7.0% actually 3.69%?

OceanSound

RG2015 said:

zagfles said:

RG2015 said:

@AmityNeon, thank you for responding to my question.

However, it appears that my recollection of basic GCSE arithmetic and algebra differs from yours.

I much prefer to use Excel for simulating RS yield projections.

Me too, using excel for stuff like this is far easier than doing algebra, and less prone to mistakes. It's easy to visualise interest being accrued/things happening at discrete intervals, and is exactly what excel is good at.

But for stuff like the "boring" BC balance transfer issue, you can't really use excel as you'd end up with a circular reference, so that's where algebra is useful. Also a lot simpler than the RS algebra above, even I got bored reading that and I find algebra interesting

What is BC balance transfer, and isn’t relatively easy to avoid/circumvent any circular references in Excel.

BC is Barclaycard I think

zagfles

RG2015 said:

zagfles said:

RG2015 said:

@AmityNeon, thank you for responding to my question.

However, it appears that my recollection of basic GCSE arithmetic and algebra differs from yours.

I much prefer to use Excel for simulating RS yield projections.

Me too, using excel for stuff like this is far easier than doing algebra, and less prone to mistakes. It's easy to visualise interest being accrued/things happening at discrete intervals, and is exactly what excel is good at.

But for stuff like the "boring" BC balance transfer issue, you can't really use excel as you'd end up with a circular reference, so that's where algebra is useful. Also a lot simpler than the RS algebra above, even I got bored reading that and I find algebra interesting

What is BC balance transfer, and isn’t relatively easy to avoid/circumvent any circular references in Excel.

On page 8, or see link above. I won't repost it as some people may get bored

RG2015

OceanSound said:

RG2015 said:

zagfles said:

RG2015 said:

@AmityNeon, thank you for responding to my question.

However, it appears that my recollection of basic GCSE arithmetic and algebra differs from yours.

I much prefer to use Excel for simulating RS yield projections.

Me too, using excel for stuff like this is far easier than doing algebra, and less prone to mistakes. It's easy to visualise interest being accrued/things happening at discrete intervals, and is exactly what excel is good at.

But for stuff like the "boring" BC balance transfer issue, you can't really use excel as you'd end up with a circular reference, so that's where algebra is useful. Also a lot simpler than the RS algebra above, even I got bored reading that and I find algebra interesting

What is BC balance transfer, and isn’t relatively easy to avoid/circumvent any circular references in Excel.

BC is Barclaycard I think

Thanks for this suggestion.

However, I wasn’t aware of a general Barclaycard balance transfer issue. Unless it was specifically discussed in earlier posts that I haven’t read.

RG2015

zagfles said:

RG2015 said:

zagfles said:

RG2015 said:

@AmityNeon, thank you for responding to my question.

However, it appears that my recollection of basic GCSE arithmetic and algebra differs from yours.

I much prefer to use Excel for simulating RS yield projections.

Me too, using excel for stuff like this is far easier than doing algebra, and less prone to mistakes. It's easy to visualise interest being accrued/things happening at discrete intervals, and is exactly what excel is good at.

But for stuff like the "boring" BC balance transfer issue, you can't really use excel as you'd end up with a circular reference, so that's where algebra is useful. Also a lot simpler than the RS algebra above, even I got bored reading that and I find algebra interesting

What is BC balance transfer, and isn’t relatively easy to avoid/circumvent any circular references in Excel.

On page 8, or see link above. I won't repost it as some people may get bored

Okay, thanks.

I have done a few balance transfer zero %, zero fee credit cards but never thought to spend on them as well. 

I do understand the potential additional opportunity but I like a simple life. Plus interest rates over the last few years have made stoozing returns rather meagre.

AmityNeon

zagfles said:

AmityNeon said:

zagfles said:

AmityNeon said:

zagfles said:
You seem to be saying people don't need teaching maths or be shown mathematical techniques because they should be able to work it all out themselves.

Really? Where did I say that?

"It's not a case of they 'should' be able to solve everyday maths problems with innate logic; they can do it. "

Can do it (not 'should'); the context being adults are already educated in basic arithmetic and algebra due to compulsory maths education.

So not "innate logic", but what you've been taught! You seem to agree with me now!

(PS my last final word on this issue otherwise we'll end up going round in circles and some people may find it booooring )

Surely you understand how logic is integral to the foundation and application of maths? The ‘rules of math’ were not derived arbitrarily; it’s a formal system where logic is used to develop these ‘techniques’. One has to apply their learned knowledge with logic to solve new problems. It’s the difference between blindly following instructions using a calculator/spreadsheet and not understanding the result, and being able to decide for yourself which functions to use and why they’re appropriate for the task at hand. These decisions are all made with logic.

We also did use spreadsheets to visualise interest being accrued at discrete intervals with specific examples and daily interest, but it was useful having a generic formula that everyone could use (in the absence of a calculator).

zagfles

RG2015 said:

zagfles said:

RG2015 said:

zagfles said:

RG2015 said:

@AmityNeon, thank you for responding to my question.

However, it appears that my recollection of basic GCSE arithmetic and algebra differs from yours.

I much prefer to use Excel for simulating RS yield projections.

Me too, using excel for stuff like this is far easier than doing algebra, and less prone to mistakes. It's easy to visualise interest being accrued/things happening at discrete intervals, and is exactly what excel is good at.

