Global Matrix! New Site!

http://globalmatrix.blogspot.com

Hedge Fund Egos Exposed - Alex Fleiss

1. INFO - - Alexander Fleiss (Amhurst, '05) started "Rebellion Research", and it's twin hedge fund, with Johnathan Knight Sturges (Amhurst), and Spencer Greenberg (Columbia):
(Info source: http://integrityresearch.blogdrive.com/comments?id=718)

2. GOSSIP - - Apparently, while a student at Amhurst, Alex was...attacked by an "Asian" gang!?
but he just wanted to help his friends pick up more "friends" at Mount Holyoke...
*This is a must read!*:
http://halogen.note.amherst.edu/~astudent/2003-2004/issue05/news/01.html

3. GOSSIP - - Comment about "hedge fund toddlers" post. See, http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_31/c3995026.htm

Hedge Fund Heirs Is More Like It

"Hedge fund toddlers" (News: Analysis & Commentary, July 3) gives the impression that no prior hedge fund experience is necessary to start a fund and that launching one is "easy" because all it requires is filing some "paperwork." At first, I was impressed by Rebellion Research Technologies because it seemed they had started from the ground up, with no experience.

I became less impressed as I read that Alexander C.E. Fleiss's mother manages her own hedge fund, and Spencer G. Greenberg's father manages another. What's more, Fleiss started the hedge fund with money he inherited from his grandfather. What person would not attempt to capitalize on these facts (i.e., pedigree)? Their "start" is no different than that of Donald Trump. Let's face it, Trump would not be where he is today if it were not for the wisdom, experience, and money inherited from his father, who was himself in the business.

Christopher Siegle
Pompano Beach, Fla.

4. FRIENDS AND ASSOCIATES - - Mum Karen Fleiss indeed seems well connected...and missing that 1.7 million...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB108690562744434417.html?mod=home_whats_news_us

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000039&sid=aMQfnq0s7IQk&refer=columnist_lewis

Hedge Fund Egos Exposed - Chris Lahiji

Chris Lahiji
(See photo by Hal Bergman - http://www.halbergman.com/blog/lahiji1.html)


1. INFO - - Chris' website (apparently selling advice is a better gig than...)


2. GOSSIP - - A brief silly interview with Chris and someone (that pretended to be from the NYTimes?):
http://www.electronicmayhem.net/satire/1054112982.shtml

3. INFO - - A bit more serious interview:
http://www.dealbreaker.com/2006/11/better_know_a_trader_chris_lah_1.php

4. INFO - - An article:
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2004/05/10/free-realtime-garbage.aspx


5. GOSSIP - - He was one of the 'whiz kids' of hedge funds:
http://www.rgm.com/articles/bloomberg.html

Hedge Funds - Hypothetical

Bradford is a senior manager at a hedge fund, specializing in political elections. He reseraches which candidate is likely to win, and why, then constructs a compatible investment strategy (e.g. in the year 2000, Bradford invested in both oil and renewable energy, reasoning that oil stocks/futures would go up if Bush won, and renewable energy stocks/futures would go up if Gore won).

Surprise is key to Bradford's success. If others knew he was going to move $500 million into the oil market, others would buy first, and advantage off of his research.

This year Bradford was monitoring elections, and saw some quality candidates with disorganized campaign managers. So he decided to get involved. Bradford decides to help Clancy, who is running for Mayor of Metrocity. Clancy has openly stated that he would support the development of a gold mine on the West side of town. This controversial project is projected to lower gold prices.

Bradford starts to donate to Clancy's campaign, and provides expert strategies for free.

Clancy's thought process: he not only does not need to report his associated with a hedge fund, but he cannot report this association because hedge fund's have the SEC-given right to keep their investment strategies confidential.


DISCUSS....

Hedge Funds - Background

Hedge funds are managed investment funds that are only lightly regulated by the SEC. To take advantage of this lack of scrutiny, hedge funds can only manage money for the wealthy (e.g. they set a minimum enrollment investment at $1 million or more). The rationale is that the SEC does not need to monitor hedge funds, because hedge fund investors can afford to lose their investment.

Furthermore, the light regulation is justified by the argument that hedge funds' free reign attracts investors, which in turn lifts the whole market. Hedge funds manage approximately $1.4 trillion in the U.S. market, accounting for about 5% of all assets in the US, and about 30% of stock-trading volume in US markets. (Wall Street Journal, Jan 29, 2007) See: http://users1.wsj.com/lmda/do/checkLogin?mg=wsj-users1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB115394214778218146.html%3Fmod%3D2_1154_3

(Here is an interesting map of global asset distribution (originally, Wall Street Journal, Jan 10, 2007): http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2007/01/worlds_assets_h.html)

Hedge Funds - Controling Political Agendas?

Spitzer is regulation-shy:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116951629735584431.html?mod=rss_law_page

Cerberus (an established, large hedge fund) is connected to Dan Quayle and the Bush administration:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerberus_Capital_Management

Madeline Albright is even working for a hedge fund:
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/23/washingtons-hedge-fund-shuffle/

And Chelsea Clinton is too...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15549672/

Hedge Funds - Food for Thought

....if hedge funds cannot protect their investment strategies from the public, they are less attractive to investors, and $1.4 trillion could go overseas, or into conservative investments, dragging down the entire U.S. market economy. However, politicians are our only protection from crazy egos that double down on natural gas. So shouldn't politicians stay away, far away, of that big money pile with no paper trail?...

Some sites with promise?

www.petitionspot.com

www.personaldemocracy.com/

www.flickr.com/explore/interesting/ the concept of interestingness may have some utility for polling questions...

Five questions

1. If you could appoint a person to be president, who would you appoint and for how long?

2. If you could fix one injustice in the world what would you do?

3. What,if any, circumstances that would justify a thermonuclear world war?

4. Who or what is most at fault for the problems of the U.S. education system? the U.S. health care system?

5. Under what circumstances, if any, would you live in another country?

Projective polling

Given that polls offer limited choices and often an implied world view, projective posting would just ask respondents for a statement on whatever topic they felt inclined to discuss

Approaches

http://www.wikimocracy.com/
Based on wiki technology...good idea...needs more users.

http://www.moreperfect.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
also based on wiki model

http://www.pollingreport.com/

good sampling of polling by major media groups.

http://www.pollster.com/

more political polling

The future of opinion surveys

As people become skeptical of the honest curiosity of pollsters where can we turn for valid summaries of the public's views on government policies.