• 21 Dec 2009 at 9:40 AM

David Tepper’s Lucky Charm(s)

Picture 61.pngA pair of panties and 5 inch stilettos. A carton of Pall Malls. The ticket to his first Cher concert. These are just a few of the good luck charms some of the industry’s best known managers (Jiang, Simons, Griffin) turn to when they need that extra inch. They’ve done their research. Their homework has been turned it. But they still aren’t sure which way this thing’s gonna go. So they look to the rabbit’s foot or whatever their version of the rabbit’s foot may be. In David Tepper’s case, it’s a pair of testicles.

The husky, bespectacled trader laughs easily, but employees say he can quickly turn on them when he’s angry. Mr. Tepper keeps a brass replica of a pair of testicles in a prominent spot on his desk, a present from former employees. He rubs the gift for luck during the trading day to get a laugh out of colleagues.

So, David Tepper rubs his lucky balls at various intervals throughout the day. Okay, that’s fine. It’s actually better than fine, because it’s helped Appaloosa earn $7 billion in profits so far this year. Which brings us to this: they’re a brass replica of whose testicles? Obviously there are going to be some hedge fund managers out there reading this who’d like to break themselves off a piece of D.Tepp’s success this year. Those things were based on an original, and we’re going to need to know who they belonged to, asap.

Fund Boss Made $7 Billion In The Panic
[WSJ]
Earlier: Dear Team Tepper

Comments (1,127)

  1. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:44 AM

    Brass replica?
    Plebe…
    -lb

  2. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 9:46 AM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  3. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 AM

    i make replicas of all my underling's testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  4. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 9:48 AM

    BALLS

  5. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:49 AM

    I'm guessing his father or an uncle.

  6. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 9:49 AM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  7. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:52 AM

    is he hiring?
    -andrea tong

  8. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 AM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  9. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 9:57 AM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  10. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 9:58 AM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  11. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 9:58 AM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  12. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:01 AM

    from the WSJ article:
    "He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase "it is what it is" to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift."

  13. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:01 AM

    It's a shame there isn't a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  14. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 6:04 AM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  15. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:12 AM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=5

  16. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:26 AM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let's hope he's going 'SAC Remote'
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  17. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:31 AM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.ht
    does he have these on his prius?

  18. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:31 AM

    I'm thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper's profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  19. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 10:33 AM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  20. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:50 AM

    19 = adam sender

  21. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:52 AM

    @11 I can't tell by the "bit" if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  22. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:58 AM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  23. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 7:01 AM

    That crystal "bull" looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  24. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 11:02 AM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  25. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 11:07 AM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  26. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 11:10 AM

    @25 no just you

  27. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 7:19 AM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  28. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 7:21 AM

    I've got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  29. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 7:40 AM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He's so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  30. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 7:48 AM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  31. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 11:50 AM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  32. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 7:56 AM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven't seen that since the early nineties.

  33. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 12:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  34. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 12:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  35. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 12:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  36. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 8:36 AM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #'s originally reported don't include all funds under management.

  37. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 8:46 AM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  38. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM

    Glass balls or not, I've gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  39. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 8:53 AM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won't be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  40. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 9:10 AM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  41. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  42. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  43. [...] Related: David Tepper’s Lucky Charm(s) [...]

  44. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:44 PM

    Brass replica?
    Plebe…
    -lb

  45. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:44 PM

    Brass replica?
    Plebe…
    -lb

  46. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 AM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  47. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  48. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  49. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  50. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  51. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  52. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  53. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

    @1 was thinking the same thing

  54. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  55. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  56. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  57. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  58. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  59. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  60. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  61. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  62. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM

    i make replicas of all my underling’s testicles. is that weird?
    -pj

  63. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:48 AM

    BALLS

  64. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM

    BALLS

  65. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    I’m guessing his father or an uncle.

  66. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    I’m guessing his father or an uncle.

  67. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    I’m guessing his father or an uncle.

  68. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    I’m guessing his father or an uncle.

  69. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    I’m guessing his father or an uncle.

  70. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:49 AM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  71. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  72. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  73. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  74. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  75. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  76. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  77. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM

    is he touching them in that pic?

  78. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:52 PM

    is he hiring?
    -andrea tong

  79. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:52 PM

    is he hiring?
    -andrea tong

  80. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  81. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  82. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  83. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  84. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  85. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  86. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  87. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  88. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  89. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  90. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:53 PM

    my lucky charms are whiteboard markers, fucking get it right!!!
    -PJ

  91. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:57 AM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  92. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  93. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  94. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  95. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  96. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  97. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  98. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  99. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM

    he looks so smug in that pic.

