“Kill the umpire,” the fan cried to open the 1996 baseball season in Cincinnati, and eight pitches later, the man behind the plate, John McSherry, was dead, all 320 pounds of him screaming for more and more oxygen to feed his spastic heart. He’d been killed by a billion molecules of sink-clogging, Drano-resistant cholesterol that fed on his coronary artery and sucked up his life’s blood like a vampire in the heat of the night. The next day Howard Stern had characteristically railed that the antidote was obvious. It was the same for all fat people: “DON’T EAT,” he howled. As if the ump hadn’t known. The fact was, he couldn’t stop. He loved the taste of food – every sugary, fat-ladened, carbohydrated morsel. The first bite was a special ecstasy, as was the last, and everything in between. The man, it seemed, was a Cuisinart with four limbs.
Franz Kafka wove a tale 100 years earlier that was a mirror image of McSherry’s tragedy. His “A Hunger Artist” described a professional faster – a sideshow freak in 19th century Europe who attracted attention and spare coins by withering away inside a wooden cage. The gapers marveled at his shriveled skeleton, stuck their hands through the bars to nudge his boney ribs, and awed at his resolve to starve himself to the precipice of self-extinction. “I always wanted you to admire my fasting,” confessed the hunger artist, “but you shouldn’t have. The fact is, I have to fast, I can’t help it. I couldn’t find the food I liked. If I had found it, believe me, I would have made no fuss and stuffed myself like you or anyone else.”
The juxtaposition: one man who couldn’t stop and another one who couldn’t start – eating, that is. Their stories, though, are really not about food, but life itself – what compels us to do what we do, what forces us to act or not to act, what makes us who we are: is personal behavior really beyond our control? Shakespeare would retort that the fault lies not in our stars, but in ourselves. On the other hand, who are we other than this amorphous, gelatinous blob of moving flesh and bone molded primarily without our input, first by DNA, and then by environment into the living person we know as ourselves? Are we all just walking Cuisinarts, or better yet, mobile computers with a consciousness? Modern science has progressed to the point of asking, “Can machines think?” and if they can, it might well ask the corollary, “Are people machines?” The fact is that sophisticated modern machines can do just about anything a human being can do. The difference between “us” and “them” may only be our consciousness. We are “aware” whereas they are not. But if true, who wants to be a machine that simply knows it’s a machine? Who wants to walk the Earth as a preprogrammed robot with no input or free will? Unless the John McSherrys of the world can stop eating and the hunger artists can start, we might as well just turn out the lights.
Our economy’s lights, if not switched off in a rehash of the 1930s Depression, have certainly been dimmed in a 21st century version likely to be labeled the Great Recession. Much like John McSherry, U.S. and many global consumers gorged themselves on Big Macs of all varieties: burgers to be sure, but also McHouses, McHummers, and McFlatscreens, all financed with excessive amounts of McCredit created under the mistaken assumption that the asset prices securitizing them could never go down. What a colossal McStake that turned out to be. Now, however, with financial markets seemingly calmed and an inventory-based recovery in store for the balance of 2009, there is a developing optimism that we can go back to the lifestyle of yesteryear. PIMCO’s driving thesis however, if not a juxtaposition, is succinctly described as a “new normal” where growth is slower, profit margins are narrower, and asset returns are smaller than in decades past based upon the delevering and reregulating of the global economy, which in turn should substantially inhibit the “gorging” of goods and services that we grew used to in decades past.
Forecasts based on econometric models inevitably miss these secular/structural breaks in historical patterns because it is impossible to quantify human behavior, and long-term trends involving risk-taking and in turn derisking are decidedly human in their origin. Bell-shaped curves with Gaussian/random distributions fail to anticipate that human beings do not make decisions by chance or independently of each other, but in many cases in reaction to one another. Humanity’s personal and social computers appear to be programmed that way. And so, instead of “normal” distributions, economists and investors must learn to be on the lookout for “black swans,” and if not, then certainly “fat tails,” which differ from the measurement of natural phenomena accepted in science. “New normals,” flatter-shaped bell curves, and structural shifts in previously accepted standards become not only possible, but probable as human nature reacts to itself and its prior behavior. The efficient market hypothesis was always dead from the get-go, but academic tenure and Nobel prizes were food for the unwilling or perhaps unthinking.
PIMCO and yours truly are not masters of the antithesis, a subjective approach which might derisively be called “crystal ball gazing,” but we try to focus on what might be legitimate changes in the way economies and financial markets are affected by seemingly irrational or “non-normal” behavior and events. The supersizing of financial leverage and consumer spending in concert with the politicizing of deregulation describes in fifteen words our most recent brush with irrational behavior and inefficient markets. Greed will come again. But for now, the trend is the other way and it promises to persist for a generation at a minimum. The fact is that American consumers have suffered a collapse in wealth of at least $15 trillion since early 2007. Global estimates are less reliable, but certainly in multiples of that figure. And when potential spenders feel less rich by that much, the only model one can use to forecast the future is a commonsensical one that predicts higher savings, lower consumption, and an economic growth rate that staggers forward at a new normal closer to 2 as opposed to 3½%. There’s no magic in that number, and no model to back it up, just a lot of commonsense that says this is how people and economic societies behave when stressed and stretched to a near breaking point.
I was impressed this weekend by an article in the Op-Ed section of The New York Times by staff writer Bob Herbert. “No Recovery in Sight” was the heading and his opening sentence asked, “How do you put together a consumer economy that works when the consumers are out of work?” That is really all one needs to ask when divining our economy’s future fortune. Unless an optimist can prescribe how to put Humpty Dumpty back together again and shuffle him/her back to work then there can be no return to an “old normal.” As unemployment approaches 10%, what is less well publicized is that the number of “underutilized” workers in the U.S. has increased dramatically from 15 to 30 million. Those without jobs, as well as those individuals who only work part-time and have become discouraged and stopped looking, total 30 MILLION people. The number is staggering. Commonsensically, one has to know that many or most of these are untrained for the demands of a green-oriented, goods-producing future economy. Imagine a welding rod in the hands of an investment banker or mortgage broker and you’ll understand the implications quicker than any economist using an econometric model.
What this all means to you as an investor is near obvious as well. Unsurprisingly, what still can be modeled is the direct correlation of real profit growth to real economic growth, assuming a constant division of the “pie” between profits, labor and government. If long-term economic growth declines by 1½% then profit growth will as well. This, after settling at perhaps half of absolute peak profit levels of 2007, because of the rise of savings rates from 0 to 8% or higher. But to add to the woes of the investor class, one has only to observe that their share of the pie is shrinking. What does the General Motors example tell us all about the rebalancing of power between the investor class and the proletariat? What do trillion-dollar deficits and the recent reinitiation of PAYGO government programs tell you about the future of corporate tax rates? They’re headed higher. Do you really think that a national health care program can be paid for with cost-cutting as opposed to tax hikes at insurance companies and benefit-paying corporations throughout all sectors of the American economy? The new normal will not be investor-friendly unless your forecasting dial is turned to “Pollyanna” or your intelligence quotient is significantly less than 100.
