anyone see Goldman absolutely getting crushed in Jan due to “superstar” talent leaving to pursue more profitable opportunities at hedge funds, investment companies, and private equity firms. Or is this possibly already priced in.
You mean the superstar talent that led them to lose 2/3 of the company value? Goldman is a valuable company because of brand name so it’s hard to imagine that anyone cares who comes or goes. In particular, did Goldman stock ever move much because of a CEO departure? (Probably, but none springs to mind).
Joey, why are you so bitter?
He chews coffee grounds.
JoeyDVivre Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You mean the superstar talent that led them to > lose 2/3 of the company value? Lol. Exactly. Anybody could be a superstar levered 30+ to 1. Ironman - what’s your definition of “talent?”
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Joey, why are you so bitter? His whole portfolio was GS shares.
No bonuses for the top talents this year so why wait til January? What exit opps do these guys have in the market? Probably better to take a year long vacation…
IronMan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > anyone see Goldman absolutely getting crushed in > Jan due to “superstar” talent leaving to pursue > more profitable opportunities at hedge funds, > investment companies, and private equity firms. > Or is this possibly already priced in. No. GS already is one big hedge fund. Any “talent” that could have/wanted to leave did so 2-3 years ago. Any as people continue to point out (correctly) but no one seems to understand, where are they going to go? Citadel? Tontine? AQR? Doesn’t anybody know what “high water mark” means?
phBOOM Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No bonuses for the top talents this year so why > wait til January? What exit opps do these guys > have in the market? Probably better to take a year > long vacation… No bonuses? Says who? That was only a recommendation from the fed, not a requirement. It will ultimately be up to Goldman to decide the bonuses.
cfa_gremlin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeyDVivre Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > You mean the superstar talent that led them to > > lose 2/3 of the company value? > > Lol. Exactly. Anybody could be a superstar > levered 30+ to 1. > > Ironman - what’s your definition of “talent?” There are undoubtedly some traders in the prop group who would be widely considered “talent.” Even if they had a tough year like everyone else. But if the regulatory environment changes such that Goldman may not being out the type of bonuses it use to, you may see some exodus.
Nakedputs, Good point, not many hedge funds are going to pull in huge returns over the near term to get them back to the high watermark so they can start charging performance fees again. Therefore hedge fund bonuses are likely to be small to none.
nm.
IronMan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > phBOOM Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > No bonuses for the top talents this year so why > > wait til January? What exit opps do these guys > > have in the market? Probably better to take a > year > > long vacation… > > No bonuses? Says who? That was only a > recommendation from the fed, not a requirement. > It will ultimately be up to Goldman to decide the > bonuses. Executives are not getting bonuses this year Blankfein, Goldman Deputies Decide to Forgo Bonuses http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aMw7rMoW1QmA&refer=home
Rydex Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nakedputs, > > Good point, not many hedge funds are going to pull > in huge returns over the near term to get them > back to the high watermark so they can start > charging performance fees again. Therefore hedge > fund bonuses are likely to be small to none. On the contrary, hedge funds are going to start taking huge risks to get try and salvage their returns for this year, and be able to start on an even keel for next year. Some will blow up and some will live on.
It doesn’t work that way and no responsible hedge fund will do that (i.e., almost all the ones you have heard of will not). In particular, if you change your investment style due to poor returns you will get massive redemption requests and if you do it too much you will get fraud suits. I also find that it is hard to get 90% of people on losing streaks to invest in anything, to say nothing of take huge risks to get back to even. People like having their job and just don’t want to completely blow up if they think they can avoid a job search.
IronMan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rydex Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Nakedputs, > > > > Good point, not many hedge funds are going to > pull > > in huge returns over the near term to get them > > back to the high watermark so they can start > > charging performance fees again. Therefore > hedge > > fund bonuses are likely to be small to none. > > > On the contrary, hedge funds are going to start > taking huge risks to get try and salvage their > returns for this year, and be able to start on an > even keel for next year. Some will blow up and > some will live on. What, exactly, are you basing this thought on? I’m in the industry, and everything I’ve seen points to funds de-risking, deleveraging and focusing on preserving capital, all of which are antithetical to taking huge risks.
He’s not basing it on anything except a fantasy world. Everyone in the industry knows it’s not true.
Maybe he figures the funds are much better at selling puts than he is.
I work in the industry and know exactly what I am talking about folks. Firms with a huge reputation won’t, but they don’t even make up 2% of the industry. The rest, who don’t have a sterling reputation, have nothing to lose. If they risk and lose big, they will just close shop and start again somewhere else. It’s either that or stick it out and get no bonus… they will go with the former.
You couldn’t have much of a position in the industry. a) The top 200 hedge funds control about 80% of the assets in hedge fund land and those are the ones with the “huge reputations”. The 2% number is wacky. b) I’ve been the risk manager of about 2% of the assets in hedge fund land and nobody even suggested such a thing when we were down (which didn’t happen much). You delever when you are down. c) They have absolutely tons to lose and they lose it quick.