  100. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 5:58 AM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  101. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  102. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  103. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  104. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  105. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  106. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  107. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  108. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  109. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  110. Posted by James Lipton | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Anal_yst, testicles, your thoughts?

  111. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:58 AM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  112. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  113. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  114. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  115. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  116. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  117. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  118. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  119. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  120. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  121. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  122. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM

    Are those Gucci loafers?

  123. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  124. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  125. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  126. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  127. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  128. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  129. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  130. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  131. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  132. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  133. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  134. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    from the WSJ article:
    “He claims to have popularized on Wall Street the phrase “it is what it is” to explain the need to adjust a portfolio if facts on the ground shift.”

  135. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  136. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  137. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  138. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  139. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  140. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  141. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  142. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  143. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  144. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:01 PM

    It’s a shame there isn’t a piece of glass poop behind the bull on his desk…

  145. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  146. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  147. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  148. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  149. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  150. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  151. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  152. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  153. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  154. Posted by Barney F | December 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    Cher concert tix? Ball rubbing?
    Am so in.

  155. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  156. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  157. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  158. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  159. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  160. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  161. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  162. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  163. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  164. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  165. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  166. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

    perhaps he has a deskful of these also http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=54421

  167. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  168. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  169. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  170. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  171. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  172. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  173. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  174. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  175. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  176. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  177. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    Do you think Tepper is worried about being tied into any trades that Stevie Cohen is doing. Would any of those bets have needed inside info to make him stay in the trade? Let’s hope he’s going ‘SAC Remote’
    http://hf-implode.com/article/sac-remote

  178. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  179. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  180. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  181. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  182. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  183. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  184. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  185. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  186. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  187. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  188. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  189. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  190. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  191. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    http://www.trucknutzandbikerballz.com/Big_Nutz.html
    does he have these on his prius?

  192. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  193. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  194. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  195. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  196. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  197. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  198. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  199. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  200. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  201. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  202. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  203. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  204. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM

    I’m thinking WSJ Zuckerman got the idea to write about Tepper’s profits after he first read his q3 investor letter that Bess published on Dec 4th. Dealbreaker was first to publish this guy was going to score coin which then just opened the door for the WSJ to figure out how he did it.
    At least we know they are reading DB.
    Great work Bess – we know MSM gets most of their ideas from you.

  205. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 6:33 AM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  206. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  207. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  208. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  209. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  210. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  211. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  212. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  213. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  214. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  215. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  216. Posted by now on buyside | December 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Only one screen? I thought there was a rule that to be an HF BSD you need to be photographed with at least five on your desk– and flatscreens, natch.

  217. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:50 AM

    19 = adam sender

  218. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  219. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  220. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  221. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  222. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  223. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  224. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  225. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  226. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  227. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  228. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  229. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  230. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  231. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  232. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  233. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM

    19 = adam sender

  234. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  235. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  236. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  237. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  238. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  239. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  240. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  241. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  242. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  243. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  244. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  245. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  246. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  247. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  248. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  249. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM

    @11 I can’t tell by the “bit” if they are Gucci or Ferragamo

  250. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:58 AM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  251. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  252. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  253. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  254. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  255. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  256. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  257. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  258. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  259. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  260. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  261. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  262. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  263. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  264. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 3:58 PM

    Oh! SNAP! Guess what I saw?

  265. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  266. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  267. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  268. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  269. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  270. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  271. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  272. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  273. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  274. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  275. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  276. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  277. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  278. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  279. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  280. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  281. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  282. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  283. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  284. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 7:02 AM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  285. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    That crystal “bull” looks like some kind of un-Godly beast, with the head of a horned man.

  286. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  287. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  288. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  289. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  290. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  291. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  292. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  293. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  294. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  295. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  296. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  297. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  298. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  299. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  300. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  301. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  302. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  303. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  304. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    can someone at appaloosa pls send in a pic of said nuts?

  305. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 7:07 AM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  306. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  307. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  308. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  309. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  310. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  311. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  312. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  313. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  314. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  315. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  316. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  317. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  318. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  319. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  320. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  321. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  322. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  323. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  324. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  325. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    Anyone else wondering why we are getting blitzed with life insurance ads?

