I am not dismissing it. I am a big fan of trades with option-like payoffs, which are often negative carry. I just think that you have to be aware of the true costs of having these trades on. Moreover, you're not correct to generalize and assume I am one of these carry monkeys you read so much about. I like all sorts of trades, incl ones that carry negatively. It's just that I know from bitter experience how often it happens that carry completely kills the trade that you think you have made money on.Quote from ralph00:
I'm hostile because you seem to dismiss something just because there is negative carry. You say you think for yourself, but you behave just like 95% of the hedge funds out there which seem to be little more than vehicles set up to borrow at low yields and invest at high ones. That can also be a way to the poorhouse.
Just because I find stories like Burry or Eisman or Cornwall inspirational doesn't mean I don't think for myself. As far as I know, these guys have made no recent public pronouncements about the fate of interest rates. Should I instead take my inspiration from John Devaney?
http://money.cnn.com/2007/07/30/news/newsmakers/yacht_sale/index.htm
I don't know who the people you cite are, honestly. I am sure they're very smart people, but I am generally very cautious about stories of heroic exploits, since I know journalists and writers love to exaggerate and romanticize. Moreover, survivorship bias is a massive issue.
At any rate, it's fine, there's plenty of people that agree with you (e.g. one of the recent Macro Man posts). My personal opinion is simply that I don't like these trades. The optionality of the payoff is not big enough to make me want to pay the carry. Let me stress that this is an opinion, no more, no less. I have no problem whatsoever if you disagree with it.
