Having read all of his books years ago, he had a certain mystique with me. But he cultivates a kind of transgression with reporters by only giving them one side of the story, with which he'll play 3- card monty with his audience and reporters.
Example:
months ago. ... Euro is flawed and will not be around in 2-5 years.
This week ... Euro is great, it got bailed out by China...
My guess is he fooled China into buying a portfolio of Soverign Euro CDS risk.
It's interesting because his audience dont really care about the subject matter. During the credit crisis, no one in the audience would be able to ask a real question that had actual trading answers- he would say im not at liberty to say, or if I traded, I might know, but I'm retired, etc...
Definitely a geopolitical flooze.
Example:
months ago. ... Euro is flawed and will not be around in 2-5 years.
This week ... Euro is great, it got bailed out by China...
My guess is he fooled China into buying a portfolio of Soverign Euro CDS risk.
It's interesting because his audience dont really care about the subject matter. During the credit crisis, no one in the audience would be able to ask a real question that had actual trading answers- he would say im not at liberty to say, or if I traded, I might know, but I'm retired, etc...
Definitely a geopolitical flooze.
