On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:38:27 -0700 Mark Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > >On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:20:24 -0700 > >Mark Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > [...] > > >>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 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. > > 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. agreed. I do think, however that a pricedb entry for any actual buy or sell is valid. Regardless, we're getting off track on the actual report and its expected behavior. I think I'll put together a nice example with expected results from the report and get some feedback on that. thanks for working throuhg this with me. I appreciate it very much. A > > Mark > >
pgpZ6Mtjo84YK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