But for stuff like the "boring" BC balance transfer issue, you can't really use excel as you'd end up with a circular reference, so that's where algebra is useful. Also a lot simpler than the RS algebra above, even I got bored reading that and I find algebra interesting

What is BC balance transfer, and isn’t relatively easy to avoid/circumvent any circular references in Excel.

On page 8, or see link above. I won't repost it as some people may get bored

Okay, thanks.

I have done a few balance transfer zero %, zero fee credit cards but never thought to spend on them as well. 

I do understand the potential additional opportunity but I like a simple life. Plus interest rates over the last few years have made stoozing returns rather meagre.

It won't work with all cards, I think for some you'd end up paying interest on the purchases, because the specific exemption of "no interest if you pay in full" may not apply if you just pay off purchases and leave the balance transfer. But the BC T&Cs do state that the "pay in full" exemption applies if you pay off the full amount excluding promotional BTs at 0%.

The other thing about the new BC rewards card is cash withdrawals are treated like purchases (no fee/immediate interest) so you could just withdraw cash if you don't have anything to spend on. Older BCs are different.

AmityNeon

RG2015 said:

@AmityNeon, thank you for responding to my question.

However, it appears that my recollection of basic GCSE arithmetic and algebra differs from yours.

I much prefer to use Excel for simulating RS yield projections.

Spreadsheets were initially used to show projections using specific examples with precise rates and daily interest calculations, but they did not match all circumstances due to everyone’s varying number of months (and their individual lower easy access rates).

My recollection of GCSE arithmetic and algebra is hazy, but it was still more advanced than what was used to derive the full formula, which is just a logical extension of the more familiar (m * r * 6.5), which people seem happy to use for general approximations.

RG2015

AmityNeon said:

RG2015 said:

@AmityNeon, thank you for responding to my question.

However, it appears that my recollection of basic GCSE arithmetic and algebra differs from yours.

I much prefer to use Excel for simulating RS yield projections.

Spreadsheets were initially used to show projections using specific examples with precise rates and daily interest calculations, but they did not match all circumstances due to everyone’s varying number of months (and their individual lower easy access rates).

My recollection of GCSE arithmetic and algebra is hazy, but it was still more advanced than what was used to derive the full formula, which is just a logical extension of the more familiar (m * r * 6.5), which people seem happy to use for general approximations.

Just to be clear, can you confirm that saying the formula is a logical extension of m*r*6.5 does not mean you are deriving the formula from m*r*6.5?

I am sure you don’t mean that but that was my initial thought.

AmityNeon

RG2015 said:

AmityNeon said:

RG2015 said:

@AmityNeon, thank you for responding to my question.

However, it appears that my recollection of basic GCSE arithmetic and algebra differs from yours.

I much prefer to use Excel for simulating RS yield projections.

Spreadsheets were initially used to show projections using specific examples with precise rates and daily interest calculations, but they did not match all circumstances due to everyone’s varying number of months (and their individual lower easy access rates).

My recollection of GCSE arithmetic and algebra is hazy, but it was still more advanced than what was used to derive the full formula, which is just a logical extension of the more familiar (m * r * 6.5), which people seem happy to use for general approximations.

Just to be clear, can you confirm that saying the formula is a logical extension of m*r*6.5 does not mean you are deriving the formula from m*r*6.5?

I am sure you don’t mean that but that was my initial thought.

Why was that your initial thought?

Looking at it visually, the 6.5 of m * r * 6.5 is just the area of a large triangle: 78, which is divided by 12 (for monthly interest).

Month 1    n
Month 2    n n
Month 3    n n n
Month 4    n n n n
Month 5    n n n n n
Month 6    n n n n n n
Month 7    n n n n n n n
Month 8    n n n n n n n n
Month 9    n n n n n n n n n
Month 10   n n n n n n n n n n
Month 11   n n n n n n n n n n n
Month 12   n n n n n n n n n n n n

The longer formula is the area of two smaller triangles, plus the rectangle between them, to equal the same area as the larger triangle. The total 'area' of the shapes is 78 monthly contributions; the difference is the differing rates of interest applied to those shapes.

Month 1    n
Month 2    n n
Month 3    n n n
Month 4    n n n n
Month 5    n n n n n

Month 6    e e e e e   S
Month 7    e e e e e   S S
Month 8    e e e e e   S S S
Month 9    e e e e e   S S S S
Month 10   e e e e e   S S S S S
Month 11   e e e e e   S S S S S S
Month 12   e e e e e   S S S S S S S

Fundamentally, it's finding the area of two triangles, and multiplying each individual unit (monthly contribution) with different numbers (interest rates) to compare their totals.

It's also easy via applying logic to derive how to calculate drip-feeding amounts (without resorting to calculators or complicated formulae). 12 months of 12 monthly contributions = 144 (a perfect square). 78 contributions are accounted for above, so 144 - 78 = 66, and we just apply a lower monthly rate of interest to those 66 contributions.

Brie

I know this will drag people back several pages but there's comments about the lack of math and financial education in the UK.  Is that actually true that money is never part of the math curriculum?  I can't believe that there's no questions at some point when discussing percentages that variations on simple or compound interest.  So no teacher ever says "If you have 100 (of anything) how much do you have if 10% is added?"

Being in education long ago (1970s) and far away we did have financial training where there was a whole term where things like savings accounts, mortgages, budgeting were taught.  Well taught to some of us.  Actually just the boys.  Because girls didn't do finance.  They were taught about babies instead.  I assume that there, now, albeit still far away, that all students are taught about finances and assumed that the same would be happening in the UK.