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 30
Yowza. Looks like Japan's intervention was larger than I thought it was.

Am guessing ¥5.5-6.0trln based on the Forecast BOJ Current Account Changes "Financial Factors" change for May 1.

That's $35-38bn.
I'd expect they'd be "comfortable" selling twice that again, without problem. If Korea and US joined in, one could expect another $50-100bn total selling as well.

As previously noted, this fiscal year (ending 31Mar25) is also the year of the quinquennial policy mix review.
Currently, the mix is basically 50/50 for yen and FX assets (unhedged) and that was based on a set of expectations/assumptions from 5yrs ago which favoured USD. IF they adjust those assumptions to normalise them, you'd probably get a midpoint closer to 40-45% FX and 55-60% yen.
Read 8 tweets
Apr 26
A couple of points on USDJPY:

1) The MOF (officially, the Vice Minister of Finance for international Affairs) is the one who decides. The BOJ is the execution desk, not the decision-maker.

2) Gov Ueda can guide policy to react to market conditions if necessary, but will not
be a/the deciding factor on yen intervention

3) The MOF is sitting on big gains from the intervention in the 2010-2012 period. What they sold in Sep 2022 and what they would be selling now would likely be (as far as the bureaucratic memory is concerned) "taking profits" rather
than "dipping into reserves" to support the yen.

4) The MOF cares more about speculative impulse and speed of move than actual level. They aren't dumb. There is institutional memory. They recognise when trade flows, portfolio flows, and real interest rate differentials impact
Read 23 tweets
Mar 22
I've been trying to get my head around this shocker because it opens a couple of weird cans of worms.

First, US$78bn of inflated revenues was something like 53% of reported revenues in 2019-2020. If those were false, then 2018 has to be in question (2019 gain was only +2.4%yoy
but 2018 was +49.9% vs previous year, and that is not in question?

The other part here is that PwC's onshore entity was the one auditing the books of the onshore Hengda entity. To screw up that amount of revenue across 1,000+ project companies meant that the audits of an
enormous number of project companies also had to be false. And those projects would have reported revenues and profits to local authorities as they booked the sales because the local authorities then take the contracted sale, observe the money in the escrow account, the process
Read 17 tweets
Mar 16
The CSRC admonition to companies to pay higher dividends and/or buy back stock became really visible in English when China Telecom and China Mobile listed A-Shares and in their prospectuses they had nearly identical sections and clauses about returning capital to
shareholders and how their company, in different stages of its corporate lifecycle, would be expected to have a payout ratio of X, Y, or Z. That was academic for them because they were in Z meaning much higher div payout ratio to come, but key was that the language was identical
because the CSRC wanted it there.

There was a really interesting development recently. On 25 Jan 2024, there was an article in the China Securities Journal about a presentation by Xie Xiaobing, head of the Property Rights Management Bureau of the central (State Council) SASAC
Read 8 tweets
Mar 11
Reading that Memo which is "NOT the official Prospectus or OM and shouldn’t be relied upon as official material for the upcoming macro fund"...

30-40 trades a year, half making money, half losing money, 15% fund target return at 10-12% annualised vol because either the ex-ante
trade distribution is truncated (there's a chart) because of great trade identification and top-notch portfolio construction OR ex-post because portfolio management and trading is top-notch.

Assuming each trade lasts 3-6mos = one has 7-20 trades on at any given time.
As few as 2 trades on if a 6wk horizon. Assuming a 10-12% portfolio volatility means using options (i.e. way lower than 50% daily win rate) to skew trade return distribution (and skew is assumed good, because Good Alpha), resulting in high Dollar Win vs Loss ratio (matching the
Read 10 tweets
Feb 10
Nope.

"International bondholders just got wiped out for the benefit of domestic creditors - CCP policy!"

WRONG

"The lesson: Apportioning losses between domestic creditors and foreign creditors will be political, ie. domestic creditors outrank international creditors.

WRONG
This is not new. It has been known by any foreign bondholder who bought the bonds in the last decade. The bond offerings often provided org charts. There's one in the thread below.

Put simply (highly simply), offshore bondholders lent money to a company (Evergrande (3333 HK)) which owned a 60% stake in another company onshore. Image
Read 18 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!

:(