I don't know, that doesn't sound that bad to me. Really. High returns generally means high volatility. I wouldn't call -30% an "implosion". Although they may well be in the process of imploding -- but that's really something you can only determine after the fact. If I were an investor here I wouldn't be too worried. (Yet!)
Sign me up bro. I'm looking to. I really like Schindler's fund. Even though he has been struggling of late have you seen this guy's credentials? You are not going to get any better then that. But I'm still waiting to hear alternatives. Why isn't anyone speaking up? Surely there has got to be some funds out there that meet our criteria. My guess is we are probably going to have to focus on funds with 25 million or less under management. Once these funds get too big, it's hard to earn the same kind of returns.
http://www.superfund.at/de/ Let me know when you take your foot out of your mouth, "Mr. Know-It-All" Do you even know what you are talking about, or do you always pop-off at others before you put on your thinking cap?
These losses are considerly larger than the numbers Max Haller gave to me. Make me wonder what is going on.
YOU are quoting SUPERFUND, LP numbers for "onshore" investors. I am quoting the SUPERFUNDS for "offshore" investors, asswipe . . . do you even know the difference? Guess not.
Yup. Keep the strangers out, limit your LP's % of their net worth, give your LP's an open door policy, and kick out the assholes -- you'll be dumb, fat, and happy. You can almost fire the lawyers, but not quite.
They are not the same funds jackass!!!!!!!!! Man you are dense. The whole discussion on this thread is centered around the SuperFund series A and B, not the offshore funds that don't even have remotely similar results. Wake up! Nobody on this site can get into those funds since they are not available to us, that is why they are not being discussed. I'm starting to really wonder about your motivations on this thread. You come in here out of nowhere. Never posted on this thread before and just start attacking one particular fund being discussed here without even bothering to read the whole thread. God, I hate people like that. Do you have anything else to say?
I hate the fact that "hedge fund" is becoming such a buzzword with the public. For that very reason, we don't list with any of the databases and keep a low profile, strictly a word-of-mouth operation. We shut up and trade, and we're thankful that most will never hear of us while we grind out a couple of percentage points each month. Read up about Stu Walton in Stock Market Wizards -- I think he had a part-time assistant and that's it. I liked Seykota's philosophy, too. That's what a hedge fund is all about -- they're supposed to be private, and the last thing anyone needs is the lynch-mob mentality of the investing public when things don't go their way.
Mav -- it's great that they're only down 6% ytd... although I suspect it's worse than 6% through the end of July. My point was that their fees are totally out of line. The fact that they would churn for revenue is astonishing.
well...they are and they aren't. since the investments made by each individual fund are not necessarily independent of what other funds under Q management are doing or holding at that time - as they state up front in the prospectus - it isn't quite as cut and dry a situation as one might like. and since there appears to be near-zero transparency into what the active managers are actually doing there is no way to know if you're being affected or not. (yes, i realize this is tangential to the YTD performance comparisons)