Dear John and All,
I have just consulted last Saturday's 'Weekend Australian' financial pages.
Below one dollar here are some examples of share prices. For values below
one dollar I could not find any that had more than three digits after the
decimal marker. None of these had a leading zero. A single redundant zero
was used to make up to two digits after the decimal point.
.001
.04
.255
.98
For values between 1 $ and 10 $ there could be up to (but not more than)
four significant figures. Redundant zeroes were always used to ensure that
were at least two digits after the decimal marker. Three decimal place
values were more common at the lower end of this range. Here are some
examples.
1.572
3.50
5.06
6.00
>From 10 $ to 100 $ there were no examples of three decimal places. There
were examples of the use of one or two redundant zeroes.
13.82
19.30
29.00
31.33
Above 100 $ values had only one decimal place. There were examples of single
but not of two redundant zeroes.
100.0
101.3
106.5
160.0
There were no examples of prices above 1000 $. It is a common practice here
to 'split' the stocks so that they maintain a range usually somewhere
between 10 $ and 20 $.
On reflection, it almost seems as if there is a tendency to aim for four
significant figures as the norm for stock prices. The precision is 1 part in
a 1000 for prices below 1 $ and 1 part in 10 000 for prices above 1 $.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin CAMS
Geelong, Australia
on 2001-02-18 04.59, kilopascal at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 2001-02-17
>
> What it really proves is people don't understand fractions. The fractions
> blinded them to what was really going on. Now, decimals makes trading more
> transparent and the values are more clear. Thus even a 4 ¢ change becomes
> noticeable.
>
> I just wonder what the minimum point spread is in other countries? Like
> Canada, Australia, the Euro zone, etc.? Do they experience the same problem
> and if so, how do they deal with it? I can't believe that only the
> Americans are having this kind of trouble.
>
> I was also under the belief that when decimalization was discussed, that a 5
> or 6 ¢ spread would be maintained and the change to penny pricing would not.
> Maybe they should have gone from fractions to decimals and stuck with a 5 ¢
> spread, and once the dust settled from that, then experiment and change the
> limits. This kind of problem gives decimals a bad taste in peoples mouth.
> And opponents can charge that problems in the stock market will happen in
> the public if we ever go metric.
>
> John
>
> Keiner ist hoffnungsloser versklavt als derjenige, der irrtümlich glaubt
> frei zu sein.
>
> There are none more hopelessly enslaved then those who falsely believe they
> re free!
>
> Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832)
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nat Hager III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "U.S. Metric Association"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, 2001-02-17 10:17
> Subject: RE: [USMA:11088] Re: decimal stocks at 3 weeks
>
>
>> It sounds like the problem is more with the minimum point slide being too
>> small (1 cent vs. 6.25 cents) than any issue specific to decimalization.
>> There was the lady who thought a stock going from $35.04 to $35.00 was
>> "dropping like a rock", but you'll always have that. <g>
>>
>> Nat
>>
>>>
>>> 2001-02-17
>>>
>>> I had also read similar articles in the Wall Street Journal and the
>>> Cleveland Plain Dealer (AP report) over the past few days. The question
>>> that comes to mind, is how are stocks traded in other countries that
> have
>>> been decimal from the git-go and how do they get around the problems
>>> experienced here? I can't help wonder why Americans have so much
> trouble
>>> doing things that are normal and logical.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> Keiner ist hoffnungsloser versklavt als derjenige, der irrtümlich glaubt
>>> frei zu sein.
>>>
>>> There are none more hopelessly enslaved then those who falsely
>>> believe they
>>> are free!
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Nat Hager III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Sent: Saturday, 2001-02-17 05:09
>>> Subject: [USMA:11079] decimal stocks at 3 weeks
>>>
>>>
>>>> Some fine-tuning related to decimal stocks....
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