Investors who stuffed themselves on a constant diet of asset appreciation for the past quarter-century will now be enclosed in a cage featuring government-mandated, consumer-oriented fasting. “Non Appétit,” not Bon Appétit, will become the apt description for the American consumer, and significant parts of the global economy, including the U.S. Because this is so, short-term policy rates will be kept low for longer than cyclical norms, and the outlook for risk assets – stocks, high yield bonds, and commercial and residential real estate will involve just that – risk. Investors should stress secure income offered by bonds and stable dividend-paying equities. Consumer Cuisinart consumption is a relic of the past.
William H. Gross
Managing Director
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Gendell, Scholes Are Losers as Hedge Funds Drop for Fifth Month - Saijel Kishan and Katherine Burton
Hedge funds run by Jeffrey Gendell and John Burbank III posted their worst monthly losses in October. Peter Thiel gave back gains made earlier in the year. Nobel-prize winner Myron Scholes froze his biggest fund.
The managers, like many in the $1.7 trillion hedge-fund industry, were caught in a downdraft of market declines, client redemptions, demands from lenders for more collateral and forced asset sales that accelerated after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. collapsed in mid-September.
Funds fell by an average 5.4 percent last month, pushing the year-to-date drop to 15.5 percent, according to the HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index compiled by Chicago-based Hedge Fund Research Inc. Investors have been handed losses for five straight months, the longest streak since HFRI started the index in 1990.
``October was the perfect storm for liquidity drying up, especially in the credit markets,'' said Gary Vaughan-Smith, co- founder of London-based SilverStreet Capital LLP, which has $600 million invested in hedge funds for its clients. ``We are through the worst and the turmoil should be gone by the end of November.''
While hedge funds have held up better than actively managed mutual funds or index-based investments, losses in 2008 are almost certain to be the biggest on record. U.S. global equity mutual funds fell by an average of 39 percent in the first 10 months of the year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index was down 34 percent. The hedge-fund industry's only unprofitable year was 2002, when the HFRI index shed 1.45 percent and the S&P 500 tumbled 23 percent.
Redemptions Rise
Hedge fund investors have reacted by requesting withdrawals that may reach 15 percent of assets in the U.S. and 25 percent in Europe, Huw van Steenis, a Morgan Stanley analyst in London, told clients last month. Combined with investment losses, industry assets may drop by 24 percent to $1.3 trillion in the fourth quarter, van Steenis said.
``I don't think the hedge fund model is broken,'' said Jaeson Dubrovay, head of the $19 billion hedge-fund group at Cambridge, Massachusetts-based consulting firm NEPC LLC. ``We just need to loosen the credit spigots to get the system working again. We don't anticipate that they will be loosened in any way like they were before.''
Hedge funds are private, largely unregulated pools of capital whose managers can buy or sell any assets, bet on falling as well as rising asset prices and participate substantially in profits from money invested. They typically charge fees of 2 percent of assets and 20 percent of investment profits.
Tontine, Passport
Gendell's Tontine Capital Partners LP fund, based in Greenwich, Connecticut, plunged 65.7 percent in October, extending its decline for the year to 76.8 percent, according to investors. Burbank's Global Strategy fund fell 38 percent in the month and 44 percent year-to-date, according to a letter to clients of his San Francisco-based based Passport Capital Management LLC.
Ken Griffin, founder of Citadel Investment Group LLC, lost 22 percent last month in his Kensington and Wellington funds, extending the year-to-date-slide to 39 percent, according to people familiar with the firm.
Chicago-based Citadel, which oversees $16 billion, held a conference call with investors Oct. 24 to dispel speculation that it was liquidating. Griffin, 40, told Citadel bondholders that the firm had $8 billion in untapped bank credit and 30 percent of its assets in cash, and faced ``modest'' client redemptions.
Gains Evaporate
Some managers have seen gains from the first half of the year evaporate. Clarium Capital Management LLC, the hedge-fund firm run by PayPal co-founder Thiel, slumped 18 percent in October, according to estimates given to investors. The San Francisco-based firm's Clarium LP fund reported a year-to-date decline of 2.8 percent, wiping out the 58 percent gain from the first half.
Harbinger Capital Partners Fund, run by Philip Falcone, dropped about 5 percent in October, bringing its loss for the year to about 13 percent, according to investors. The New York- based fund was up 42 percent at the end of June.
Blue Mountain Capital Management LLC of New York and London, Scholes's Platinum Grove Asset Management LP in Rye Brook, New York, and Deephaven Capital Management LLC of Minnetonka, Minnesota, were forced to freeze investor withdrawals after a surge in redemptions.
Some Winners
``We continue to re-evaluate hedge funds,'' Brad Alford, head of Alpha Capital Management LLC in Atlanta, which invests in hedge funds, said in an interview. ``They should do better.''
Managers that made money last month include Christian Levett, whose Clive Capital LLP fund advanced 19.8 percent, bringing its annual return to 43 percent, according to investors. The firm manages more than $2.5 billion from London.
Ionic Capital Management LLC, a $3.5 billion hedge fund run by former Highbridge Capital Management LLC executives Bart Baum, Adam Radosti and Dan Stone, rose 8 percent in October, extending its gain to 16.5 percent for the year, according to a person familiar with the New York-based firm.
John Paulson's New York-based Advantage Plus Fund, which rose 3.8 percent last month, extending its increase for the year to 29.4 percent, according to investors.
Bruce Kovner, who runs Caxton Associates LLC in New York, posted a 2.6 percent return in October for his Caxton Global Investment Ltd. fund, which has climbed 7.25 percent so far this year.
The managers, like many in the $1.7 trillion hedge-fund industry, were caught in a downdraft of market declines, client redemptions, demands from lenders for more collateral and forced asset sales that accelerated after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. collapsed in mid-September.
Funds fell by an average 5.4 percent last month, pushing the year-to-date drop to 15.5 percent, according to the HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index compiled by Chicago-based Hedge Fund Research Inc. Investors have been handed losses for five straight months, the longest streak since HFRI started the index in 1990.
``October was the perfect storm for liquidity drying up, especially in the credit markets,'' said Gary Vaughan-Smith, co- founder of London-based SilverStreet Capital LLP, which has $600 million invested in hedge funds for its clients. ``We are through the worst and the turmoil should be gone by the end of November.''
While hedge funds have held up better than actively managed mutual funds or index-based investments, losses in 2008 are almost certain to be the biggest on record. U.S. global equity mutual funds fell by an average of 39 percent in the first 10 months of the year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index was down 34 percent. The hedge-fund industry's only unprofitable year was 2002, when the HFRI index shed 1.45 percent and the S&P 500 tumbled 23 percent.
Redemptions Rise
Hedge fund investors have reacted by requesting withdrawals that may reach 15 percent of assets in the U.S. and 25 percent in Europe, Huw van Steenis, a Morgan Stanley analyst in London, told clients last month. Combined with investment losses, industry assets may drop by 24 percent to $1.3 trillion in the fourth quarter, van Steenis said.
``I don't think the hedge fund model is broken,'' said Jaeson Dubrovay, head of the $19 billion hedge-fund group at Cambridge, Massachusetts-based consulting firm NEPC LLC. ``We just need to loosen the credit spigots to get the system working again. We don't anticipate that they will be loosened in any way like they were before.''
