For a guy who fancies himself as a big "critical thinker" you sure dont bother to use your brain very much. If you would have done the slightest amount of research you would have been able to figure out that under Romney's leadership Bain was averaging a 113% per year return for 14 years. If Romney was to start with 10k in his IRA and it was all invested in Bain, and he added an average of 2000 per year, in 14 years he would have 550 million dollars. Now keep in mind that he left his money at Bain even when he was no longer running Bain, all in all he could have had his money invested at Bain for 27 years. It is incredibly easy how you get to an astronomical sum in an IRA simply because BAIN was so successful.
The majority of those demanding his returns think exactly that. A contradiction in that you would think they trusted that same government (IRS) to have already found any improprieties.
No way..... Romney has light years more business experience than Obama - but 113% for 14 yrs??? http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/08/attacking-bain-for-wrong-reason/ "No, they did not (as claimed) return 113% per year. In fact, their investment performance, according to their own data, was rather unremarkable." "Letâs start with that silly 113% per year: Thats a more than doubling each year, and it would have turned $1.1 billion into $9 trillion over the same time period."
Well Maxi . . . . shouldn't you be retracting that comment you made to Free Thinker ? I wish you would.
There is a discrepancy somewhere between what Bain averaged and what it was returning to its clients, your article doesnt explain that, and i highly doubt that Bain and company were charging fees to themselves on the money they had invested. This is from the Wallstreet journal. Even at the lower number of 50-80% from their analysis, if Romney left his money at Bain getting those kinds of returns in an IRA for 20 years its not hard to figure out how he spun it up to 100 million. Even if Bain did between 50-80% if you were to take 10k stick it in an IRA for 20 years at an average return of 55% and add 2000 per year to the IRA you end up with 100 million. Anyway you want to slice the numbers its not hard to figure out how he could have spun an IRA into 100 million using Bains returns. Mitt Romney's political foes are stepping up attacks based on his time running investment firm Bain Capital, tagging him with making a fortune from the rougher side of American capitalismâeven as Mr. Romney says his Bain tenure shows he knows how to build businesses. Amid anecdotal evidence on both sides, the full record has largely escaped a close look, because so many transactions are involved. The Wall Street Journal, aiming for a comprehensive assessment, examined 77 businesses Bain invested in while Mr. Romney led the firm from its 1984 start until early 1999, to see how they fared during Bain's involvement and shortly afterward. Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost. Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investorsâyet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains. Some of those companies, too, later ran into trouble. Of the 10 businesses on which Bain investors scored their biggest gains, four later landed in bankruptcy court. Enlarge Image A spokesman for Bain Capital said its "success rate in growing and turning around businesses in both strong and weak economic periods is very highâ¦" The company called the Journal's analysis "inaccurate and misleading" and said it unfairly put the onus on Bain for events at companies after it no longer owned them. Seeking the protection of a bankruptcy court isn't necessarily a sign of long-term business failure. Many of the Bain companies emerged from reorganization healthier, just as, for instance, General Motors GM -0.35% did a few years ago. But while bankruptcy filings aren't a perfect measure of performance, they provide a way to assess a disparate array of target businesses that in many cases weren't required to make public financial filings. The Journal's findings could provide fodder for both critics and supporters of Mr. Romney's presidential ambitions and of his role at Bain. Some experts, while conceding that available studies don't provide a direct comparison, said the rate at which the firms Bain invested in ran into trouble appears to be higher than experienced by some rival buyout firms during the era. Romney's GOP rivals attacked the front-runner's conservatism, strength as a candidate and business record in a final debate before New Hampshire's primary. Patrick O'Connor has details on Campaign Journal. That notion could undermine a central thrust of Mr. Romney's campaign message: that his private-sector experience building companies makes him the best candidate to turn around the ailing U.S. economy. The numbers, however, also reflect Bain's investing style, which, particularly during the firm's early years, was focused on smaller and sometimes troubled companies that Bain hoped to fix or build. Bain was investing in "riskier deals," said Steven N. Kaplan, a finance professor at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business. "For every one that went bankrupt, they had one that was a screaming success. The overall effect was terrific performance" for the firm's investors. The Journal analysis shows that in total, Bain produced about $2.5 billion in gains for its investors in the 77 deals, on about $1.1 billion invested. Overall, Bain recorded roughly 50% to 80% annual gains in this period, which experts said was among the best track records for buyout firms in that era. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204331304577140850713493694.html
Well, I don't know anything about this author but the comment about how private equity calculates their IRR seems intentionally misleading. IRR is used as a standard for all types of returns on capital, and the only way it would be calculated (or really just applied) differently would depend on the complexity of the investment or potential investment. It can't be calculated differently as that wouldn't be the IRR, is my point. Also the total return from 1.1B to 2.5B or whatever might assume that all annual earnings were reinvested, we don't know that is the case. Anyway, here is an article based on an actual Bain prospectus from 2000, about all of Romney's career there. Pg 19 or 20 begins listing the investments themselves, you can enlarge on the top right and there are notes on the lower right. According to this Bain averaged an IRR of 88% per year AND some were still open positions.. so to speak. The realized per year IRR was 173%. These are gross numbers before fees and Bain's cut etc. regardless Bain under Romney appears to have an outstanding record. I would say that this supports Max, reinforces that Romney did it all legit, and should open the doubter's eyes to the POSSIBILITY. http://documents.latimes.com/bain-capital-investments/
I don't see the point of nitpicking the returns Bain made under romney. The fact that he was a management consultant, then ran a successful PE firm puts him light years ahead of Obama and the dolt Biden. I doubt Obama or Biden can read a balance sheet or explain compound interest.
Probably already mentioned, but perhaps the Amnesty allowed a few years ago for those with Swiss and other foreign bank accounts. But, again, who cares? Just nuts to no release his taxes.
We were only pointing out the returns because Free Thinker and his buddies down at MSNBC automatically assume that Romney did something sinister to get 100 million into an IRA just because they are incapable of doing it, when it is very easily doable using Bain's returns.
AAA, this thread is about the value of his IRA, which some (free thinker) are calling impossible.. that is the point of the nitpicking. Not that your point isn't completely accurate.