Re-tab

i think retab is more justified when your results are extremely below expectation vs. being on the border and hoping the machine picked up a stray mark…
has anyone else heard back with their retab results asides from anxiously waiting?
 
I have taken the exam 3 times and didnt pass this time either. I have gotten >70 in all topics in one year or the other, unfortunately never in the same year….how long to continue studying the same thing??. When I started the CFA, it was for learning and the designation…but now it seems more running after the designation which ofcourse is valuable - but at what cost and time since passing the level 2 seems to be turning into one exam I could never pass. Hoping against hope with the retab request.
 
mphorizon Wrote:
——————————————————-
> I have taken the exam 3 times and didnt pass this
> time either. I have gotten >70 in all topics in
> one year or the other, unfortunately never in the
> same year….how long to continue studying the
> same thing??. When I started the CFA, it was for
> learning and the designation…but now it seems
> more running after the designation which ofcourse
> is valuable - but at what cost and time since
> passing the level 2 seems to be turning into one
> exam I could never pass. Hoping against hope with
> the retab request.
Dude, be aware of being negative! People will tell you to go out after your every post (that’s happen with me here). They want to listen only shining winners or super optimists!
 
I will only retab if I am band 1 or 2, band 9 or 10 is less likely a computer reading error
 
DSLHU Wrote:
——————————————————-
> mphorizon Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
> > I have taken the exam 3 times and didnt pass
> this
> > time either. I have gotten >70 in all topics in
> > one year or the other, unfortunately never in
> the
> > same year….how long to continue studying the
> > same thing??. When I started the CFA, it was
> for
> > learning and the designation…but now it seems
> > more running after the designation which
> ofcourse
> > is valuable - but at what cost and time since
> > passing the level 2 seems to be turning into
> one
> > exam I could never pass. Hoping against hope
> with
> > the retab request.
>
>
> Dude, be aware of being negative! People will tell
> you to go out after your every post (that’s happen
> with me here). They want to listen only shining
> winners or super optimists!
http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?12,1043495
 
Appreciate the advise. Don’t get me wrong, getting the CFA designation is a fantastic thing, otherwise I wouldn’t be registered with the institute for the last 10 years. Maybe just not for me. At somepoint I got to be realistic. No?
 
mphorizon Wrote:
——————————————————-
> Appreciate the advise. Don’t get me wrong, getting
> the CFA designation is a fantastic thing,
> otherwise I wouldn’t be registered with the
> institute for the last 10 years. Maybe just not
> for me. At somepoint I got to be realistic. No?
Well, it’s up to you to decide. I am finding from searching the forum (I find result thread and track the author’s messages in later years so I know if she failed the next year; if an author with failing history was active till the exam and quits the forum afterwards I understand she failed).
So, ON THE FORUM (I am not sure if it represents all the candidates), but on the forum data if you failed the second time your chances to pass the third time drops significally and there were only 7 people on the forum who passed on their 4th, 5th trail and so on (and there were lots of 3-time failers).
I think that the professionalism is the key. If you fail this staff over and over again, that is a good prove you perhaps less professional you thought or you just out of the industry.
 
I searched google and found on another similar forum (analyst notes) that there was a grading mistake in 2004. It affected about 3% of the total that took that level and those 3% were contacted by phone about it. I’m pretty sure they’ve implemented some changes since then to avoid this.
I’m thinking of a retab as I got a much lower score than expected but I know the chances are pretty slim.
 
This issue was discussed on the forum in big details 2005 (I guess, in Septeber).
londonj Wrote:
——————————————————-
> I searched google and found on another similar
> forum (analyst notes) that there was a grading
> mistake in 2004. It affected about 3% of the total
> that took that level and those 3% were contacted
> by phone about it. I’m pretty sure they’ve
> implemented some changes since then to avoid this.
>
>
> I’m thinking of a retab as I got a much lower
> score than expected but I know the chances are
> pretty slim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top