that mean the exam results are coming out soon?
 
bchadwick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> oooh... people are getting a little punchy here...
> does that mean the exam results are coming out
> soon?

nope, but it is monday.
 
FIAnalyst Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kondratieff Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > kkent,
> >
> > How long have you been a quant?
> >
> > Kondratieff
> >
> > PS. It's "goddamned" - you could work on
> English
> > yourself....
>
>
> I was about to point this out, but it looks like
> you beat me to the punch. But hey, since he is a
> "psuedo-quant," he probably shouldn't expected to
> be the strongest communicator.


But you would be wrong too. 'goddamn' and 'goddamned' are approximately the same word.
 
Sounds like my new gig insofar as the mandate seems to shift hourly Kent.

Best of luck though.

Willy
 
kkent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I just can't see
> myself as a psuedo-quant when I'm 30 (or even 25),
> although at 22 these skills are fantastic to learn
> and I'm not complaining.

With all due respect. I like you kkent, you seem like a smart guy.

Pal, based on your own account your work is nothing to close quant work in the first place. How the hell can aperson be a psuedo quant in that case. Do quants or their work have a particularly distinctive appearance.

Last time I checked they sat at computer terminals like everyone else using MS office in conjunction with inhouse/online data sources to crunch numbers. In that case even the admin folks working on T&Es are psuedo quants, especially to somebody who doesn't know any better. Maybe were all pseudo quants, FO, MO, BO, and Admin since we all analyze numbers to some degree.

Nah, I don't think so. You were implying the WORK you do is psuedo quant work making you a quant of sort by default and your not, unless you want to get really technical.

I use excel to analyze numbers, therfore I could say I'm a pseudo quant, but I don't because I know what it would imply and the implication would be a cotton picking lie.
 
JoeyDVivre Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FIAnalyst Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Kondratieff Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > kkent,
> > >
> > > How long have you been a quant?
> > >
> > > Kondratieff
> > >
> > > PS. It's "goddamned" - you could work on
> > English
> > > yourself....
> >
> >
> > I was about to point this out, but it looks
> like
> > you beat me to the punch. But hey, since he is
> a
> > "psuedo-quant," he probably shouldn't expected
> to
> > be the strongest communicator.
>
>
> But you would be wrong too. 'goddamn' and
> 'goddamned' are approximately the same word.

In the same way that fish and cats are approximately the same animal.

The original use of the term was, "Learn some Goddamn English."

Here, "Goddamn" is attempting to modify the noun, "English."

Now, perhaps you are suggesting that the "ed" at the end of words is now, umm, voluntary when making an adjective of a familiar noun:

the ringed finger
the blossomed virgin
the hedged MBS (requiring two FI instruments from different locations on the yield curve...)

I imagine you would consider properly stated as:

the ring finger
the blossom virgin
the hedge MBS

Of course, that would be babbling, and the Queen would deny your utterances as her English.

If this is not sufficient explanation, I refer you to a source, and request you focus on the adjectival entry:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/goddamn

If you dispute this further, I will have to sic my mother on you: she wields a Ph.D. in linguistics and her college-level book on English grammar is in its 5th edition.

I win these disputes, because growing up, I had my knuckles rapped at dinner when I misspoke, and on matters like these, she's always goddamn right....

Very best,

Quantratieff
 
Please sic your mother on me. Even your own reference suggests that adjectival meaning for 'goddamn' as 'damned'. The use of 'goddamn' as an adjective is everywhere and widely accepted even by the reference you point out to dispel the notion. I should have pointed out in my previous post that 'In this case', 'goddamn' and 'goddamned' are approximartely the same word. For example, 'goddamn' can be a noun but 'goddamned' can't be.

Edit: Actually maybe goddamned can be a noun, i.e., the 'The Goddamned gnashed their teeth while they were flung into the lake of fire'. Not sure of I like that.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 06:58AM by JoeyDVivre.
 
Ahh semantics. me suspecto that you've all lost the plot or should I say all of you have lost the plot, either way welcome to my clubbed, fellow quaints.
 
if the highest-powered excel function you use is the exponent, please don't consider yourself a quant...

i never really understood why certain people in banking, research or some other field considered themselves to be "quantitative." one of the funniest things was to hear this one girl from harvard argue how her knowing how to run simple linear regressions exemplified her strong quantitative background. well, i'm sure she was smart in her own little way, but that was just hilarious.
 
Quantitative standards vary from discipline to discipline. It's a bit like saying that someone is "very tall" - the answer depends on "compared to what?" For a physicist to say they have strong quantitative skills is a different standard than for a political scientist who uses regression or game theory. (I've done both)

For me, I thought it was odd to think that people who analyzed balance sheets and financial ratios might *NOT* be quantitative. Sure, they're not solving differential equations, but it's hard to figure out how anyone in the industry can get away without being at least minimally quantitative. However, in this industry, "quant" usually means using statistical/probabilistic techniques, or using mathematics and arbitrage principles for determining prices of (mostly) derivative products.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 09:25AM by bchadwick.
 
"if the highest-powered excel function you use is the exponent, please don't consider yourself a quant...

i never really understood why certain people in banking, research or some other field considered themselves to be "quantitative." one of the funniest things was to hear this one girl from harvard argue how her knowing how to run simple linear regressions exemplified her strong quantitative background. well, i'm sure she was smart in her own little way, but that was just hilarious."

good point, numi.

i would argue that this "quant" mentality has, to some extent, come from employers who encourage potential employees applying for non-quant positions to believe they will be valued for their "quant" skills (read: basic math ability). almost every banking and sell-side research jobs i have come across asks for "quantitative majors or demonstrated strong numerical ability." remind me again please, am i suppose to apply my mad "quant" skills to the algebra or arthmetic portion of the job? not to put myself or others who work in the industry down, but come on, we are not solving complex equations here, this is basically plug and chug using elementary school level math. sure, you have to know how to interpret the numbers, but a math major has no meaningful advantage over an english major when it comes to "fundamental" finance. trading and some of the real quant jobs are differnet, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top