Hedge funds are private, largely unregulated pools of capital whose managers can buy or sell any assets, bet on falling as well as rising asset prices and participate substantially in profits from money invested. They typically charge fees of 2 percent of assets and 20 percent of investment profits.
Tontine, Passport
Gendell's Tontine Capital Partners LP fund, based in Greenwich, Connecticut, plunged 65.7 percent in October, extending its decline for the year to 76.8 percent, according to investors. Burbank's Global Strategy fund fell 38 percent in the month and 44 percent year-to-date, according to a letter to clients of his San Francisco-based based Passport Capital Management LLC.
Ken Griffin, founder of Citadel Investment Group LLC, lost 22 percent last month in his Kensington and Wellington funds, extending the year-to-date-slide to 39 percent, according to people familiar with the firm.
Chicago-based Citadel, which oversees $16 billion, held a conference call with investors Oct. 24 to dispel speculation that it was liquidating. Griffin, 40, told Citadel bondholders that the firm had $8 billion in untapped bank credit and 30 percent of its assets in cash, and faced ``modest'' client redemptions.
Gains Evaporate
Some managers have seen gains from the first half of the year evaporate. Clarium Capital Management LLC, the hedge-fund firm run by PayPal co-founder Thiel, slumped 18 percent in October, according to estimates given to investors. The San Francisco-based firm's Clarium LP fund reported a year-to-date decline of 2.8 percent, wiping out the 58 percent gain from the first half.
Harbinger Capital Partners Fund, run by Philip Falcone, dropped about 5 percent in October, bringing its loss for the year to about 13 percent, according to investors. The New York- based fund was up 42 percent at the end of June.
Blue Mountain Capital Management LLC of New York and London, Scholes's Platinum Grove Asset Management LP in Rye Brook, New York, and Deephaven Capital Management LLC of Minnetonka, Minnesota, were forced to freeze investor withdrawals after a surge in redemptions.
Some Winners
``We continue to re-evaluate hedge funds,'' Brad Alford, head of Alpha Capital Management LLC in Atlanta, which invests in hedge funds, said in an interview. ``They should do better.''
Managers that made money last month include Christian Levett, whose Clive Capital LLP fund advanced 19.8 percent, bringing its annual return to 43 percent, according to investors. The firm manages more than $2.5 billion from London.
Ionic Capital Management LLC, a $3.5 billion hedge fund run by former Highbridge Capital Management LLC executives Bart Baum, Adam Radosti and Dan Stone, rose 8 percent in October, extending its gain to 16.5 percent for the year, according to a person familiar with the New York-based firm.
John Paulson's New York-based Advantage Plus Fund, which rose 3.8 percent last month, extending its increase for the year to 29.4 percent, according to investors.
Bruce Kovner, who runs Caxton Associates LLC in New York, posted a 2.6 percent return in October for his Caxton Global Investment Ltd. fund, which has climbed 7.25 percent so far this year.
Bob Farrell’s Ten Market Rules to Remember
1) Markets tend to return to the mean over time. This
is especially noteworthy now, for the housing market is
returning to its mean by plunging, as are equity market,
the dollar, the Yen, et al.
2) Excesses in one direction will lead to an opposite
excess in the other direction. They always do, and the
excesses of the housing bubble and excessive, lenient
bank lending, are giving way to the housing collapse and
inordinately tight lending practices.
3) There are no new eras — excesses are never
permanent. And how strongly does that speak to us
now, for the supposed era of unending housing price
increases and of globalisation has given way to weak
housing and growing protectionism.
4) Exponential rapidly rising or falling markets usually
go further than you think, but they do not correct by
going sideways. Markets correct by going in the
opposite direction, falling sharply after sustained, broad
rallies, and rallying after sustained broad weakness. The
world ebbs and the world flows; it has always been thus,
and shall always be thus.
5) The public buys the most at the top and the least at
the bottom. Of course they do; they always have and
they always shall. The public buys when euphoria reigns,
and it sells when depression does years later.
6) Fear and greed are stronger than long-term
resolve. We are human beings dealing with rational and
irrational markets; to believe that "fear" and "greed" can
ever be lost is naive for they are the most fundamental of
human traits.
7) Markets are strongest when they are broad and
weakest when they narrow to a handful of blue chip
names. Just as volume must follow the trend, so too
must good markets have broad support and weak
markets have broad weakness... and at the moment, the
market is very, very broadly weak.
8) Bear markets have three stages — sharp down —
reflexive rebound —a drawn-out fundamental
downtrend. This really is how this bear market shall end;
not with a hoped for "V" bottom, but with a great
washing-out... a capitulation... and then months, or even
years, of base building.
9) When all the experts and forecasts agree –
something else is going to happen.... or as we like to
say, "When they are yellin', you should be sellin,' and
when they are cryin,' you should be buyin.' "
10) Bull markets are more fun than bear markets.... or
as a friend of ours from Raleigh, N. Carolina used to say
many years ago, "Bears don't eat; bulls party!"
is especially noteworthy now, for the housing market is
returning to its mean by plunging, as are equity market,
the dollar, the Yen, et al.
2) Excesses in one direction will lead to an opposite
excess in the other direction. They always do, and the
excesses of the housing bubble and excessive, lenient
bank lending, are giving way to the housing collapse and
inordinately tight lending practices.
3) There are no new eras — excesses are never
permanent. And how strongly does that speak to us
now, for the supposed era of unending housing price
increases and of globalisation has given way to weak
housing and growing protectionism.
4) Exponential rapidly rising or falling markets usually
go further than you think, but they do not correct by
going sideways. Markets correct by going in the
opposite direction, falling sharply after sustained, broad
rallies, and rallying after sustained broad weakness. The
world ebbs and the world flows; it has always been thus,
and shall always be thus.
5) The public buys the most at the top and the least at
the bottom. Of course they do; they always have and
they always shall. The public buys when euphoria reigns,
and it sells when depression does years later.
6) Fear and greed are stronger than long-term
resolve. We are human beings dealing with rational and
irrational markets; to believe that "fear" and "greed" can
ever be lost is naive for they are the most fundamental of
human traits.
7) Markets are strongest when they are broad and
weakest when they narrow to a handful of blue chip
names. Just as volume must follow the trend, so too
must good markets have broad support and weak
markets have broad weakness... and at the moment, the
market is very, very broadly weak.
8) Bear markets have three stages — sharp down —
reflexive rebound —a drawn-out fundamental
downtrend. This really is how this bear market shall end;
not with a hoped for "V" bottom, but with a great
washing-out... a capitulation... and then months, or even
years, of base building.
9) When all the experts and forecasts agree –
something else is going to happen.... or as we like to
say, "When they are yellin', you should be sellin,' and
when they are cryin,' you should be buyin.' "
10) Bull markets are more fun than bear markets.... or
as a friend of ours from Raleigh, N. Carolina used to say
many years ago, "Bears don't eat; bulls party!"