  326. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 7:10 AM

    @25 no just you

  327. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  328. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  329. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  330. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  331. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  332. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  333. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  334. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  335. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  336. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  337. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  338. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  339. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  340. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  341. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  342. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  343. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  344. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  345. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  346. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  347. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  348. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  349. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:10 PM

    @25 no just you

  350. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  351. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  352. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  353. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  354. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  355. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  356. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  357. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  358. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  359. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  360. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  361. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  362. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  363. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  364. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  365. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  366. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  367. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  368. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  369. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  370. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  371. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  372. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  373. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  374. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  375. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  376. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  377. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  378. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  379. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  380. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  381. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  382. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  383. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    Testicles….on my chin….make me gwin….and smile!
    Bawney Fa Fa Fa Fwank

  384. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  385. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  386. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  387. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  388. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  389. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  390. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  391. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  392. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  393. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  394. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  395. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  396. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  397. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  398. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  399. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  400. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  401. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  402. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  403. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  404. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  405. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:21 PM

    I’ve got a Chamorran priapus that would put his balls to shame.

  406. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  407. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  408. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  409. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  410. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  411. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  412. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  413. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  414. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  415. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  416. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  417. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  418. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  419. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  420. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  421. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  422. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  423. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  424. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  425. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  426. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  427. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  428. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  429. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  430. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  431. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  432. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  433. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  434. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM

    Wow, what a man, Tepper is. Such a fearsome trader. He’s so butch. He prolly looks hot in a pair of leather chaps with his bar ass exposed. Toodles, sweetie!

  435. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  436. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  437. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  438. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  439. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  440. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  441. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  442. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  443. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  444. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  445. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  446. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  447. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  448. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  449. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  450. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  451. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  452. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  453. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  454. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  455. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  456. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  457. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  458. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  459. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  460. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  461. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  462. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  463. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM

    @25
    Rumor has it that Gasparino is going to go on some kind of rampage against bloggers soon.

  464. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 7:50 AM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  465. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  466. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  467. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  468. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  469. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  470. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  471. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  472. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  473. Posted by NegativeConvexity | December 21, 2009 at 4:50 PM

    I had no idea Corky made the transition from acting to alternative investments.

  474. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven’t seen that since the early nineties.

  475. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven’t seen that since the early nineties.

  476. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven’t seen that since the early nineties.

  477. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven’t seen that since the early nineties.

  478. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven’t seen that since the early nineties.

  479. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven’t seen that since the early nineties.

  480. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven’t seen that since the early nineties.

  481. Posted by Last Man Standing | December 21, 2009 at 4:56 PM

    is that the kilt on his loafers? wow, i haven’t seen that since the early nineties.

  482. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 8:10 AM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  483. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  484. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  485. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  486. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  487. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  488. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  489. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  490. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  491. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  492. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  493. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  494. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  495. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  496. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  497. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  498. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  499. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  500. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  501. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  502. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  503. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  504. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  505. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  506. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  507. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  508. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  509. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  510. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  511. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  512. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  513. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  514. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  515. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  516. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  517. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  518. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  519. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  520. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  521. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  522. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  523. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  524. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  525. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  526. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  527. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  528. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  529. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  530. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  531. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  532. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Ok, so November put total AUM at

  533. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 8:10 AM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  534. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  535. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  536. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  537. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  538. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  539. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  540. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  541. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  542. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  543. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  544. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  545. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  546. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  547. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  548. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  549. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  550. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  551. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  552. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  553. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  554. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  555. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  556. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  557. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  558. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  559. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  560. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  561. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  562. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  563. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  564. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  565. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  566. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  567. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  568. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  569. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  570. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  571. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  572. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  573. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  574. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  575. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  576. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  577. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  578. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  579. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  580. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  581. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  582. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  583. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  584. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  585. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  586. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  587. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  588. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  589. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  590. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  591. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  592. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  593. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:10 PM

    Have you seen my baseball?

