Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Chelsea Clinton's husband closing Greek-focused hf after losing 90% of investors asstes"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]A hedge fund that invests in greek debt and recruits investors who want to invest in greek debt is not doing a disservice to people if greek debt turns out to be a bad bet.[/quote] Sure.[/quote] I don't know why this isn't obvious to you. If you are a qualified investor, you should know this. If Vanguard or Fidelity offers you the chance to invest in a precious metals index fund and precious metals go down, are Vanguard and Fidelity negligent?[/quote] Very funny, Clintontroll. Vanguard charges 0.1% or so. Hedge funds, like Clinton's SOL, charge 2% of the whole amount invested, plus 20% of profit. Notice some slight difference? Why do you think they charge that?[/quote] There are no index funds for buying into greek debt. It does cost more to get into asset classes not available to the small investor. If you don't buy into that it's fine. But the fiduciary issues are no less for an index fund than for a hedge fund because their fees are lower. [/quote] Faacinating. Tell us, what were the fiduciary responsibilities of a manager who lost 90% of the capital invested?[/quote] A fiduciary duty is a duty to act 100% in the interest of their principals. Failure to make money is not a violation of fiduciary duty. You don't sound like someone who has much experience investing.[/quote] And you sound remarkably like a paid clinton troll. Your spin may work for some but it's just hilariously wrong for those of us who actually deal with hedge funds. But hey, your responses keep the thread alive so you keep your job.[/quote] +1. Frankly, I don't get why some Clinton supporter would care so much about this as to enter into obviously embarrassing discourse. I respect Clinton more than either Sanders or Trump, but still be surprised at the 90% principal loss we are discussing here.[/quote] Me to. I wonder what really happened.[/quote] What do you mean, "what really happened"? The entire fund was based on a bet that Greece would pull out of their debt crisis. It didn't.[/quote] Very true, but by the time they bought all that Greek debt it was already heavily discounted. Losing 90% in those conditions is quite a feat.[/quote] A). Who knows if they bought debt? The only thing that's reported is that this teeny tiny fund took a long position on Greek debt. Maybe they bought debt. Maybe they sold protection. Maybe they bought synthetic debt and one of the underlying asset markers tanked. B). Even if they bought deeply discounted debt, that doesn't preclude it tanking more. C). Really, the only thing that's remarkable is own such a young trio got backing for such a small group of funds to begin with. While this fund was only 25 (or 40) million, their group only had 400 million in the aggregate. That figure is pretty low and doesn't really suggest a whole lot of confidence in them by investors. It is a nice way to guarantee a presidential candidate's daughter/family has a nice NYC income. [/quote] Finally, signs of intelligent life on DCUM :wink: A and B). True C). Indeed. There are several surprising things that came to light in this implosion, so I expect we'll see some good analysis at some point. [/quote] Indeed. There are news stories dated near the founding of the fund describing the portion of the firm's funds known to come from Clinton supporters. Perhaps not investing for return on capital purposes. Capitol return, maybe. But this thread is intriguing for another reason. It appears that when paid posters are called out, they have to stop posting rather than pretend to be other. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics