User Comments - Romontana

Profile picture


Posted on: The Sharing Economy
October 05, 2017, 05:35 AM

Never mind, looks fine now.

Posted on: The Sharing Economy
October 03, 2017, 07:18 PM

Under the Dialogue tab on the website, are there two lines of dialogue missing?  I don't see two lines spoken by the female speaker (i.e., the dialogue just goes B, B, B) about halfway through.  These lines show up on the app, but I'm not seeing them on the web interface.

Posted on: 见面三分情
June 02, 2015, 04:41 PM

In the lesson I believe Constance said that 插手 is a separable verb, as it is used in the dialogue. With separable verbs, is the meaning that they can be separated, but need not be? One of the expansion sentences uses 插手不了 rather than 插不了手.

Posted on: Private vs. Public Placement
September 24, 2014, 07:51 PM

At the risk of muddling things more, the reason the lesson content is confusing is because of the use of the words "placement" and "private equity".

A company raises capital in exchange for ownership interests (usually represented by stock) in that company. In general, such issuances can be conducted via public markets (e.g. stock exchanges), or through private transactions with select investors (e.g., when a startup raises venture capital funding). The catch-all term for the latter is a "private placement", whereas the former can be referred to as public offerings – but not "public placements". In either case, individual retail investors like the folks in this dialogue can participate (but in the case of private placements, there are often conditions involved, e.g. minimum wealth thresholds and geographic limitations, that render them unavailable to most people).

Meanwhile, "private equity" is not used in the context of capital raising as much as investment, as sumnerg said. Specifically – the acquisition of equity in non-public companies, for the purpose of acquiring control of the company (as opposed to becoming silent investor or minority shareholder). In short, private equity firms raise money to form buyout funds, and use that money to acquire control of private companies (or of public companies for the purpose of taking them private). The idea is to improve the performance of those companies and then sell or re-list them later at a profit so that the gains can be distributed to the fund investors. PE funds generally require significant minimum investments, and thus the investors consist of wealthy individuals and institutions.

So it's not clear to me what's being discussed in the dialogue, but I'm not familiar with China's capital markets. While a private placement would normally refer to investment in a single company to contribute capital, the dialogue seems to be referring to a type of fund that invests in a variety of securities (including bonds), like some sort of private mutual fund or index fund. It's not the way we would discuss investing in the US, but again, there could be different investment vehicles and paradigms available in China.

Posted on: A Foreign Intern
July 06, 2014, 04:44 AM

Can someone on staff please respond to this? I'm guessing it should be 手法, not 守法...

Posted on: Thinking Inside the Box
April 27, 2014, 01:38 AM

我觉得这课的生词对中级课有点奇怪。比如,为什么 “用” 算是生词,但是 “链接”,“宽带”,和 “播放” 都不在?


Posted on: Ordering a Cake
April 02, 2014, 01:28 AM

I'm having mixed feelings about this conversation thread. On the one hand, I'm somewhat stunned by the sarcastic and needlessly defensive response to an innocuous (and not unfounded) comment by a long-time loyal user. On the other hand, I've learned a handful of useful and colorful new words and phrases in the ensuing comments. So maybe it's a wash.

Posted on: Bringing the Heat Home
March 31, 2014, 08:06 PM

Expansion 里的这个句子:”雪昨晚就不下了“ 。。。

是怎么能用 “不” 的?不是过去的吗?我以为应该用 “没”。

Posted on: Bringing the Heat Home
March 05, 2014, 03:44 AM

Is this message a joke? We are paid users, many of us "premium" users at that. We are NOT beta testers. So I suggest fewer deflections and requests for "patience," and more on the side of accountability and meaningful information. Just because many of us are locked in with a lump sum advance payment does NOT give the company the right to ignore user preferences, introduce faulty products, and generally display such flippancy with regards to the user experience.

The disregard for user comments and critiques has been palpable for months now and the problem is not confined to the context of the new site roll-out. Insinuating that anyone has been uncivil would be a cop-out even if it were true. Your job is to provide the service that is being paid for, not to gripe about the tenor of the commentary like an irritated parent. I think the community here is largely friendly, collaborative, understanding, and accommodating; if the company is discerning an increasing impatience on our part then it is best served casting its glare inward rather than further antagonizing the loyal Poddies.

In short, more introspection, attention to detail, and cooperation; less defensiveness and inertia.

Posted on: Bringing the Heat Home
March 03, 2014, 09:03 PM

P.S. While I co-sign all of the complaints, I want to emphasize how inane it is that there is no easy way to see which lessons you've marked studied and which ones you have not.

Even if Cpod is short-staffed and/or in the midst of some kind of transition period, other organizations find ways to implement changes without destroying customer goodwill. It has now been more than a few months of voluminous typos, ignored users, and untested software updates.