Thread: Four Decimal Places Beginning 07/01/08

The 4 decimals might give me a better idea when the full penny is about
to come in. But do you remember reading why they are going to the Four
Decimal publishing of the prices. Greater accuracy ? Yeah right ! I'm simply
curious of the benefit. Maybe they will switch to the same 4 decimals for
our account balances. After all, 3.9 million pennies is alot of money.

Originally Posted by luv2read

Did these guys just get calculators or just a new toy? This reminds me of 1973, when in Engineering school we went from slide rules to calculators and the professors finally had to tell us to keep it to just 2 decimal points.

Of course over 30 years , that $.0001 could add up, but it just seems to me that these nimrods spend so much time and effort on crap that we could care less about. Of course barclays will probably benefit from this, now it makes sense.

CB

Again, a waste of money to focus on a non-problem.

They wanted to go to four places to eliminate the "catch the G penny" problem they saw.

Never mind that by limiting us to two moves a month, they pretty much eliminated the "catch a falling penny" action by members.

Oh well. We'll continue to manage our own money. It's just one more challenge and hurdle to overcome.

Originally Posted by James48843

Again, a waste of money to focus on a non-problem.

They wanted to go to four places to eliminate the "catch the G penny" problem they saw.

Never mind that by limiting us to two moves a month, they pretty much eliminated the "catch a falling penny" action by members.

Oh well. We'll continue to manage our own money. It's just one more challenge and hurdle to overcome.

A non-problem it is ! The (G) is nothing more then Safe-Harbour. In my
opinion, the limits haven't changed my definition of the (G) what so ever.
On the other side of the coin, I've been in the (G) for 3-4 days without
benefit and then jump into stocks. If I was getting credit for a fifth of a
penny on those days, I wouldn't feel being in the (G) was a Total Waste
of investment time. Is that what they're going to do ? Is that the plan ?

Read in one of their reports somewhere they were concerned that people were timing the penny as well, thus taking adavantage of those who were in G all the time.

I think the plan is to pay the penny portion on a daily basis....

Originally Posted by squalebear

The 4 decimals might give me a better idea when the full penny is about to come in. But do you remember reading why they are going to the Four Decimal publishing of the prices. Greater accuracy ? Yeah right ! I'm simply curious of the benefit. Maybe they will switch to the same 4 decimals for our account balances. After all, 3.9 million pennies is alot of money.

James and SkyPilot correctly stated the reason - its to stop the "determined cohort" from profiting from the "G Fund Payday" as stated in the published Final Rule:

Second, the G Fund has been subjected to a frequent transfer/market timing practice that is particularly insidious. The G Fund is invested in specially issued Treasury securities which provide a fixed rate of return established monthly. It is considered the TSP ‘‘stable value’’ fund, and is especially important to those cautious investors who seek security of principle and interest. Some of the frequent interfund transferors have determined that by making one-day round trips in and out of the G Fund three to five times each month, they are able to effectively collect a full month’s worth of G Fund earnings for just three to five days of actual G Fund investment. The windfall they secure comes at the direct expense of long-term G Fund investors who never anticipated that their safe retirement investment would be subjected to such mercenary treatment by their fellow TSP participants. Practitioners visit a Web site in order to compare notes and calculations to assist each other in the execution of this scheme. They congregate at a message board which they have aptly titled ‘‘G Fund Payday.’’ Indeed, like ghost workers, these individuals only show up in the G Fund on the days when their calculations show that G Fund shares will increase in value. With a finite amount of earnings to be allocated, these individuals unquestionably dilute G Fund value at the expense of longterm investors. This indefensible practice will be severely curtailed by the limit on interfund transfers. Additionally, the Agency will make a structural change beyond the purview of this rulemaking which will totally eradicate this particularly abusive form of frequent interfund transfer activity.

This still burns me up whenever I read it. Makes us sound like white-collar criminals, when Barclays is the one scamming. LIBEL! SLANDER!

Originally Posted by squalebear

A non-problem it is ! The (G) is nothing more then Safe-Harbour. In my opinion, the limits haven't changed my definition of the (G) what so ever. On the other side of the coin, I've been in the (G) for 3-4 days without benefit and then jump into stocks. If I was getting credit for a fifth of a penny on those days, I wouldn't feel being in the (G) was a Total Waste of investment time. Is that what they're going to do ? Is that the plan ?

And yes, SB, that's the other reason. So that the G fund has a daily return just like the other funds. That's what they initially stated last year before IFT limits were ever thought of.

They should have done this from the beginning, the other way is sheer laziness on the part of TSP/Barclays. What made me mad was *missing* the penny. This way you'll never miss a G payout.

Barclays and The Thrift Board:
Nothing they do surprises me anymore.

1 cent divided by 5 business days each day you would see 1/5 th of a gain. Their goal from day 1 was to force all into the G Fund and lock us in. If they break it down in this manner then it would be another problem because they did not consult Congress before changing this new process.

Originally Posted by Braveheart

1 cent divided by 5 business days each day you would see 1/5 th of a gain. Their goal from day 1 was to force all into the G Fund and lock us in. If they break it down in this manner then it would be another problem because they did not consult Congress before changing this new process.

this is a "structural" change, if I remember the law correctly they don't have to consult Congress on this or change a rule.

Originally Posted by luv2read

this is a "structural" change, if I remember the law correctly they don't have to consult Congress on this or change a rule.

If they can do this then I would like to see a +/- FV slot next to the I Fund and the others so we don't get the make believe numbers. You have to figure with all stings and raids this TSP has alot to account for.