  594. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 8:16 AM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  595. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  596. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  597. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  598. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  599. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  600. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  601. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  602. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  603. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  604. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  605. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  606. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  607. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  608. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  609. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  610. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  611. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  612. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  613. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  614. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  615. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

    @analyst- november aum was $4.3 billion

  616. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  617. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  618. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  619. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  620. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  621. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  622. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  623. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  624. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  625. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  626. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  627. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  628. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  629. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  630. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  631. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  632. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  633. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  634. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  635. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  636. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  637. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  638. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  639. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  640. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  641. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  642. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  643. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  644. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  645. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  646. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  647. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  648. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  649. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  650. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  651. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  652. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  653. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  654. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  655. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  656. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  657. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  658. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  659. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  660. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  661. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  662. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  663. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  664. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  665. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  666. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  667. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  668. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  669. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  670. Posted by Anal_yst | December 21, 2009 at 5:36 PM

    @35
    Yea for some reason 80% of my comment got cut off. My point is that if november AUM is $4.3bn, its impossible for the firm to have returned $7bn, unless the #’s originally reported don’t include all funds under management.

  671. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  672. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  673. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  674. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  675. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  676. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  677. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  678. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  679. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  680. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  681. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  682. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  683. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  684. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  685. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  686. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  687. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  688. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  689. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  690. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  691. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  692. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  693. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  694. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  695. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  696. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  697. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  698. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  699. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  700. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  701. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  702. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  703. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  704. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  705. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  706. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  707. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  708. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  709. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  710. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  711. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  712. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  713. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  714. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  715. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  716. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  717. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  718. Posted by pfluger | December 21, 2009 at 5:46 PM

    @36:
    Why is that impossible?? It is perfectly legitimate to pay out more in dividends than AUM, provided that future capital commitments exceed the difference by at least $1.
    -bm

  719. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  720. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  721. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  722. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  723. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  724. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  725. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  726. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  727. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  728. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  729. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  730. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  731. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  732. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  733. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  734. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  735. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  736. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  737. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  738. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  739. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  740. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  741. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  742. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  743. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  744. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  745. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  746. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  747. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  748. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  749. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  750. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  751. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  752. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  753. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  754. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  755. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  756. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  757. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  758. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  759. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  760. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  761. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  762. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  763. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  764. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  765. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  766. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  767. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  768. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  769. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  770. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  771. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  772. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  773. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  774. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  775. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  776. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  777. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  778. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  779. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  780. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  781. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  782. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  783. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  784. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  785. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  786. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  787. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  788. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  789. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  790. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  791. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  792. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  793. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM

    Glass balls or not, I’ve gotta give the guy kudos for buying that crap (Citi and B of A) when the world looked like it was gonna end. That was a scary time.

  794. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  795. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  796. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  797. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  798. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  799. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  800. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  801. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  802. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  803. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  804. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  805. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  806. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  807. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  808. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  809. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  810. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  811. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  812. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  813. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  814. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  815. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  816. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  817. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  818. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  819. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  820. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  821. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  822. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  823. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  824. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  825. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  826. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  827. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  828. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  829. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  830. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  831. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  832. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  833. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  834. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  835. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  836. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  837. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  838. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  839. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  840. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  841. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  842. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  843. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  844. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  845. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  846. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  847. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  848. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  849. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  850. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  851. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  852. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  853. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  854. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  855. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  856. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  857. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  858. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  859. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  860. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  861. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  862. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  863. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  864. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  865. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  866. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  867. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  868. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  869. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  870. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  871. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  872. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  873. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  874. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  875. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  876. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  877. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  878. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  879. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  880. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  881. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  882. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM

    @ Anal:
    The guy has $7.5bn in his main strategy and $4.5 in his fixed-income biased fund. I won’t be the one to post the numbers for his namesake fund, but the YTD performance is equally impressive.

  883. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  884. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  885. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  886. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  887. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  888. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  889. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  890. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  891. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  892. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  893. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  894. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  895. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  896. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  897. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  898. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  899. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  900. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  901. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  902. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  903. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  904. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  905. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  906. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  907. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  908. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  909. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  910. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  911. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  912. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  913. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  914. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  915. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  916. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  917. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  918. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  919. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  920. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  921. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  922. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  923. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  924. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  925. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  926. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  927. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 1:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  928. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  929. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  930. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  931. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  932. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  933. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  934. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  935. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  936. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  937. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  938. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  939. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  940. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  941. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  942. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  943. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  944. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  945. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  946. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  947. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  948. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  949. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  950. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  951. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  952. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  953. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  954. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  955. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  956. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM

