As if the taint of having been taken by Madoff weren’t bad enough, five fund of funds have now essentially been relegated to worse than cow status.
Standard & Poor’s Fund Services has downgraded five fund of hedge funds (FoHFs) to the category of “not rated” because of their exposure to Madoff exposed vehicles and lax due dilligence.
The funds affected are Bonhote Alternative Multi-Arbitrage, Constantia Composite, the Constantia Low Volatility, DGC Pendulum, Dinvest Concentrated Opportunities, Dinvest Total Return and RMF Four Seasons.
Earlier: We rate every deal. It could be structured by cows and we would rate it.
Seven FoHFs downgraded by S&P [Hedge Fund Reviews]
Does the person who rates the deals structured by cows wear a moo-moo? They are clearly milking the deal. Bastards probably ride in limousins like some Brahman. I asked my wife for some spending money because she bragged that herford stock had risen.
These have been rated “generational buys” by noted analyst Dick Bovine.
worse THAN cow status
@3- get a hobby (or life).
Why is “not rated” possible? Shouldn’t it be (due to “lax standards” or whatever) – F?
“Not rated” implies way too neutral a stance.
@ 5
See my posts in this morning’s Meredith Whitney piece as they relate to why it’s imprudent to rely on analysts to do your homework for you.
This is yet another in a long line of classic examples that would fall under the category of conflicts of interest. This example highlights a subcategory of the “buy bias” as ratings agencies and analysts are afraid to issue unfavorable coverage of potential sources of future business. Ratings agencies and analysts will sooner drop coverage than say something disparaging about an entity…regardless of how fucked up the entity might be. This is because the ratings agencies and analysts never know when that entity or someone in it might be in a position to send your firm business. Also, most people in that line of work lack the testicular fortitude to be anything other than tools. Absolutely shameless.
Just look at how many times Weidner’s Journal piece refers to Whitney’s call as “gutsy”, “mythical”, and etc. Look at all the praise she’s received for having the gall to make the call…even though it turns out she was correct. The only thing I find remotely interesting about the situation is that an analyst actually did her job.
@6 = Meredith Whitney.
Speaking of taints, I’m sure Madoff’s is a bit tender right now
This is bad news for the fund of funds (FoF) community and limits the options of the fund of funds of funds (FoFoF). But what is worst is that it makes my proposed fund of funds of funds of funds (FoFoFoF) a non-starter.