Originally Posted by
Dave Noble
not sure how much more explicit it needs to be
It needs to be explicit on the QF website.
Which it isn't.
It's ambiguous.
And incorrect on QF's own retail website.
Wouldn't that be more and absolutely explicit?
This ongoing argument is probably the most childishly stupid and boring outpouring of idiocy I have ever read on FT. Only my opinion. And to be clear this personal observation is made on the arguments offered (not the owners of those arguments).
Arguments already made demolishing your position, you simply ignore - posted facts, which are not in alignment with your position, you simply disregard.
Fruitless - better things to do....