    IT WAS ME!
    -SAC

  957. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  958. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  959. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  960. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  961. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  962. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  963. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  964. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  965. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  966. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  967. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  968. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  969. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  970. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  971. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  972. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  973. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  974. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  975. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  976. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  977. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  978. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  979. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  980. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  981. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  982. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  983. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  984. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  985. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  986. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  987. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  988. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  989. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  990. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  991. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  992. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  993. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  994. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  995. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  996. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  997. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  998. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  999. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1000. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1001. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1002. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1003. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1004. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1005. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1006. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1007. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1008. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1009. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1010. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1011. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1012. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1013. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1014. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1015. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1016. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1017. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1018. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1019. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1020. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1021. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1022. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:22 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1023. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1024. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1025. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1026. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1027. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1028. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1029. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1030. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1031. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1032. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1033. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1034. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1035. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1036. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1037. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1038. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1039. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1040. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1041. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1042. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1043. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1044. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1045. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1046. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1047. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1048. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1049. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1050. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1051. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1052. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1053. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1054. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1055. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1056. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1057. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1058. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1059. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1060. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1061. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1062. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1063. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1064. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1065. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1066. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1067. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1068. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1069. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1070. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1071. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1072. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1073. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1074. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1075. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1076. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1077. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1078. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1079. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1080. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1081. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1082. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1083. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1084. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1085. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1086. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1087. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1088. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1089. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1090. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1091. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1092. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1093. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1094. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1095. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1096. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1097. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1098. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1099. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1100. Posted by guest | December 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    carnegie mellon represent

  1101. [...] year’s conference will not include David Tepper’s balls but the show must go on. Scheduled speakers, in order of appearance: Erez Kalir, Dinakar Singh, [...]

  1102. [...] via gawker and Dealbreaker [...]

  1103. [...] owner of the $100 million receipt turns out to be Hedge Fund Founder/Manager David Tepper, who rubs his balls for good luck throughout the day, which has helped his company — Appaloosa Management — [...]

  1104. [...] 01:37 PM Update: Apparently Mr. Receipt is hedge fund manager, D. Tepp, who joked after the withdrawal that he “hadn’t used an ATM since Lehman, and hasnt [...]

  1105. [...] balance ($ 2.75 poorer after ATM fee). Speculation was that the fat cat was hedge fund manager David Tepper, but he told the Post that he “wasn’t in the Hamptons in June at all,” plus, [...]

  1106. [...] balance ($ 2.75 poorer after ATM fee). Speculation was that the fat cat was hedge fund manager David Tepper, but he told the Post that he “wasn’t in the Hamptons in June at all,” plus, [...]

  1107. Posted by guest | June 30, 2011 at 4:11 AM

    Maybe he can splurge a few dollars on a new computer.

  1108. [...] owner of the $100 million receipt turns out to be Hedge Fund Founder/Manager David Tepper, who rubs his balls for good luck throughout the day, which has helped his company — Appaloosa Management — earn [...]

  1109. Posted by Ginaharding | July 1, 2011 at 9:54 PM

    Vintage gucci loafers.

  1110. Posted by heelivaf | April 13, 2012 at 11:59 PM

    purchase cheap chanel handbags to your friends

  1111. Posted by insedelt | April 18, 2012 at 5:09 PM
  1112. Posted by Cinkavoinia | August 28, 2012 at 9:15 AM

    kpxgtghe [url=http://abercromfitchsdesoldes.com/#6118]abercrombie parisc[/url] agkpwlnf abercrombieh france mngtfosf http://abercromfitchsdesoldes.com/

  1113. Posted by gvsyfs5865 | August 31, 2012 at 1:54 AM

    ftlmyxlj [url=http://achatlongchamppliageonline.com/#4244]longchamp pas cher[/url] urmppaib longchamp pas cher iwcecjab http://achatlongchamppliageonline.com/

  1114. Posted by peenueBum | September 11, 2012 at 2:29 PM

    hawzgk [url=http://chaussuresjordannsoldes.webnode.fr/#6326]air jordan pas cher[/url] guasib jordan pas cher epmzrx
    pnwkosjb [url=http://achatlongchampsacensoldes.info/#3300]longchamp pliage[/url] nmnakzsatm sac longchamp pliage wrdmjtm
    wcsydkmps [url=http://frlouboutinnssoldes.webnode.fr/#1169]chaussures louboutin[/url] tbpelqrnhr louboutin emlpwmm

  1115. Posted by Scupaspinna | September 13, 2012 at 1:25 PM

    potuuyaf [url=http://salesrbansunlgassesoutletstore.info]ray ban sunglasses[/url] ijkohszape kqrbqtwy [url=http://salesmulbagsoutletstore.info]mulberry sale[/url] lwhpzlfvmw http://salesmulbagsoutletstore.info

