3 ms·

Fred Wilson is an investor and investors are expected to have at least somewhat of an understanding of a company's outlook and make investments accordingly (alt

by dr_ 16y ago

Fred Wilson is an investor and investors are expected to have at least somewhat of an understanding of a company's outlook and make investments accordingly (although Fred invests in private, not public, companies). As such, it's his job to invest based on fundamentals and deliver solid returns for his portfolio. Apple not being forward with investors about Jobs turned out to not be a good reason to dump the stock. Apple has never been very open about anything - that is the culture of the company and it's no secret (no pun). Twitter hasn't been very forthcoming with people who develop for it's platform - having abandoned a chunk of them recently. Not to mention there's been a lot of shuffling in management. Will Fred dump his holdings in Twitter?

joshfraser 16y ago
Why would Fred dump his holding in Twitter? I'm sure Twitter are incredibly open with Fred about their financials and future plans. Fred's beef was with being a shareholder and not getting that information.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- dr_ 16y ago
  I don't buy it. Fred's a smart man - he knows with a company the size and scope of Apple releasing certain information will only feed competitors and fuel speculation. Steve Jobs said he was taking a medical leave of absence because his health issues are more complex than he thought. That's enough information. What is Fred looking for, biopsy reports?
  - jonknee 16y ago
    The SEC rules are pretty vague, so it's hard to say how much is enough information. They did ask Apple for more information though, which lends me to believe that they're more on the "disclosure is better" side. Apple's board of directors was also not amused by Jobs' policy of not disclosing his medical issues (Jerry York told the WSJ that he almost resigned after hearing the news but didn't so as to not contribute to the media drama).
MatthewPhillips 16y ago
Wilson put his money into other companies and his portfolio is still strong (according to him). His job isn't to pursue a particular investment strategy but to weigh risk/reward and to stick with what he knows. He's said in the past that he wouldn't have invested in GroupOn, for example, because it's not what he knows.
jcromartie 16y ago
Do you think there is anything wrong with a system that places profits and dividends over transparency and principles? Didn't Fred make his move because he felt that what Apple was doing was wrong and that bothered him? And so you are saying that, since he is "an investor," it's his job to put aside right and wrong and focus only on returns?
- dr_ 16y ago
  Fred argues for an "open" platform, but I guess that "openess" doesn't apply to Twitter. So much for principles.
MichaelSalib 16y ago
As such, it's his job to invest based on fundamentals and deliver solid returns for his portfolio. Apple not being forward with investors about Jobs turned out to not be a good reason to dump the stock. That's only true if you think fundamentals are only about short term return on investment. But if you think fundamentals include risk-adjusted returns, then his decision may be perfectly sound. Dishonest companies are risky investments; even if they have great returns, they may have awful returns after adjusting for the increased risks associated with an untrustworthy company.

by dr_ 16y ago

joshfraser 16y ago

Why would Fred dump his holding in Twitter? I'm sure Twitter are incredibly open with Fred about their financials and future plans. Fred's beef was with being a shareholder and not getting that information.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
dr_ 16y ago
I don't buy it. Fred's a smart man - he knows with a company the size and scope of Apple releasing certain information will only feed competitors and fuel speculation. Steve Jobs said he was taking a medical leave of absence because his health issues are more complex than he thought. That's enough information. What is Fred looking for, biopsy reports?
- jonknee 16y ago
  The SEC rules are pretty vague, so it's hard to say how much is enough information. They did ask Apple for more information though, which lends me to believe that they're more on the "disclosure is better" side. Apple's board of directors was also not amused by Jobs' policy of not disclosing his medical issues (Jerry York told the WSJ that he almost resigned after hearing the news but didn't so as to not contribute to the media drama).

MatthewPhillips 16y ago

Wilson put his money into other companies and his portfolio is still strong (according to him). His job isn't to pursue a particular investment strategy but to weigh risk/reward and to stick with what he knows. He's said in the past that he wouldn't have invested in GroupOn, for example, because it's not what he knows.

jcromartie 16y ago

Do you think there is anything wrong with a system that places profits and dividends over transparency and principles? Didn't Fred make his move because he felt that what Apple was doing was wrong and that bothered him? And so you are saying that, since he is "an investor," it's his job to put aside right and wrong and focus only on returns?

dr_ 16y ago
Fred argues for an "open" platform, but I guess that "openess" doesn't apply to Twitter. So much for principles.

MichaelSalib 16y ago

As such, it's his job to invest based on fundamentals and deliver solid returns for his portfolio. Apple not being forward with investors about Jobs turned out to not be a good reason to dump the stock. That's only true if you think fundamentals are only about short term return on investment. But if you think fundamentals include risk-adjusted returns, then his decision may be perfectly sound. Dishonest companies are risky investments; even if they have great returns, they may have awful returns after adjusting for the increased risks associated with an untrustworthy company.