Friday, November 14, 2008
Interview with Don Coxe - ROBIN GOLDWYN BLUMENTHAL
November 7th, 2008
ONCE A WEEK, LOADS OF INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS DROP whatever they're
doing to tune in to Donald Coxe's strategy conference calls. Small
wonder. With a keen sense of history and wry sense of humor, Coxe has
helped his followers anticipate some of the biggest shifts in markets,
be they in stocks or commodities. As global portfolio strategist for
BMO Financial Group, a Toronto-based bank that is among Canada's
largest, he now sees real hope for two sectors that have been taking
poundings: banks and commodities. Though he launched the Coxe
Commodity Strategy Fund this past summer, right before commodities
took a nose dive, Coxe remains convinced that we are in the midst of
the greatest commodities bull market of all time. For his reasons,
please read on.
Matthew Furman for Barron's
"The gigantic investment returns are all going to be tied to companies
that meet real human needs and do it better than other companies. What
a great time to be an investor."--Donald Coxe
Barron's: What's your take on the monetary scene?
Coxe: The Fed has doubled the debt on its balance sheet in five weeks.
We don't know how long they are going to be carrying out these
policies, which would send Milton Friedman spinning in his tomb. On
the other hand, they had to do it. I challenged groups this week,
saying, if I had said to you a year ago things will be so bad that the
Fed will double its balance sheet in five weeks, would any of you have
ever invited me back to speak to you? And, of course, the reaction was
the same: Clearly you are stark raving mad.
Are the economic prospects any better in Europe?
The Europeans had thought it was an American problem, but European
banks have lent a vast percentage of their capital to these Slavic
countries, with even worse demography than Europe. Emerging markets
are such a powerful asset class because each generation is bigger than
the next, and there is an increasing middle class and a high savings
rate. That's the stuff of real economic power, and a terrific
investment concept. By contrast, in the OECD countries, each
generation is just 60% of the predecessor generation, there's no
growing middle class and there's a zero savings rate. The formula
across the OECD is for sluggish growth at best.
How should investors approach today's stock market?
If you aren't deeply in the equity market, this is not a time to be
committing large amounts of money. Stocks are cheap but they can get
cheaper; we know that. We got back to the Dow having a multiple of 5.9
in December of '74, which was the foundation of Warren Buffett's
wealth because he started buying at that level. The Dow isn't anywhere
near 5.9 [its multiple last week was 11], but some of my favorite
stocks are trading at lower P/Es than that. I can tell you they are
the fertilizer, oil and agricultural companies.
Tell us some more about those industries.
The core investment concept of our time is that we are living through
the greatest simultaneous effervescence of personal economic liberty
in history. When people go from abject poverty to dwellings with
indoor plumbing, electricity, basic appliances and access to motorized
transportation, they have more economic liberty than 99% of humanity
enjoys and we are adding 50 to 150 million people a year to that list.
The gigantic investment returns are all going to be tied to companies
that meet real human needs and do it better than other companies. What
a great time to be an investor, because it is not just about the
dwellings and the transportation, it is about the high-protein diet.
When I came back from a trip two years ago, I said the biggest
commodity story is going to be food, bigger than the other ones. It is
high-protein food. The way to play that is through the fertilizer
stocks, the genetically modified seed stocks and the farm-equipment
stocks. [Coxe would not recommend specific companies, citing his
firm's compliance restrictions.]
What are the big trends in food consumption?
If you look at areas under cultivation, wheat has only gone up in
hectares a little bit in a decade. Rice is flat in a decade.
Meanwhile, our need for protein has gone up dramatically because
people are consuming more beef and pork. But more important than oil
in this decade is milk. In rural India, the kids are getting animal
protein and they are going to be physically stronger than their
parents. Their brains are going to be better.
But there's still a serious global food shortage.
Until four months ago, when you Googled "global 'blank' crisis" it was
the global food crisis. The global food crisis was our big theme. The
global financial crisis has pushed the food crisis off the front page
at a time when people are actually getting together to say, "How do we
deal with this problem?" We have an enormous challenge, but we also
have the technology to increase farm productivity. Investors who
invest in this are going to make a lot of money, and they don't have
to apologize to anybody for doing it. If it hadn't been for [the
development of genetically modified crops], corn would have gone to
$10 a bushel [instead of a recent high of $7.50] and we would have had
another 100 million people starving. This is a great investment theme.
Which commodity groups do you like best?
Agriculture is first. We will need more fertilizer. There are only
three farm-equipment companies of any size in the world. Terms of
entry are difficult. You have to have dealerships. CNH Global [ticker:
CNH] is one of the top three companies in the world in the field. It's
a subsidiary of Fiat and its stock has collapsed, but earnings haven't
collapsed. In May it sold for $45 a share. It's $17 now. The next
group has to be gold stocks. A period of massive reflation always
leads to a good move in gold.
Next?
The third group is energy. Despite Obama's plan to spend $150 billion
on alternative energy, each year we still lose 4.5 million barrels of
oil a day that we have to replace. Oil is trading now at $61 a barrel,
but oil for delivery in 2015 is trading at over $90 a barrel. Those
with reserves in politically secure areas of the world will do well.
Venezuela could solve a large part of the world's energy needs, but
not under the current management.
How about base metals?
Those stocks are selling for pennies on the dollar. Take BHP Billiton
[BHP]. It was $95 in May, it recently fell to $30, but it's back up to
nearly $40. This is an unrivaled set of assets, a great balance sheet,
top-notch management and no scandals.
Is copper worth a look?
Copper is now at $1.80 per pound, where it was in '05. But as soon as
the economy recovers, copper always doubles in price. It's levered to
growth in China and India. They have an increasing percentage of
well-off people who use energy and metals, and each generation is
bigger than the last. Since 1995, China has had a plan to create 200
cities of more than one million people. The investment strategy should
be tied to areas of the world that are growing the fastest in the next
five years.
As for stocks in general, when will we know that they're ready to
rebound?
In every bear market since 1972, when the banks went through a period
of at least six weeks where they outperformed the S&P, it was over.
But we can't use the rule this time because of the TED spread, which
has a 100% forecasting record in all bear markets.
You have our attention.
The TED spread is the spread between the front-month T-bill contract
and the front-month Eurodollar contract, because the Eurodollar
contract is uninsured deposits in banks around the world in dollars.
Therefore it is the measure of risk in the system. It reached a high
of 500 after Lehman Brothers collapsed. The highest reading we have
ever had up till then was 415 when Continental Illinois bank went bust
in 1984 and got saved in order to save the system. The only reason
they knew they had to save it was because of the spike in the TED
spread. I know that from having interviewed the people involved. I
used it to predict the crash in 1987. Then there was a long period
where my knowledge of the TED spread was useless.
What does TED tell us now?
The spread has fallen to a little under 200 because of the various
bank-rescue programs, and it could easily get to 140-145, which signal
that banks are in a position to start lending again.
Does that favor any particular sector?
As they put this money into the banking system, then the oddity is
that when the bear market ends, the bank stocks will be among the
leaders in the rally that will come. This is based also on the
principle of redemption and religion, which holds that when you have
redeemed your sin you can come into heaven. When the bankers have
stopped sinning and have gone through enough penance, then...
