To: dvdw© who wrote (18) 1/16/2009 9:23:57 AM
From: dvdw© of 20
Out take discussion, from this post Message 25329061;
The Roundtable and Regulation
Recently, Goldstein turned the reins of the Roundtable over to Tim Selby, a partner at law firm Alston+Bird.
“There is a lot of misperception about hedge funds,” said Selby, who will serve as the group’s new president. “What I’d like the Roundtable to do is to better educate people on how hedge funds operate and what they do for the industry. They are meant to be about risk management, and they are designed to help people preserve capital.”
Selby's view is always what I've been told over the years about Hedge Funds.
I never believed it was possible to meet these goals, because the market sustains its own systemics and its systemics never violate its rules for self preservation.......which the hedge fund model violates from the get go..
Risk Management....means what? Riskless? Not possible.
Capital Preservation? Under the standard practice of evaluating performance, vis a vis profit or loss, this goal is subject to operator timing, and can not reliably be realized within the limits of single phase logics.
QCPP methods and practice are far and away better than the submission of ones business/money to a model that derives its purpose from externalizing and hence subverting Supply and Demand.
Replacing Supply and Demand with a leverage model, that functions as a Supply multiplier?????? that is the first red flag for anyone using an iota of common sense.
all by itself, from the get go, this is encouraging law breaking, by violating first principles laws governing stock issuance, encouraging multiplication of a companies legal authorized outstanding......by derivatives, designed to set value on a deferred clock (owned by someone else), to favor an hypothetical outcome favoring your private goals and objectives....)?
The idea that under the terms managing risk and preserving capital by utilizing algorithmic dance steps, which are little more than contrivance to facilitate transfer of risk..too a clock, that always runs down. is nonsense.......By using leverage your plan has placed you on the clock of a third party, which sets your goal fulfillment objectives in thier hands.
Reduce as you will, as an attempt to take which someone else owns, value it according to your private purpose,
and seek redemption later, hopefully just in time for the leverage obligation incurred by those structuring the derivatives to be met? And all this without a single awareness of market systemics, accepting only those contrived by your own motives..
self reflexivities break down under these conditions....always have and always will.
BUT....as long as you can get away with it, the other guys clock is just tick tick ticking away? |
