Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
[...]On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:20:24 -0700 Mark Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The bit that you are missing is that the conversion from one fund to another uses the cost basis rather than the market value as the dollar amounts. Suppose I bought the fund some years ago (true), and suppose it has gone up in value significantly since then (sadly not true). Now if the conversion from one fund to another at original cost places an entry in the pricedb, that entry will be the cost of the mutual fund, not the current market value. Since the cost and market value are now significantly different, this entry would produce a large, short, downward blip in a (hypothetical) graph of the prices in the pricedb.True. What about the possibility of reports based upon the pricedb entries? Eg. a graph of the price history. Such entries would produce unwelcome blips. I'm just thinking here about possible future features, and, I suppose, the meaning of pricedb entries.In thinking on this more, as I understand the way the report currently works, that shouldn't necessarily cause a blip. The report takes the txn and converts it from whatever commodity it is currently represented in to the final display commodity(currency). Frankly, I don't understand the currency exchange function well enough yet to know, but it may be that it correctly shows a conversion. so for example if you have 10 units stockA @ $10 and trade it for 5 units stockB @ $20, then the value should line up at $100 either way. What if your trade is not 1:1. hmmm. 10units A @ $10 becomes 7 units B @ $20. well your value jumps from $100 to $140. but this is still accurate as that is what the stock is worth. What am I missing here? The point I am trying to make is that we should not automatically create entries in pricedb for transactions that do not reflect the current market value. Mark |
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel