WHAT IS EVERYONE’S VIEW ON THE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (BDC) INDUSTRY? Investing in Private Equity companies seems pretty fun and I’ve heard its a new and growing area. Also, it sounds like there could be some solid exit ops.
Bernanke Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Best undoubtably is Technology as whole, because > there’s (and there will be) always a bull run in > tech in some way or the other, so you have good > chance to keep employed all your life, and > possibly making good bonuses, and later starting a > fund, if you are a Technology analyst. Bad part is > that, it’s not that easy to grasp, it’s vast in > scope and one innovation changes the game, so you > continuously need to be in the game full on > steroids. Tech is one sector which runs on > steroids, and personally my favorite sector too, > so I may be little biased :-). > > Worst I think would be Food & Beverage, > hospitality, transportation. They can dive in any > time, hard to get hold of data required for > analysis, and they are pretty slow moving. Though > there is chance to make money in every sector, if > you got the guts to short stuff. If you are > looking for Bull Runs, then get in Tech. GMCR and LVS have arguably been two of the most intriguing stories the past 12 months. Also how is data hard to get in those spaces? Euromonitor,and NPD amongst many others cover those gaps well; beyond that the hardest part maybe predicting pricing ability or ability to pass price increases through however a lot of the input prices are readily available and accurate due to their constant marketability. Also, it is easier to do channel checking with those companies than it is a lot of Tech names.
Iginla2010 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ So, you think a fund full of tech stocks is an > awesome idea? Nopes, I never said that, I said it’s one of the best sectors to be in as an Analyst, that’s like a career advice, not an investment strategy. But about starting a Tech fund, I don’t know, may be it’s a good idea, maybe it’s a bad idea. Next best I would say Energy. @Flux: I was making a comparison, that too with intent of generalizing, not an objective statement. There’s always scope to make money in any sector, on an average those who are in bull run make more money, because people are biased towards going long, very few people have stomach to short. Or you can anyway make money if your predictions are better than 50-50. And what happens on bust?, you don’t need to care as you took your bonus in boom, in bust you won’t be asked to pay it back, but you’ll find the another boom in another technology, that’s the beauty of Tech. Technology, in broad sense, is a perpetual bubble as you might say, bust at one place starts growing at another. If anyone’s prediction rate is better then 50-50, hands down, he’s a rockstar.
Bernanke Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Or you can anyway make money if your > predictions are better than 50-50. If anyone’s prediction rate is better then 50-50, > hands down, he’s a rockstar. Obviously an inaccurate statement. You could have an 80/20 hit rate, but if the 20 go to zero and the 80 return 10% you’re f’d. Magnitude matters. Then again, maybe I just have no idea what you mean by “prediction rate”.
^ Hmm… for purpose of statistical analysis all the samples are treated fairly, i.e. considering the magnitude same, or constant discipline, or something like magnitude weighted prediction ration over a long term if you like… or whatever scaling measure. But not to complicate things… the whole point is, it’s better to be in a place where bubbles happen again and again and again.
Bernanke Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Iginla2010 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > ^ So, you think a fund full of tech stocks is > an > > awesome idea? > > Nopes, I never said that, I said it’s one of the > best sectors to be in as an Analyst, that’s like a > career advice, not an investment strategy. But > about starting a Tech fund, I don’t know, may be > it’s a good idea, maybe it’s a bad idea. > > Next best I would say Energy. > > @Flux: I was making a comparison, that too with > intent of generalizing, not an objective > statement. There’s always scope to make money in > any sector, on an average those who are in bull > run make more money, because people are biased > towards going long, very few people have stomach > to short. Or you can anyway make money if your > predictions are better than 50-50. And what > happens on bust?, you don’t need to care as you > took your bonus in boom, in bust you won’t be > asked to pay it back, but you’ll find the another > boom in another technology, that’s the beauty of > Tech. Technology, in broad sense, is a perpetual > bubble as you might say, bust at one place starts > growing at another. > > If anyone’s prediction rate is better then 50-50, > hands down, he’s a rockstar. Ok. I tend to agree as the foods space is the definition of “defensive” so the upside is relatively limited on returns.
Iginla2010 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > naturallight Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I would say that at the margins it would > probably > > help to cover an industry that is very > connected > > to the macro economy. Helps to really > understand > > the big picture. > > > > But if you really want to be a PM, 1) hope that > > your dad is a PM and that he’ll pass the job on > to > > you when he’s done or 2) be really good at > raising > > assets. > > > Although this is getting away from the original > topic, but you bring up a good point. People tend > to think that being a big shot analyst or a PM is > the end all. In the process, they fail to realize > that you need assets to manage. Without assets, > guess what you’re analyzing or managing - didly!! > > Even Buffett (besides other legendary money > managers) had to wear a sales hat or a business > development hat at some point in their careers to > raise money. Although this might need to happen > only in the early stages, there is no guarantee > that it will not need to continually happen. You think I’m worried about my sales pitch? Check my user name
Others have already pointed it out, but do you realize you’re missing a ‘c’ in the name shmoozer?
this guy has mckinsey written all over him
I did not, I actually have never spelled out the word prior to creating my user name. I really hope my online reputation isn’t ruined!
I think he’s a goy schmoozer.
Bernanke Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ Hmm… for purpose of statistical analysis all > the samples are treated fairly, i.e. considering > the magnitude same, or constant discipline, or > something like magnitude weighted prediction > ration over a long term if you like… or whatever > scaling measure. > > But not to complicate things… the whole point > is, it’s better to be in a place where bubbles > happen again and again and again. except that the magnitude of losses and gains are not equal, it takes a lot to recover from losses. People underestimate the importance of capital preservation.
^ yups you are ture… I was just making a point about benifits of being a Tech Analyst, nothing else.
shmoozer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Iginla2010 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > naturallight Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > You think I’m worried about my sales pitch? Check > my user name sorry, brah. lost us right here.
Personally, I hate FIG. No transparency.
SuperiorReturn Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > greengrape Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I was just on the other SS ER thread. > Apparently, > > there are a LOT of haters for ER. Personally, I > > think most of them are bitter they can’t get in > > ER, and try to trash on it. > > > > I actually work in ER, and I don’t think you > can > > really master all of them. You can learn which > > sectors are affected most by changes in the > > markets (commodities prices, demographics…), > but > > as a PM, you can’t be up totally up to date > versus > > say a SS ER analyst who only focuses on a > sector. > > This is partly why SS ER actually exists. > > (according to some people in the other thread, > SS > > ER is useless and is nothing except dead > weight) > > > > A valid criticism of ER is that in some ways > you > > have a more limited scope against the bigger > > picture. > > > get out of here green grape, what you say is > invalid cause you are an idiot There’s actually a good conversation on this thread. I’m glad to see that. Thank god the flamers like SuperiorReturn here, didn’t ruin it. AND it looks like he’s been banned. Finally.
Flux Capacitor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > FIG, energy, bio-tech, and managed care all come > to mind as “specialty”- That is however not a bad > thing as usually those are great teams to be > on… > > Greengrape do you work in ER? I can’t tell. Yes I do, SS ER
greengrape Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Flux Capacitor Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > FIG, energy, bio-tech, and managed care all > come > > to mind as “specialty”- That is however not a > bad > > thing as usually those are great teams to be > > on… > > > > Greengrape do you work in ER? I can’t tell. > > Yes I do, SS ER Lulz… I was being sarcastic, as you allude to your job every other time you post.