Robert S Fried
My feedback
5 results found
-
21st ranked
An error occurred while saving the comment -
17th rankedRobert S Fried
supported this idea
·
-
10th ranked
An error occurred while saving the comment Robert S Fried
commented
I've seen this problem several times. The only thing to do is keep entering the symbol you want and the error eventually fixes itself.
-
7th ranked
An error occurred while saving the comment Robert S Fried
commented
You actually can still edit the number of shares. You have to add a transaction, then find three little dots, click on that and pick edit transaction. That will replace the previous transactions. It's much more tedious but at least you can rescue your portfolios if you're willing to spend a lot more time.
-
4th ranked
An error occurred while saving the comment Robert S Fried
commented
I converted several portfolios to 2.0, and they showed losses of millions of dollars in the my portfolio view. The reason is you changed how you handle $$cashholders adding a column that assumes the value shown in cost per share can be multiplied by the number of shares to give a net invested. The logic in basic was that if the $$cashholder number of shares was its dollar value, the cost of the cashholder was shown in the next column. So for things like annuities or bonds or CD's one could put in what its basis was and then number of shares as its current dollar value. In 2.0 that doesn't work at all and there is no way to use $$casholder as a place holder. That's a disaster for me. I spend hours cleaning out the effect of the 2.0 system, plus the editing is extremely tedious in 2.0.
Also, you had a banner saying you could use $$cash to hold cash in 2.0 as if it was something new. It didn't work. You have to use anything but $$cash - like $$IRA or $$401k - anything but the word cash.
I think there are probably a lot of users who might like the tedium of adding in dividends, trades and so on. 2.0 is good for them. I spend enough time editing my Yahoo portfolios and I want something reasonably simple. Give people like me the option to stay with what you call basic and let those who want the other bells and whistles go to 2.0.
I request the ability to revert to what you call basic.
I've seen this problem. If you ask the same thing again several times it comes up with the correct answer. It does need to be fixed.