I recently saw this chapter and had questions about it, so I left a footnote to discuss it.

First of all, I specifically looked for the English version of the original book, because the author’s translation was somewhat unflattering.

My premise hypothesis:

B’s original income is 1.3, and the cost is 0.85*1.015=0.86275.

According to the hypothesis in the book:

“disconut of 27 from asset value” means that he lost part of the asset value (asset value) with an absolute return of approximately 27

Then the income becomes 1.3-0.27=1.03, and the rate of return is 1.03÷0.86275=1.1938. The revenue to cost ratio is 19, which is the same as A.

Loss meter traceability:

The author mentioned that "the closed-end man could suffer a widening of 12 points in the market discount before his return would get down to that of open-end investor”

This means that from the perspective of the close-end man (refer to the open-end investor in the contrastive clause), he can (could, indicating room for concession) be allowed to suffer at the recycling price Return a loss calculation of up to 12 points of the asset price (discount, based on asset value).

The above assumption states that there is a loss meter of 27. We attribute this to the recovery stage, subtract 27 from the asset value, and compare it with 0.85-( 1-27)=12.

At this point all parameters are calculated.

Summary:

There is some ambiguity in the content expressed by Graham, and the management methods of modern funds have changed greatly, so this is regarded as a mental training, which can be used for Modern fund profits and losses must be calculated accurately to avoid misunderstandings.