How do we know this will happen?
The TED spread certifies for bankers collectively they are entitled to
go to heaven because it indicates they have gotten their balance
sheets in order and the system is working again and money is flowing
more freely.
Which banks are you buying?
We like those that show that they actually had a pretty good risk
culture beforehand, but a couple of mistakes were made. The system is
shot through with corrupt practices.
Thank you, Don.
ONCE A WEEK, LOADS OF INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS DROP whatever they're
doing to tune in to Donald Coxe's strategy conference calls. Small
wonder. With a keen sense of history and wry sense of humor, Coxe has
helped his followers anticipate some of the biggest shifts in markets,
be they in stocks or commodities. As global portfolio strategist for
BMO Financial Group, a Toronto-based bank that is among Canada's
largest, he now sees real hope for two sectors that have been taking
poundings: banks and commodities. Though he launched the Coxe
Commodity Strategy Fund this past summer, right before commodities
took a nose dive, Coxe remains convinced that we are in the midst of
the greatest commodities bull market of all time. For his reasons,
please read on.
Matthew Furman for Barron's
"The gigantic investment returns are all going to be tied to companies
that meet real human needs and do it better than other companies. What
a great time to be an investor."--Donald Coxe
Barron's: What's your take on the monetary scene?
Coxe: The Fed has doubled the debt on its balance sheet in five weeks.
We don't know how long they are going to be carrying out these
policies, which would send Milton Friedman spinning in his tomb. On
the other hand, they had to do it. I challenged groups this week,
saying, if I had said to you a year ago things will be so bad that the
Fed will double its balance sheet in five weeks, would any of you have
ever invited me back to speak to you? And, of course, the reaction was
the same: Clearly you are stark raving mad.
Are the economic prospects any better in Europe?
The Europeans had thought it was an American problem, but European
banks have lent a vast percentage of their capital to these Slavic
countries, with even worse demography than Europe. Emerging markets
are such a powerful asset class because each generation is bigger than
the next, and there is an increasing middle class and a high savings
rate. That's the stuff of real economic power, and a terrific
investment concept. By contrast, in the OECD countries, each
generation is just 60% of the predecessor generation, there's no
growing middle class and there's a zero savings rate. The formula
across the OECD is for sluggish growth at best.
How should investors approach today's stock market?
If you aren't deeply in the equity market, this is not a time to be
committing large amounts of money. Stocks are cheap but they can get
cheaper; we know that. We got back to the Dow having a multiple of 5.9
in December of '74, which was the foundation of Warren Buffett's
wealth because he started buying at that level. The Dow isn't anywhere
near 5.9 [its multiple last week was 11], but some of my favorite
stocks are trading at lower P/Es than that. I can tell you they are
the fertilizer, oil and agricultural companies.
Tell us some more about those industries.
The core investment concept of our time is that we are living through
the greatest simultaneous effervescence of personal economic liberty
in history. When people go from abject poverty to dwellings with
indoor plumbing, electricity, basic appliances and access to motorized
transportation, they have more economic liberty than 99% of humanity
enjoys and we are adding 50 to 150 million people a year to that list.
The gigantic investment returns are all going to be tied to companies
that meet real human needs and do it better than other companies. What
a great time to be an investor, because it is not just about the
dwellings and the transportation, it is about the high-protein diet.
When I came back from a trip two years ago, I said the biggest
commodity story is going to be food, bigger than the other ones. It is
high-protein food. The way to play that is through the fertilizer
stocks, the genetically modified seed stocks and the farm-equipment
stocks. [Coxe would not recommend specific companies, citing his
firm's compliance restrictions.]
What are the big trends in food consumption?
If you look at areas under cultivation, wheat has only gone up in
hectares a little bit in a decade. Rice is flat in a decade.
Meanwhile, our need for protein has gone up dramatically because
people are consuming more beef and pork. But more important than oil
in this decade is milk. In rural India, the kids are getting animal
protein and they are going to be physically stronger than their
parents. Their brains are going to be better.
But there's still a serious global food shortage.
Until four months ago, when you Googled "global 'blank' crisis" it was
the global food crisis. The global food crisis was our big theme. The
global financial crisis has pushed the food crisis off the front page
at a time when people are actually getting together to say, "How do we
deal with this problem?" We have an enormous challenge, but we also
have the technology to increase farm productivity. Investors who
invest in this are going to make a lot of money, and they don't have
to apologize to anybody for doing it. If it hadn't been for [the
development of genetically modified crops], corn would have gone to
$10 a bushel [instead of a recent high of $7.50] and we would have had
another 100 million people starving. This is a great investment theme.
Which commodity groups do you like best?
Agriculture is first. We will need more fertilizer. There are only
three farm-equipment companies of any size in the world. Terms of
entry are difficult. You have to have dealerships. CNH Global [ticker:
CNH] is one of the top three companies in the world in the field. It's
a subsidiary of Fiat and its stock has collapsed, but earnings haven't
collapsed. In May it sold for $45 a share. It's $17 now. The next
group has to be gold stocks. A period of massive reflation always
leads to a good move in gold.
Next?
The third group is energy. Despite Obama's plan to spend $150 billion
on alternative energy, each year we still lose 4.5 million barrels of
oil a day that we have to replace. Oil is trading now at $61 a barrel,
but oil for delivery in 2015 is trading at over $90 a barrel. Those
with reserves in politically secure areas of the world will do well.
Venezuela could solve a large part of the world's energy needs, but
not under the current management.
How about base metals?
Those stocks are selling for pennies on the dollar. Take BHP Billiton
[BHP]. It was $95 in May, it recently fell to $30, but it's back up to
nearly $40. This is an unrivaled set of assets, a great balance sheet,
top-notch management and no scandals.
Is copper worth a look?
Copper is now at $1.80 per pound, where it was in '05. But as soon as
the economy recovers, copper always doubles in price. It's levered to
growth in China and India. They have an increasing percentage of
well-off people who use energy and metals, and each generation is
bigger than the last. Since 1995, China has had a plan to create 200
cities of more than one million people. The investment strategy should
be tied to areas of the world that are growing the fastest in the next
five years.
As for stocks in general, when will we know that they're ready to
rebound?
In every bear market since 1972, when the banks went through a period
of at least six weeks where they outperformed the S&P, it was over.
But we can't use the rule this time because of the TED spread, which
has a 100% forecasting record in all bear markets.
You have our attention.
The TED spread is the spread between the front-month T-bill contract
and the front-month Eurodollar contract, because the Eurodollar
contract is uninsured deposits in banks around the world in dollars.
Therefore it is the measure of risk in the system. It reached a high
of 500 after Lehman Brothers collapsed. The highest reading we have
ever had up till then was 415 when Continental Illinois bank went bust
in 1984 and got saved in order to save the system. The only reason
they knew they had to save it was because of the spike in the TED
spread. I know that from having interviewed the people involved. I
used it to predict the crash in 1987. Then there was a long period
where my knowledge of the TED spread was useless.
What does TED tell us now?
The spread has fallen to a little under 200 because of the various
bank-rescue programs, and it could easily get to 140-145, which signal
that banks are in a position to start lending again.
