I respect the people that are performance based. They are putting up real capital and earning their money. I have ZERO problem with that system; it's the way it should be. A lot of the hedgies say they're performance based, too, though, at 2/20 or 4/40 or whatever. The problem I see with that is that depending on the size of the account, even if they lose money on your behalf, they still get their base 2% or 4% or whatever. Someone needs to come out and go with a system of purely marked to profits. I even think if someone has an ethical and strong performance history, clients wouldn't balk at being very generous, knowing a competent and honest professional will feast or famine based on their accuracy.
I appreciate the kind words! It's a difficult job being performance based, but when the regulators stop in for one of their surprise audits, I don't have any problems either. And yes, I've read through a few memorandums recently, and am finding some fees that would be pretty easy to forget about disclosing.:eek: The good HF managers get lumped in with the rest too as I have some Accredited Clients that always like to say, "no, I'm not looking at any Hedge Funds. I'm not tying my money up in that, and the news said ____, and _____." You know the rest of the story... It's getting hard to get past what the news is putting out 24/7 these days.
I certainly hope YOU are doing well now and I, for one, appreciate the story from the front lines. Yeah, what sort of d*ck steals leads from the rookie? I worked in computers for 30 years and I was always glad to share what I knew with the eager beavers. Not everyone was like that.