You guys watching CNBC?

Soros and gang are testifying. Load of BS?

yeah, and I am learning over and over again that HF managers get paid too much, i.e., much more than warranted by the service they provide.

They get paid as much as people let them. Dont be a hater.

aic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They get paid as much as people let them. Dont be > a hater. Yep. Tell me that if you were in their shoes and could earn what they do, you would not do the same. I turned it off after Soros testified.

Dreary Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > yeah, and I am learning over and over again that > HF managers get paid too much, i.e., much more > than warranted by the service they provide. Yeah - this pisses me off. These HF managers earned their money. People should not hate on them. If people don’t want to invest in their funds and pay their fees, they do not have to.

Exactly, I am not suggesting that government should set their fees, or even regulate them to any extent. I just know that many investors don’t calculate it right…it’s more of an awareness issue. There are some 9000 HF’s, and most of them are no good., and the remaining ones performance varies from year to year. Knowing what the HF managers do, I still don’t think their compensation is warranted. Would I decline an HF manager job? No.

capitalism at its best…deal with it, future CFAs, its the industry we chose! L2 June Candidate

Um… if you know you are effing your client by fraudulently charging excessive fees, you are violating the standards. III. DUTIES TO CLIENTS A. Loyalty, Prudence, and Care. Members and Candidates have a duty of loyalty to their clients and must act with reasonable care and exercise prudent judgment. Members and Candidates must act for the benefit of their clients and place their clients’ interests before their employer’s or their own interests. In relationships with clients, Members and Candidates must determine applicable fiduciary duty and must comply with such duty to persons and interests to whom it is owed.

This is extreme, but the point is the same: http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?1,854725,page=1

I think the issue isn’t fees so much as transparency - knowing what you are paying for. How to do that without spoiling intellectual capital investments is a question I don’t know how to answer.

Danteshek Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Um… if you know you are effing your client by > fraudulently charging excessive fees, you are > violating the standards. > > > III. DUTIES TO CLIENTS > A. Loyalty, Prudence, and Care. Members and > Candidates have a duty of loyalty > to their clients and must act with reasonable care > and exercise prudent > judgment. Members and Candidates must act for the > benefit of their clients > and place their clients’ interests before their > employer’s or their own > interests. In relationships with clients, Members > and Candidates must > determine applicable fiduciary duty and must > comply with such duty to > persons and interests to whom it is owed. I don’t think this is a fraudulence issue.

HF managers make money on their intelligence and luck. Why would anybody hate them? Investors invest in HF because of handsome return (greed) which some HF managers make for them. But one should also be ready to take some losses if things don’t work out.

This falls under the COME ON category. In my opinion, any manager who runs a black box and doesn’t fully explain to the investor what they are getting is more than likely violating the standards. Half the time they don’t want to reveal their SECRETS is because the entire operation is a FRAUD.

Danteshek, I disagree that hedge fund managers that charge the industry standard in fees are acting in violation of CFA standards. Investors pay for alpha. The hedge funds develop strategies in search of this goal for their investors. I think the burden should be put on the pension fund and endowment managers that invest in these vehicles. They are the ones that ultimately decide what is right for their investors. Hedge funds state their strategy and attempt to follow it. Now, I am sure that there are some bad funds out there. If they do not follow their chosen strategy or act in ways that do not benefit the fund they should be looked at.

May be the pension fund and endowment managers are in violation of CFA standards!

Dreary Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > May be the pension fund and endowment managers are > in violation of CFA standards! Exactly!

they charged what the market would bear. period. some are worth the fee, most are not. its no different than anything else in life.

In my opinion it is none of the governments business how much these guys make. I’m surprised that turd waxman didnt call these guys in to testify before the election.

Danteshek, I agree with the disclosure issue, but no one is putting a gun to anyone’s head and forcing them to invest in a fund with no transparency. I don’t like it either but somtimes that’s how it has to be.

brianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Danteshek, > > I disagree that hedge fund managers that charge > the industry standard in fees are acting in > violation of CFA standards. Investors pay for > alpha. The hedge funds develop strategies in > search of this goal for their investors. > Yeah, but most of the alpha promised is just a transported beta. Look at the hedge fund returns recently. Sure, they provide absolute returns, as long as markets are going up!