Does that favor any particular sector?
As they put this money into the banking system, then the oddity is
that when the bear market ends, the bank stocks will be among the
leaders in the rally that will come. This is based also on the
principle of redemption and religion, which holds that when you have
redeemed your sin you can come into heaven. When the bankers have
stopped sinning and have gone through enough penance, then...
How do we know this will happen?
The TED spread certifies for bankers collectively they are entitled to
go to heaven because it indicates they have gotten their balance
sheets in order and the system is working again and money is flowing
more freely.
Which banks are you buying?
We like those that show that they actually had a pretty good risk
culture beforehand, but a couple of mistakes were made. The system is
shot through with corrupt practices.
Thank you, Don.
The Best Business Schools of 2008 - by Francesca Di Meglio and Alison Damast
No. 1: University of Chicago
Booth School of Business
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 1
Total Tuition and Fees: $97,165
Applicants Accepted: 22%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 78.0/105.0
In Brief: This year's No. 1 has it all: ambitious students, academic rigor, and top-notch faculty.
No. 2: Harvard Business School
Boston
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 4
Total Tuition and Fees: $101,660
Applicants Accepted: 12%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 77.0/121.0
In Brief: A century old, Harvard's case-based curriculum continues to set the standard.
No. 3: Northwestern University
Kellogg Graduate School of Management
Evanston, Ill.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 3
Total Tuition and Fees: $93,918
Applicants Accepted: 20%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 75.0/110.0
In Brief: Kellogg's distinct culture of collaboration and competition sets it apart.
No. 4: University of Pennsylvania
The Wharton School
Philadelphia
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 2
Total Tuition and Fees: $100,860
Applicants Accepted: 18%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 80.0/120.0
In Brief: Highly competitive program features flexible curriculum, diverse student body.
No. 5: University of Michigan
Ross School of Business
Ann Arbor, Mich.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 5
Total Tuition and Fees: $90,879
Applicants Accepted: 20%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 63.5/105.0
In Brief: School spirit runs high at Ross, where students are highly sought after by recruiters.
No. 6: Stanford University
Graduate School of Business
Palo Alto, Calif.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 6
Total Tuition and Fees: $97,842
Applicants Accepted: 8%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 75.0/125.0
In Brief: Small classes and sense of community in the heart of Silicon Valley are hard to beat.
No. 7: Columbia Business School
New York
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 10
Total Tuition and Fees: $94,104
Applicants Accepted: 15%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 75.0/110.0
In Brief: Finance focus and access to Wall Street are pluses—or used to be before the investment banking industry collapsed.
No. 8: Duke University
Fuqua School of Business
Durham, N.C.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 9
Total Tuition and Fees: $99,906
Applicants Accepted: 30%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 65.0/100.0
In Brief: Passionate teachers and competitive, collaborative learning environment all get high marks.
No. 9: MIT
Sloan School of Management
Cambridge, Mass.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 7
Total Tuition and Fees: $93,568
Applicants Accepted: 15%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 70.0/116.0
In Brief: Quantitative skills and entrepreneurship are this program's strong suits.
No. 10: University of California-Berkeley
Haas School of Business
Berkeley, Calif.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 8
Total Tuition and Fees: $84,055
Applicants Accepted: 12%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 78.0/110.0
In Brief: Small size, diverse class, and attentive faculty are pluses. Access to Silicon Valley doesn't hurt either.
Booth School of Business
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 1
Total Tuition and Fees: $97,165
Applicants Accepted: 22%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 78.0/105.0
In Brief: This year's No. 1 has it all: ambitious students, academic rigor, and top-notch faculty.
No. 2: Harvard Business School
Boston
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 4
Total Tuition and Fees: $101,660
Applicants Accepted: 12%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 77.0/121.0
In Brief: A century old, Harvard's case-based curriculum continues to set the standard.
No. 3: Northwestern University
Kellogg Graduate School of Management
Evanston, Ill.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 3
Total Tuition and Fees: $93,918
Applicants Accepted: 20%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 75.0/110.0
In Brief: Kellogg's distinct culture of collaboration and competition sets it apart.
No. 4: University of Pennsylvania
The Wharton School
Philadelphia
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 2
Total Tuition and Fees: $100,860
Applicants Accepted: 18%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 80.0/120.0
In Brief: Highly competitive program features flexible curriculum, diverse student body.
No. 5: University of Michigan
Ross School of Business
Ann Arbor, Mich.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 5
Total Tuition and Fees: $90,879
Applicants Accepted: 20%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 63.5/105.0
In Brief: School spirit runs high at Ross, where students are highly sought after by recruiters.
No. 6: Stanford University
Graduate School of Business
Palo Alto, Calif.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 6
Total Tuition and Fees: $97,842
Applicants Accepted: 8%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 75.0/125.0
In Brief: Small classes and sense of community in the heart of Silicon Valley are hard to beat.
No. 7: Columbia Business School
New York
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 10
Total Tuition and Fees: $94,104
Applicants Accepted: 15%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 75.0/110.0
In Brief: Finance focus and access to Wall Street are pluses—or used to be before the investment banking industry collapsed.
No. 8: Duke University
Fuqua School of Business
Durham, N.C.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 9
Total Tuition and Fees: $99,906
Applicants Accepted: 30%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 65.0/100.0
In Brief: Passionate teachers and competitive, collaborative learning environment all get high marks.
No. 9: MIT
Sloan School of Management
Cambridge, Mass.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 7
Total Tuition and Fees: $93,568
Applicants Accepted: 15%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 70.0/116.0
In Brief: Quantitative skills and entrepreneurship are this program's strong suits.
No. 10: University of California-Berkeley
Haas School of Business
Berkeley, Calif.
2006 BusinessWeek Rank: 8
Total Tuition and Fees: $84,055
Applicants Accepted: 12%
Pre-MBA/Post-MBA Pay in $ Thousands: 78.0/110.0
In Brief: Small size, diverse class, and attentive faculty are pluses. Access to Silicon Valley doesn't hurt either.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Goodbye Letter of a Hedge Fund Manager
Now, this is how you close a fund!
Andrew Lahde, manager of a small California hedge fund, Lahde Capital, burst into the spotlight last year after his one-year-old fund returned 866% betting on the subprime collapse. Last month, he took his ball and went home. Tired of the stress, he closed the fund.
Today, Lahde passed along his "goodbye" letter (via FT Alphaville and Portfolio.com), a snarky "Up Yours" to those who do deserve it.
Enjoy:
Dear Investor:
Today I write not to gloat. Given the pain that nearly everyone is experiencing, that would be entirely inappropriate. Nor am I writing to make further predictions, as most of my forecasts in previous letters have unfolded or are in the process of unfolding. Instead, I am writing to say goodbye.
Recently, on the front page of Section C of the Wall Street Journal, a hedge fund manager who was also closing up shop (a $300 million fund), was quoted as saying, “What I have learned about the hedge fund business is that I hate it.” I could not agree more with that statement. I was in this game for the money. The low hanging fruit, i.e. idiots whose parents paid for prep school, Yale, and then the Harvard MBA, was there for the taking. These people who were (often) truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government. All of this behavior supporting the Aristocracy, only ended up making it easier for me to find people stupid enough to take the other side of my trades. God bless America.
