baufinanciaphaster 👹 Profile picture
Aug 6, 2020 12 tweets 6 min read Read on X
Dear @realwillmeade,

What is this about?

"Former PM at Goldman Sachs founded $1.4 billion hedge fund."

Are you a former PM at Goldman Sachs who founded a $1.4bn hedge fund?

Or are you a former PM at a Goldman-Sachs-founded $1.4bn hedge fund? If so, which one?
Dear @realwillmeade you do know that when you get quoted and you don't correct the public record, people will think you are lying, because you are not expected to let actual untruths stand.

This article here may simply be sloppy reporting of a tweet but it's out there. ImageImage
There are others out there too.
This one is also from a tweet. And it misreads your bio.
But you don't really make your bio clear do you. There are people who would read that bio and say at the very least... "gee, he was a former PM at a hedge fund"

ccn.com/former-goldman… Image
This one takes a slightly different tack but somehow it still gets the facts wrong, doesn't it?

crypto-news-flash.com/ripple-former-… Image
.@realwillmeade would you consider changing your bio so people don't always get confused?

Hope I got that right. The bio you used in your 2015 "ebook" suggests the RIA was a hedge fund, but people who worked there both before and after Gary's passing say it was no such thing. Image
By the way... I love the bit about turning $20k into $26 million in 12 years or into $1.2bn in 30yrs in that e-book. I walked away from that e-book with the knowledge that you didn't understand statistics, but that you did know (or your partner knew) how to data-mine.
I see Hertz was a fave then. And as you noted, downside was limited to 100%.

Of the 4 stocks you chose in the e-book, 3 have underperformed the S&P in those 5yrs (HTZ went BK), but AAPL has done OK, which makes up for HTZ and more, but the kicker is the new WFH fave, isn't it.
That basically did little for 4yrs, then popped, got nailed in March, then rallied hard.

If you'd bought that 4-stock portfolio on 31Mar2015 and held it til you sent out that "Sell Everything!!!" tweet, you would have underperformed S&P500 by 24% in 5yrs.
If you'd bought that portfolio 30 Jun 2015, you would have underperformed by 28%. Best case? You were late and bought that portfolio 30Jun2016 and you only underperformed 5%.

I know. I checked. I even checked other possibilities, and a dollar-cost averaging in-price too. Image
Of course... since your "sell everything" tweet, which doesn't seem to subscribe to your service, all your baskets have done well. The worst performing in-price has outperformed S&P500 by 22.5% in 3mos. S&P itself is +17% since SELL EVERYTHING, so the average is up 45% since then ImageImage
I could go on but this all started with your bio....

so what say you @realwillmeade?

[if someone wants to post screenshots into his feed, he might read it because he's blocked me, but if you did, he'd block you...]
And also.... Beware of False Profits @realwillmeade Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with baufinanciaphaster 👹

baufinanciaphaster 👹 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @bauhiniacapital

Apr 26
Let's start from the back end. "Tell me why I am wrong."

OK. Fair. Here is why you are wrong. A 🧵:

Bill, your assumptions are, well, assumptions.

The first assumption is that this is a trade war between the US and China. That is wrong.

To my knowledge, Donald Trump has
broken EVERY SINGLE trade agreement which was in place between the US and other countries, before him or which he, himself, signed, including USMCA which was "maybe the greatest deal ever done."

Donald Trump has, for decades, been a fan of tariffs. He ran on it. He put tariffs
on allies. He put tariffs on Australia, which has zero tariffs on the US and with which the US runs a trade surplus. He demands tariff cuts from Japan which runs lower average tariffs on US goods than the US used to run on its imports. He put tariffs on penguins.
Read 34 tweets
Apr 18
The proposed USTR schedules for port fees are out.

For Chinese/HK/Macau owner/operators (not necessarily of Chinese vessels) Image
For foreign (non-US) owners of Chinese vessels:

with exceptions: Image
Image
TLDR;
For Chinese owner/operators of vessels...

for a standard 12,000 TEU container ship (~60-70k Net tonnes),

$50/Net Tonne (or NRT) that is US$3mm per trip to the US or US$250/TEU

rising to US$140/NT or US$8.4mm or US$700/TEU starting in 3yrs.

and... Image
Read 24 tweets
Apr 8
Just getting around to the USTR Section 301 hearings on the Proposed Action in Section 301 Investigation of China's Targeting of the Maritime, Logistics, and Shipbuilding Sectors for Dominance.

Like the USTR report released in Jan, it is something of a disaster. 500+ pgs of it.
There are people who support (politicians, labour unions, ports, dockworkers, steel companies, etc).

They almost all use the same talking points from the USTR report which were... wrong. They were factually incorrect in the USTR report and they were the same, or worse in the
hearings. The common trope is that shipbuilding 50 years ago was such that the US was the dominant global shipbuilder, and shipbuilders once employed X number of people. This was destroyed by CCP policies to achieve dominance in shipbuilding, and those policies started in 2006. Image
Read 26 tweets
Apr 8
The problem with Miran’s argument is shown in his own quote.

If two non-US countries TRADE with a USD price, and they do not tariff each other, then it is frictionless. The US does not collect 10% via tariffs.

I’ve been through this before but a reserve currency is not so
because people trade using a dollar denominated price. It is based on where the end profit is allocated to as savings.

If a European company buys 1mm bbl of oil from Aramco, first EUCo uses Euro to buy USD. Gives to Aramco who gives it to Shipper (who EUCo has also paid USD)
And a couple weeks later, EUCo takes delivery in, say, Hamburg. They pay euros to unload it, spend euros to operate their refinery, spend euros to transport diesel to a factory using a backup diesel generator. That company buys the diesel in euros, then burns it, making power
Read 13 tweets
Apr 6
@BlankBl23041510 @Citrini7 1) I don't think the market believes they will last as set.
2) There are many paths.
3) One path is simply a LOT lower consumption.
4) Over even a medium-term, if the system put in place has permanence of intention, it leads to capital controls (i.e. lower real yields)
@BlankBl23041510 @Citrini7 but basically, if you have partial or full capital controls and lower real yields, that's simply financial repression by the state - financed by low returns on capital and less choice.

To get from A to B, there are a finite number of outlets and offsets.
@Citrini7 Americans consume less (because they save more). They produce more to consume what they cut off from the outside world. Jobs which were related to consumption become jobs related to production. All fine. The savings finance the part of the govt deficit no longer financed by
Read 24 tweets
Apr 6
@Citrini7 Ask yourself what you think a reserve currency is.

Is it the fact of a stock of financial assets in a currency?

Or is it a propensity to have a flow?

If the trade deficit (flow) immediately goes to zero, the stock remains unchanged.

Other flows shift. Americans net save.
@Citrini7 Americans consume less (because they save more). They produce more to consume what they cut off from the outside world. Jobs which were related to consumption become jobs related to production. All fine. The savings finance the part of the govt deficit no longer financed by
@Citrini7 foreign flows, but until the budget deficit falls to the level of the current trade deficit, there’s an excess which has to be funded by someone (as a flow). If that is funded by foreigners, you still have the same ‘reserve currency’ ownership of stock AND new inflows ‘problem.’
Read 24 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(