shalimar's Profile
Comments
Entry: Bonus Watch '09: You Get NOTHING (Not Even Toxic Waste)
posted by shalimar
Jan 30, 2009 3:59PM
@183
I imagine you're good at spreadsheets, since writing obviously isn't your strong point.
Do this exercise: pull the "compensation" line for the investment banks (LEH, BSC, GS, MS, MER) over the past ten years. Then take that as a percentage of operating profit (include the business segment writedowns) over the same period.
Also, if you're drawn to an anecdotal argument about the 5-7% transaction fee being risk free, remember that you couldn't have pulled it in without your DCM/ECM teams, and that they couldn't have sold that shit without the firm taking on the lowest tranches on their balance sheet.
Essentially --- no, the other division didn't lose all the money.
Post the model on Google.
Entry: Dear Vikings
posted by shalimar
Feb 02, 2009 2:24PM
The "net YTD" numbers are cute. Not making any incentive till they get the FYTD numbers back upto par.
That's going to take some time.
Entry: Dear Investor
posted by shalimar
Feb 03, 2009 6:18PM
Unclear how long/short continues to lose money. Of all "strategies", long/short value has traditionally had the more rational managers, and have the most flexibility with regards to asset allocation and timing.
Maybe the successful ones don't spend as much time in the media.
Greenlight
Jan '09: down 60 bps (it's a relative VICTORY guys, and a bigger incentive-less hole in the more absolute sense)
Entry: Dear Investor
posted by shalimar
Feb 03, 2009 8:55PM
@17
Theoretically, a fund manager should allocate assets where he hopes to get an absolute return on his investment. Long/short is merely a description of the tools he has at his disposal.
Making industry/sector bets is irresponsible at bet. If you take out selection bias, all broad groups lose money in the long run.
Anyway, my earlier point was simpler. I'm a fan of Einhorn, Ackman, and Loeb. So why did they have to go lose money, after being so right? I'm disappointed that they couldn't uphold the banner.
Entry: Fail.
posted by shalimar
Feb 05, 2009 5:43PM
It's amazing how academics manage to prove history after the fact.
Also, the events of '08-'10 are not "Black Swan" events. The irrationality of '05-'07 in various asset classes may be defined as such. Generally, when things are overpriced, there's a sharp revaluation. I'd say chicken, or KFC, if you're American.
After all, EMH fanboys can't complain. The markets are always right, hence the current price levels are the proper ones.
Entry: Layoffs Watch '09: Dartmouth
posted by shalimar
Feb 09, 2009 7:52PM
"because of the global recession."
And not so much because of indiscriminate security purchase policies.
Entry: Government Mortgage Cheese
posted by shalimar
Feb 18, 2009 2:04PM
"Companies that service mortgages will get $1,000 for each loan that's modified"
Backdoor way to recap WFC and similar.
Entry: The Obama Portfolio
posted by shalimar
Mar 10, 2009 6:00PM
0 and 35
Collected annually on April 15
No high water mark
No redemptions
Incentive may be increased to 80 at the GP's discretion following his own indiscretions
Entry: We Love You, So Hurry Up And Die
posted by shalimar
Mar 16, 2009 8:36PM
Lovely, as usual.
Get back.
Entry: More Debt Than They Bargained For
posted by shalimar
Mar 25, 2009 5:16PM
oh mississipi
http://us.st12.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/scripophily_2044_67083484
Entry: Let's Talk B-School: A Dealbreaker Reader Poll
posted by shalimar
Mar 31, 2009 4:31PM
Reject both.
Get hired by a non-blowup oriented fund for being smart enough to save $xx and two years of her life.
Entry: Let's Talk B-School: A Dealbreaker Reader Poll
posted by shalimar
Mar 31, 2009 7:39PM
@ 63. It is. Although, for a new applicant (to BS or a fund), your approach (shown through innovation in the application method itself) would be more prized. PA management only matters if you're applying to be a PM.
@ Bess
Count for people I'd hire:
CBS: 0
GSB: 1 (JD/MBA who's apparently smarter than the girl I'd love to recruit)
Objectively, Harper is more isolated than CBS, and hence more conducive to the important things in the program: meeting future partners in bed and for business.
@ CBS/GSB
No offense. I only have the people I've met as reference points. CBS has a good value investing program, and GSB kids tend to have a better macro perspective.
Entry: Let's Talk B-School: A Dealbreaker Reader Poll
posted by shalimar
Mar 31, 2009 7:41PM
On the topic of b-schools. Anyone know where the perfect PE girl is heading to after graduation?
Entry: Let's Talk B-School: A Dealbreaker Reader Poll
posted by shalimar
Mar 31, 2009 8:48PM
@147
Obviously you're not a golfer.
Despite that, you seem like one of those bright strapping lads who insist on asking Terry (he stops by the basement occasionally to check out the Revise gear) whether gross margins in 3Q 2012 will be 20 or 23 bps wider, so that you can model your DCF accurately.
I'd highly encourage applying for our GMA training program for that hands-on control on that oh so important spread.
Entry: Let's Bicker Over: OFFICIAL B-School Rankings
posted by shalimar
Apr 28, 2009 6:45PM
1. Being There
2. HBS
3. Sand Hill Sandlot
4. Esso
Proof:
a. Most successful investors never went to a brand name b-school.
b. The top echelon at east coast PE firms and west coast VCs require the HBS stamp, according to the bios.
c. People occasionally recruit Stanford sandcastle builders. Otherwise, the students realize they've wasted time, and revert to option 1.
d. Gas station attendants know less about EMH & corporate finance than Wharton/CBS/Stern/SOM grads, and are easier to unteach.
Entry: Bonus Watch '09: You Get NOTHING (Not Even Toxic Waste)
posted by shalimar
Jan 30, 2009 3:47PM
Prices are converging towards intrinsic value.
By the way - "bankers", you guys are salespeople. Sales people are paid on commission. If there's nothing to sell, or if the buyers realize that you're not worth anything, you don't make money.
Now that you've run out of stupid buyers, the used-company dealership model falls apart.
If you want to maintain high wages, work in a job where you can directly attribute your pay to performance (ideally, contractually), have some level of agency over your work, then put in the sweat to make some money for your firm and yourself.