If you say so. See, I always thought it was a risk/reward thing. While the direct clients of the outperforming funds will get to enjoy the intended risk/reward trade-off, Mr. Insana's clientele will get all of the risk and a smaller slice of the reward. If you are that brand loyal and have no qualms about overpaying for your purchases, then who am I to argue?Quote from GGallin:
Yeah, hard luck. Too bad the future is unwritten. The strategies Ron invested in are sound.
GG
Quote from Landis82:
Exactly.
As I said earlier, SAC won't even pick-up the phone unless you have $5,000,000. Insana gave investors access to a dozen or so Funds ( including ) SAC for only $500k.
Unless, of course, I'm willing to be hosed with double management fees which, as Landis82 assured us, don't matter, irrespective of how inflated they may be.Quote from GGallin:
It is. How do you suggest accessing Ron's stable of funds?
Here's a clue, YOU CAN'T.
GG
Not exactly. I am merely acknowledging the audacity of someone charging so much as a "connection" fee, and the stupidity of those who support it. (Was I not being clear enough for you?)Quote from GGallin:
...You arrogance is such that you dismiss the knowledge and skill of the investors involved...
Quote from Aaron Copland:
There you go butting into a conversation trying to show everyone how smart you are, geesh Landis get a life.
Quote from Cutten:
Short version: Insana closed shop because most of the funds he picked sucked ass all year long. Instead of picking past winners he should try to find the next superstars - but then that would take more skills than simply opening his Rolodex.
That's half of the story. The breaking point seems to be that the likelihood of him raising $500m in the current environment - combined with his lackluster 12 month track record he compiled - is pretty much zero. That would leave him charging his 1% on his $100m (1m a year) without performance fees for another 12-24 months, while having to pay fees for staff, office and marketing. He would need anywhere from $500 to $1bln to have a viable business model. Many fund of funds operations are much larger. $2bln, $5bln etc.Quote from Cutten:
Short version: Insana closed shop because most of the funds he picked sucked ass all year long. Instead of picking past winners he should try to find the next superstars - but then that would take more skills than simply opening his Rolodex.
Actually, I was referring to people like you.Quote from GGallin:
By default you are saying those who invested with Ron are stupid, when actually they are extremelyintelligent, ultra high net worth, sophisticated people and firm. Your audicity in continuing this line of argument is a sad commentary on your own lack of knowledge.
GG