3 ms·

Yea, he got the greatest gift he could ever hope for at the beginning of the bet, and couldn't remotely come close to holding that lead. How often in 10 years d

Yea, he got the greatest gift he could ever hope for at the beginning of the bet, and couldn't remotely come close to holding that lead. How often in 10 years do you expect a market correction of that size? He's spewing nonsense now because he got caught with his pants down. His livelihood depends on convincing people that "hedge funds" outperform, no facts to the contrary will ever be accepted by him. He will always mark it up to being unlucky. It really was a terrible bet for Ted, because it has heavily publicized his fund of funds incompetence to his customers and potential customers.

dnautics 10y ago
"How often in 10 years do you expect a market correction of that size?" These days it feels like the answer to you question is "one, on average" Moreover, each peak will tend to exceed the previous, so it's unsurprising that Buffet's side is going smoothly. I believe in a universe run on the principle of maximal irony, so I foresee Seidel losing the bet, but by about 3-4 months.
- valuearb 10y ago
  2008 was arguably the biggest market crash since 1929, it was nearly a 50% drop in less than a year. 1973-74 and 2000-2003 were nearly as bad over longer periods, but nothing else comes close. Seidel literally got a market crash that occurs maybe once every 25 to 50 years and still couldn't win this bet. If he got two crashes he'd still lose because his hedge funds are rowing backwards 4% a year due to high fees.
  - dnautics 10y ago
    I think you also missed a part of my point, which is that if you're not warren buffet or a programmer that has a steady six figure job, employment can be procyclical. You can more easily get jobs and pay hikes when the market is up, so your ability to invest peaks during the tops of the cycle, and you are at risk of things like unemployment at the bottom of the cycle. Yeah hedge funds suck because they have high fees, but there's this Buffet-worshipping 'common man' implication that 'common man' should not be jealous of the rich man that has access to hedge funds because the S&P is just as good.

dnautics 10y ago

"How often in 10 years do you expect a market correction of that size?" These days it feels like the answer to you question is "one, on average" Moreover, each peak will tend to exceed the previous, so it's unsurprising that Buffet's side is going smoothly. I believe in a universe run on the principle of maximal irony, so I foresee Seidel losing the bet, but by about 3-4 months.

valuearb 10y ago
2008 was arguably the biggest market crash since 1929, it was nearly a 50% drop in less than a year. 1973-74 and 2000-2003 were nearly as bad over longer periods, but nothing else comes close. Seidel literally got a market crash that occurs maybe once every 25 to 50 years and still couldn't win this bet. If he got two crashes he'd still lose because his hedge funds are rowing backwards 4% a year due to high fees.
- dnautics 10y ago
  I think you also missed a part of my point, which is that if you're not warren buffet or a programmer that has a steady six figure job, employment can be procyclical. You can more easily get jobs and pay hikes when the market is up, so your ability to invest peaks during the tops of the cycle, and you are at risk of things like unemployment at the bottom of the cycle. Yeah hedge funds suck because they have high fees, but there's this Buffet-worshipping 'common man' implication that 'common man' should not be jealous of the rich man that has access to hedge funds because the S&P is just as good.