There's nothing negative about my posts. It's all about being realistic. Even raising 30-50MM is not easy for someone with no significant management experience. But some seem to think that it's actually easier than finding a job. The idea of affiliating with an existing firm is a good one - for experienced managers who have the leverage to negociate their share of the pie. One should always think in the following order: People will not partner with you if they are not willing to hire you in the first place People will not let you manage their money if they are not willing to partner with you in the first place And not the opposite.
Set up a fund with your own money, or that of friends & family. Perform for a couple of years. If you are really good, the money will roll in. If not, it won't and you will have to market if your performance is satisfactory but not eye-popping. Just remember, performance is 99% of it. If you can consistently make 25%+ per annum with acceptable drawdowns, and you set up a fund that gets onto the performance monitoring firms' screens, you will eventually become stinking rich, even if you can't market worth a damn. People will seek you out if you have exceptional performance. A guy who can trade is rare, and in demand. Rich people are plentiful. Supply/demand favours talent over investors.
That's not always true, I have seen a few people who had pretty good numbers but where not able to get that much in terms of AUM.
What you said rings true but instead, we get a freebie ad from someone who is unknown and out of the country, with little evidence expecting money and support to be forthcoming. That does not inspire much confidence. I would strongly urge ETers to avoid this person.
exactly. really good insight, brandon, on both posts. performance is not the prime mover for real hedge fund investors, STRATEGY and TRUST is more important. everyone has great performance, otherwise they wouldnt be running or thinking about a fund. HLJ