There are far too many people for me to sincerely thank for my success. However, I do not want to sound like a Hollywood actor accepting an award. The money was reward enough. Furthermore, the endless list those deserving thanks know who they are.
I will no longer manage money for other people or institutions. I have enough of my own wealth to manage. Some people, who think they have arrived at a reasonable estimate of my net worth, might be surprised that I would call it quits with such a small war chest. That is fine; I am content with my rewards. Moreover, I will let others try to amass nine, ten or eleven figure net worths. Meanwhile, their lives suck. Appointments back to back, booked solid for the next three months, they look forward to their two week vacation in January during which they will likely be glued to their Blackberries or other such devices. What is the point? They will all be forgotten in fifty years anyway. Steve Balmer, Steven Cohen, and Larry Ellison will all be forgotten. I do not understand the legacy thing. Nearly everyone will be forgotten. Give up on leaving your mark. Throw the Blackberry away and enjoy life.
So this is it. With all due respect, I am dropping out. Please do not expect any type of reply to emails or voicemails within normal time frames or at all. Andy Springer and his company will be handling the dissolution of the fund. And don’t worry about my employees, they were always employed by Mr. Springer’s company and only one (who has been well-rewarded) will lose his job.
I have no interest in any deals in which anyone would like me to participate. I truly do not have a strong opinion about any market right now, other than to say that things will continue to get worse for some time, probably years. I am content sitting on the sidelines and waiting. After all, sitting and waiting is how we made money from the subprime debacle. I now have time to repair my health, which was destroyed by the stress I layered onto myself over the past two years, as well as my entire life — where I had to compete for spaces in universities and graduate schools, jobs and assets under management — with those who had all the advantages (rich parents) that I did not. May meritocracy be part of a new form of government, which needs to be established.
On the issue of the U.S. Government, I would like to make a modest proposal. First, I point out the obvious flaws, whereby legislation was repeatedly brought forth to Congress over the past eight years, which would have reigned in the predatory lending practices of now mostly defunct institutions. These institutions regularly filled the coffers of both parties in return for voting down all of this legislation designed to protect the common citizen. This is an outrage, yet no one seems to know or care about it. Since Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith passed, I would argue that there has been a dearth of worthy philosophers in this country, at least ones focused on improving government. Capitalism worked for two hundred years, but times change, and systems become corrupt. George Soros, a man of staggering wealth, has stated that he would like to be remembered as a philosopher. My suggestion is that this great man start and sponsor a forum for great minds to come together to create a new system of government that truly represents the common man’s interest, while at the same time creating rewards great enough to attract the best and brightest minds to serve in government roles without having to rely on corruption to further their interests or lifestyles. This forum could be similar to the one used to create the operating system, Linux, which competes with Microsoft’s near monopoly. I believe there is an answer, but for now the system is clearly broken.
Lastly, while I still have an audience, I would like to bring attention to an alternative food and energy source. You won’t see it included in BP’s, “Feel good. We are working on sustainable solutions,” television commercials, nor is it mentioned in ADM’s similar commercials. But hemp has been used for at least 5,000 years for cloth and food, as well as just about everything that is produced from petroleum products. Hemp is not marijuana and vice versa. Hemp is the male plant and it grows like a weed, hence the slang term. The original American flag was made of hemp fiber and our Constitution was printed on paper made of hemp. It was used as recently as World War II by the U.S. Government, and then promptly made illegal after the war was won. At a time when rhetoric is flying about becoming more self-sufficient in terms of energy, why is it illegal to grow this plant in this country? Ah, the female. The evil female plant — marijuana. It gets you high, it makes you laugh, it does not produce a hangover. Unlike alcohol, it does not result in bar fights or wife beating. So, why is this innocuous plant illegal? Is it a gateway drug? No, that would be alcohol, which is so heavily advertised in this country. My only conclusion as to why it is illegal, is that Corporate America, which owns Congress, would rather sell you Paxil, Zoloft, Xanax and other additive drugs, than allow you to grow a plant in your home without some of the profits going into their coffers. This policy is ludicrous. It has surely contributed to our dependency on foreign energy sources. Our policies have other countries literally laughing at our stupidity, most notably Canada, as well as several European nations (both Eastern and Western). You would not know this by paying attention to U.S. media sources though, as they tend not to elaborate on who is laughing at the United States this week. Please people, let’s stop the rhetoric and start thinking about how we can truly become self-sufficient.
With that I say good-bye and good luck.
All the best,
Andrew Lahde”
Andrew Lahde, manager of a small California hedge fund, Lahde Capital, burst into the spotlight last year after his one-year-old fund returned 866% betting on the subprime collapse. Last month, he took his ball and went home. Tired of the stress, he closed the fund.
Today, Lahde passed along his "goodbye" letter (via FT Alphaville and Portfolio.com), a snarky "Up Yours" to those who do deserve it.
Enjoy:
Dear Investor:
Today I write not to gloat. Given the pain that nearly everyone is experiencing, that would be entirely inappropriate. Nor am I writing to make further predictions, as most of my forecasts in previous letters have unfolded or are in the process of unfolding. Instead, I am writing to say goodbye.
Recently, on the front page of Section C of the Wall Street Journal, a hedge fund manager who was also closing up shop (a $300 million fund), was quoted as saying, “What I have learned about the hedge fund business is that I hate it.” I could not agree more with that statement. I was in this game for the money. The low hanging fruit, i.e. idiots whose parents paid for prep school, Yale, and then the Harvard MBA, was there for the taking. These people who were (often) truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government. All of this behavior supporting the Aristocracy, only ended up making it easier for me to find people stupid enough to take the other side of my trades. God bless America.
There are far too many people for me to sincerely thank for my success. However, I do not want to sound like a Hollywood actor accepting an award. The money was reward enough. Furthermore, the endless list those deserving thanks know who they are.
I will no longer manage money for other people or institutions. I have enough of my own wealth to manage. Some people, who think they have arrived at a reasonable estimate of my net worth, might be surprised that I would call it quits with such a small war chest. That is fine; I am content with my rewards. Moreover, I will let others try to amass nine, ten or eleven figure net worths. Meanwhile, their lives suck. Appointments back to back, booked solid for the next three months, they look forward to their two week vacation in January during which they will likely be glued to their Blackberries or other such devices. What is the point? They will all be forgotten in fifty years anyway. Steve Balmer, Steven Cohen, and Larry Ellison will all be forgotten. I do not understand the legacy thing. Nearly everyone will be forgotten. Give up on leaving your mark. Throw the Blackberry away and enjoy life.
So this is it. With all due respect, I am dropping out. Please do not expect any type of reply to emails or voicemails within normal time frames or at all. Andy Springer and his company will be handling the dissolution of the fund. And don’t worry about my employees, they were always employed by Mr. Springer’s company and only one (who has been well-rewarded) will lose his job.
