Quote from Worldcrusher:
I think a lot of people go into this thinking that way. Unfortunately, performance is probably one of the least important factors. It seems that pedigrees and connections are much more important. To compound the issue, performance without a large amount of assets already under management, means very little to those with the power to invest.
I have to question how anyone can start a hedge fund without understanding this. If you start up a local pizza place and it makes good money for 5 years straight that doesn't mean that if your seeded 5 billion dollars you can take on Pizza Hut. At a certain level of size/capital there is alot more variables going on there than just selling pizza and getting good kids in highschool to work for you.
I won't be ready to go this route for another 5-10 years but from what I've looked into I really don't get why anyone on here would even want a hedge fund instead of a CTA. Your ultimately going to be offering a product to increase the risk/reward of your clients money...Just like I wouldn't be interested in investing a dollar in a bum on the street so they can buy magic markers and have a proven track record of 100% a day on a dollar from pan handling. If I invested 10k in the bum's strategy I would obviously never see a dime of that back let alone 20k the next day. Goldman isn't going to be cutting you billion dollar checks no matter what and I'm not even sure you would like the results if they did.
Just seems more logical that if you kick ass on Autumn Gold or the like for awhile that an accredited investor seeking diversity of strategy will kick you a 100k and you might actually both benefit.
Trying to court big institutional money just seems like more of the overconfident idiocy that saturates this business.
