SEC regulation on fund disclosures won't require that every fund hire a compliance officer. It just requires that the funds files the necessary disclosure documents, like audited year-end statements, virtually 80% of the funds will just hire a third-party to do the filings, not a big deal. I think that almost all hedge fund administrators will offer this service come 2006. The cost will be 20-50k, similar to a set of year-end audit. Also, this fund have 2 partners, then 3 staff, plus a secretary, and fifth ave address. This is pretty far from the norm. Let me give you a couple of comparable situations. I was a part of a $100M fund, then grew to $220, the fund was 2 partners, me (trading, risk, technology, broker interface), and 1 analyst (hired after me, who helps me out in the back-office stuff after trading hours). When we hit 220, we hired one more helper for me, and 1 more junior analyst, that's it. So all together 6 people (no secretary) to run $220M. We had a Park Ave address, rented the space from a Prime Broker, and we were paying about $14k a month in rent. This covers secretarial support (someone that answers the switch board, as "XYZ capital partners"), technology support and office supplies. A small story to show how cheap some wealthy people can be. I flew to Monterrey for a hedge fund conference once, a fund manager I know wanted to go together (sharing a rental car, etc, etc). Okay, no problem, when we were buying the plane tickets, this guy pulls out a "two-for-one" companion fare coupon for ATA airlines (imagine my eyes)! And wanted to stay at a Red Roof Inn (!!) 40 miles away. It is hilarious that we were spend the day in our suits with wealthy potential investors, then drive 40 miles back to our Red Roof Inn rooms. And when I mentioned to a mutual friend, he said, "do you know how much money he has?" "err, no, not really" "He has a Park ave south apt, next door to Henry Kissinger!" I was *floored*. I mean, this guy, whose *apartment* is worth > $5M, flies ATA and stays at Red Roof Inn. Of course it goes without saying that if we were not with clients, we were eating ... you gussed it ... McDonalds.
Yes. Job security? Bah - I have more security as a trader - noone can fire me. At the IB I was with, 40% (not me thankfully) were fired in 2 years in the recesssion. Never knew if it was you next. I dont call that security. IB work can be winged? Dont think so - still needs to be done, and obviously with no typos on the 10th page of the Appendix which only your boss reads. I interviewed in risk mgmt and sales and trading - and they said they could understand why I was interviewing as they said they could/would never work the hours pple do in IB. On the plus side - many impressive people.
Now I dont know this guy, but in my experience, in general, without those costs many NY men would be on shaky ground with their NY women.
Why? High class model escorts: $500/hour, times three times a week= 500X3X52=just $78,000. I totally avoid demanding gf's. It doesn't make any sense to spend $500K+ just to please some narcissistic itch-bay
That might have worked in the 70's, but there are too many damn STDs out there now. Screwing hookers is like playing russian roulette...... But I understand your point- gold digging bitches just aren't worth the aggravation.
"He says he has no money to spend because he's spent it all - durh!" LOL, excellent phrase, I will use it with valor. If the idiot does not know how to use his 'market beating' performance to get clients, then offering $1000/night escorts would not help either.
40%? What about those equity desks that basically fired during the recession (particularly the salemen). How about the bond and arb desks fired during 1998. Yes IB work still needs to be done. Winging means you can BS. Tell me does IB work need any incredible creativity? No. You basically look at what pitch books in the past said and take part in a grand ball of plagarization. Directly from a 2nd year analyst at MS. And yes the MDs and VPs are a bunch of arses which is for sure.
But lets consider the stats of trading versus working, specifically isolated to banking since admittedly the job arena is vast. For trading the failure rate is 95%. The unemployment rate is 5%. Agreed there is a slight apple/orange aspect here but assuming the former 5% non-failing traders, how many of those earn more than $1M+ year. With trading odds heavily biased to the failure rate, how is that more secure than a job? A blowout is a blowout and it may be possible to pick up pieces without having to find a temporary job but is the stat a bottom line figure indicating that 95% of the blowouts will not be able to successfully regroup? In banking, if you get fired, you move to the next shop. The job security aspect of banking is knowing that your experience is leveragable as you advance your career.... Net net, which option has the greater probability of providing the opportunity to reach a $1M goal... The R/R in trading seams to be risking blowout before reaching the goal where as in banking the risk is burnout before reaching the same goal... Arguably, you can burn out from trading. What's the equivalent of blowing out in banking?