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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (49809)	5/11/2004 6:58:23 PM
From: Taikun	Respond to of 74559

Not completely true. The argument is only true for the weaker pension funds that are mismanaged or where corporations have dipped in (with gov'ts blessing) to cover operating expenses. Think US Airways and Lucent as the worst, and as the main beneficiaries of PBGC. Here are a few pension funds that have had strong returns from alternative investments (buyouts, venture capital, real estate, mezzanine funds, timber, oil and gas, hedge funds). University of California Regents (ie UCLA, UC Davis, UC Santa Barbara...all the UCs), Stanford Investment Management Company, Harvard Investment Management Company, Yale, Princeton, CALPERS, CALSTERS, Hewlett Packard, Virginia Retirement System. The list of the best performing pension funds is in the hundreds. Some of these, like Stanford IMC for example (for the Stanford professors) have not required any payment from members (ie the professors, university staff) in 10-12(!) yrs. These are the Jay Chen's of the pension fund industry, well-prepared for the coming storm. Crummy company=crummy pension plan. Time to get a University job?