I have no interest in any deals in which anyone would like me to participate. I truly do not have a strong opinion about any market right now, other than to say that things will continue to get worse for some time, probably years. I am content sitting on the sidelines and waiting. After all, sitting and waiting is how we made money from the subprime debacle. I now have time to repair my health, which was destroyed by the stress I layered onto myself over the past two years, as well as my entire life — where I had to compete for spaces in universities and graduate schools, jobs and assets under management — with those who had all the advantages (rich parents) that I did not. May meritocracy be part of a new form of government, which needs to be established.
On the issue of the U.S. Government, I would like to make a modest proposal. First, I point out the obvious flaws, whereby legislation was repeatedly brought forth to Congress over the past eight years, which would have reigned in the predatory lending practices of now mostly defunct institutions. These institutions regularly filled the coffers of both parties in return for voting down all of this legislation designed to protect the common citizen. This is an outrage, yet no one seems to know or care about it. Since Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith passed, I would argue that there has been a dearth of worthy philosophers in this country, at least ones focused on improving government. Capitalism worked for two hundred years, but times change, and systems become corrupt. George Soros, a man of staggering wealth, has stated that he would like to be remembered as a philosopher. My suggestion is that this great man start and sponsor a forum for great minds to come together to create a new system of government that truly represents the common man’s interest, while at the same time creating rewards great enough to attract the best and brightest minds to serve in government roles without having to rely on corruption to further their interests or lifestyles. This forum could be similar to the one used to create the operating system, Linux, which competes with Microsoft’s near monopoly. I believe there is an answer, but for now the system is clearly broken.
Lastly, while I still have an audience, I would like to bring attention to an alternative food and energy source. You won’t see it included in BP’s, “Feel good. We are working on sustainable solutions,” television commercials, nor is it mentioned in ADM’s similar commercials. But hemp has been used for at least 5,000 years for cloth and food, as well as just about everything that is produced from petroleum products. Hemp is not marijuana and vice versa. Hemp is the male plant and it grows like a weed, hence the slang term. The original American flag was made of hemp fiber and our Constitution was printed on paper made of hemp. It was used as recently as World War II by the U.S. Government, and then promptly made illegal after the war was won. At a time when rhetoric is flying about becoming more self-sufficient in terms of energy, why is it illegal to grow this plant in this country? Ah, the female. The evil female plant — marijuana. It gets you high, it makes you laugh, it does not produce a hangover. Unlike alcohol, it does not result in bar fights or wife beating. So, why is this innocuous plant illegal? Is it a gateway drug? No, that would be alcohol, which is so heavily advertised in this country. My only conclusion as to why it is illegal, is that Corporate America, which owns Congress, would rather sell you Paxil, Zoloft, Xanax and other additive drugs, than allow you to grow a plant in your home without some of the profits going into their coffers. This policy is ludicrous. It has surely contributed to our dependency on foreign energy sources. Our policies have other countries literally laughing at our stupidity, most notably Canada, as well as several European nations (both Eastern and Western). You would not know this by paying attention to U.S. media sources though, as they tend not to elaborate on who is laughing at the United States this week. Please people, let’s stop the rhetoric and start thinking about how we can truly become self-sufficient.
With that I say good-bye and good luck.
All the best,
Andrew Lahde”
Thursday, July 10, 2008
The cult of the dabbawala - From The Economist print edition
AS THE warrior king who defeated the Mughals and founded the Maratha empire of Western India in the 17th century, Shivaji Bhosle is remembered as a tactical genius as well as a benevolent ruler. The direct descendants of his Malva-caste soldiers are also developing a reputation for organisational excellence. Using an elaborate system of colour-coded boxes to convey over 170,000 meals to their destinations each day, the 5,000-strong dabbawala collective has built up an extraordinary reputation for the speed and accuracy of its deliveries. Word of their legendary efficiency and almost flawless logistics is now spreading through the rarefied world of management consulting. Impressed by the dabbawalas’ “six-sigma” certified error rate—reportedly on the order of one mistake per 6m deliveries—management gurus and bosses are queuing up to find out how they do it.
The system the dabbawalas have developed over the years revolves around strong teamwork and strict time-management. At 9am every morning, home-made meals are picked up in special boxes, which are loaded onto trolleys and pushed to a railway station. They then make their way by train to an unloading station. The boxes are rearranged so that those going to similar destinations, indicated by a system of coloured lettering, end up on the same trolley. The meals are then delivered—99.9999% of the time, to the right address.
Harvard Business School has produced a case study of the dabbawalas, urging its students to learn from the organisation, which relies entirely on human endeavour and employs no technology. For Paul Goodman, a professor of organisational psychology at Carnegie Mellon University who has made a documentary on the dabbawalas, this is one of the critical aspects of their appeal to Western management thinkers. “Most of our modern business education is about analytic models, technology and efficient business practices,” he says. The dabbawalas, by contrast, focus more on “human and social ingenuity”, he says.
Firms, both Indian and foreign, are similarly curious. Tata, Coca-Cola and Daimler have all invited dabbawalas to explain their model to managers. Last month it was the turn of delegates at an accountancy conference in Dubai. There are even plans within the organisation to create a consulting business. The dabbawalas, who all receive the same pay, are also seen as paragons of “bottom up” social entrepreneurship. C.K. Prahalad, a professor at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, says they show how a home-grown business can help lift workers at the “bottom of the pyramid” out of poverty. They also contradict the stereotype of developing-world labourers as low-wage economic victims.
In Salman Rushdie’s 1988 novel “The Satanic Verses”, one of the main characters, Gibreel Farishta, worked as a dabbawala before going on to become a film star. The deliverymen no longer need a career change to get noticed.
The system the dabbawalas have developed over the years revolves around strong teamwork and strict time-management. At 9am every morning, home-made meals are picked up in special boxes, which are loaded onto trolleys and pushed to a railway station. They then make their way by train to an unloading station. The boxes are rearranged so that those going to similar destinations, indicated by a system of coloured lettering, end up on the same trolley. The meals are then delivered—99.9999% of the time, to the right address.
Harvard Business School has produced a case study of the dabbawalas, urging its students to learn from the organisation, which relies entirely on human endeavour and employs no technology. For Paul Goodman, a professor of organisational psychology at Carnegie Mellon University who has made a documentary on the dabbawalas, this is one of the critical aspects of their appeal to Western management thinkers. “Most of our modern business education is about analytic models, technology and efficient business practices,” he says. The dabbawalas, by contrast, focus more on “human and social ingenuity”, he says.
Firms, both Indian and foreign, are similarly curious. Tata, Coca-Cola and Daimler have all invited dabbawalas to explain their model to managers. Last month it was the turn of delegates at an accountancy conference in Dubai. There are even plans within the organisation to create a consulting business. The dabbawalas, who all receive the same pay, are also seen as paragons of “bottom up” social entrepreneurship. C.K. Prahalad, a professor at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, says they show how a home-grown business can help lift workers at the “bottom of the pyramid” out of poverty. They also contradict the stereotype of developing-world labourers as low-wage economic victims.
In Salman Rushdie’s 1988 novel “The Satanic Verses”, one of the main characters, Gibreel Farishta, worked as a dabbawala before going on to become a film star. The deliverymen no longer need a career change to get noticed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
