Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio candidates - Moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mathemagician who wrote (105)	10/28/2003 10:48:21 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2955

Mathman, I'm familiar with the issue about the late-trading mutual funds but I haven't heard about the "market timers." What are you referring to? --Mike Buckley

To: Mathemagician who wrote (105)	10/28/2003 10:53:16 AM
From: Uncle Frank	Respond to of 2955

>> ... off topic and Frank can squash it if he wants... The rules haven't changed, MM. The only things off topic are comments delivered in contentious mode. As far as rage at mutual fund market timers, I wasn't aware that this was a hot issue. The last time it hit my radar screen was when Jeff V. was playing games at Magellan. uf

To: Mathemagician who wrote (105)	10/28/2003 11:32:12 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 2955

Mathman, Okay, now that I understand what you're referring to ... I can see why the late-traders (placing trades after the deadline) are getting in trouble. They were breaking the rules. But the timers were using information that was freely available to everybody and placing trades that anybody could place. Not as I understand it. Whereas you and I would have to settle for the next day's price when we put in an order to buy or sell a mutual fund, these guys were making trades that affected the assets of their own mutual fund. They were making trades that lowered the assets of their clients' mutual funds to better their own pockets during periods when their clients weren't able to make trades. In my opinion, that's stealing from their clients. The fund manager has a fiduciary responsibility to act on behalf of his/her clients. When the manager makes trades that have an adverse affect on the fund's assets during periods that their clients are prohibited from reacting, it's a double whammy. The only recourse the client has is to redeem all shares and move the money to a different investment vehicle, which is what the Putnam investors should do in my opinion. --Mike Buckley