  1116. Posted by Stuppydaype | September 14, 2012 at 7:57 PM

    sonwanrg [url=http://ravensjerseysaleonline.webeden.net/#23800]baltimore ravens jersey sale[/url] hpxbbyh baltimore ravens jersey sale mdexravt http://ravensjerseysaleonline.webeden.net/

  1117. Posted by LathyLatanild | September 16, 2012 at 1:37 AM

    jihpkush [url=http://achatjordanenligne.webnode.fr/#24354]air jordan[/url] toqwsler jordan 6 grctxwtl http://achatjordanenligne.webnode.fr/

  1118. Posted by ChailmglixHah | September 16, 2012 at 2:14 AM

    nkeoov [url=http://saclongchamponline.webnode.fr/#7171]longchamp pas cher[/url] ubbtvv sac longchamp pas cher aedeyh mnxyxh [url=http://doudounemclersmagasin.webnode.fr/#3845]moncler pas cher[/url] dewijv doudoune moncler pas cher nsclpd eokrplsz [url=http://achatlongchampsacensoldes.info/#5947]longchamp pliage[/url] pmtesaaopa sac longchamp pas cher rzubroy

  1119. Posted by Arrivatriva | September 16, 2012 at 2:30 PM

    knibvxhp [url=http://sacsvuittonpascher.webnode.fr/#8619]sac louis vuitton pas cher[/url] anqdonnc sac louis vuitton pas cher vmfsrkod http://sacsvuittonpascher.webnode.fr/scspivpb [url=http://frvuittonsoldes.webnode.fr/#5616]louis vuitton soldes[/url] zprykrjh sac louis vuitton pas cher evkdxonw http://frvuittonsoldes.webnode.fr/

  1120. Posted by Dumpusase | September 19, 2012 at 9:48 PM

    apmnotlo [url=http://frmclersdoudounesoldes.com/#55746]doudoune moncler[/url] ivkymbrbbp doudoune moncler pas cher wunkalm

  1121. Posted by Hietryelery | September 30, 2012 at 12:09 PM

    pcxcqpqe [url=http://abercromfitchonlinesales.webeden.net/#2375]abercrombie and fitch outlet[/url] thimgtopfg abercrombie kids dfytchj ttaivsyw [url=http://ralphlaurenshirtsonlinesale.webeden.net/#8653]cheap polo ralph lauren[/url] ihkabpuqmz ralph lauren polo outlet rhvjbbj
    http://cheapralphlaurenshirtssale.webeden.net/#0606

  1122. Posted by Crycliscerela | October 3, 2012 at 10:33 AM

    yfuzqsyt [url=http://muberrybagsoutletsonline.co.uk/#58913]mulberry bags outlet[/url] ipkcgb mulberry outlet store ixfunyqe http://muberrybagsoutletsonline.co.uk/dxbxgamy [url=http://bestaffjacketsaleonline.co.uk/#18999]belstaff jackets[/url] epcusr belstaff jackets inyuhlbm http://bestaffjacketsaleonline.co.uk/

  1123. Posted by cetarrinialal | October 6, 2012 at 10:20 AM

    aqqjrnde [url=http://frmclerdoudounesdesoldes.com/]doudoune moncler[/url] mopyvlyk moncler soldes mwvvvdfm http://frmclerdoudounesdesoldes.com/

  1124. Posted by Pehimmehourse | October 11, 2012 at 1:54 AM

    pscgrjut wrxnuxqy [url=http://poloshritsrallphlaurensmagasin.com/]polo ralph lauren pas cher[/url] lpgokizu polo ralph lauren sdimvbcg pvrqeonr http://poloshritsrallphlaurensmagasin.com/

  1125. Posted by water dispenser | December 8, 2013 at 1:46 PM

    Lucky charms are working fine for the superstitious. Im one too. I supply 828 water dispenser singapore produces high quality, beautiful water dispensers with worldwide certification since 2005. Water related stuff are my lucky charms

  1126. Posted by water dispenser | December 8, 2013 at 1:47 PM

    Brass balls. One of the main elements of luck. Mine is water. I supply 828 water dispenser singapore produces high quality, beautiful water dispensers with worldwide certification since 2005. Water related stuff are my lucky charms

  1127. Posted by Baba | December 20, 2013 at 4:47 PM

    <script>$(document).ready(function(){alert("hello");});</script>