Myth465 Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 MooreCapital you are by definition wrong when you call Tilson's performance mediocre. Tilson has beat the market over the last decade net of fees. The vast majority of fund managers underperform the market over a random 10 year period net of fees. Therefore his performance is by definition above average. I thought Tilson was benchmarked to the S&P 500, but according to you apparently he is benchmarked to some guy named Ezra Kalir. I guess Tilson is just a pathetic loser until he has beaten every random fund manager in bumf*ck Canada. Anything less is mediocre. LOL. I see both ends, Tilson's performance is nothing to write home about, but its by definition better then most isnt it? My guess is there is more to the story, MooreCapital is fairly involved in hitting Tilson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hester Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 My comments towards tilson are based on facts... His performance is just terrible, and I can't believe some of you think otherwise.ment than you are dreaming. Tilson = Mediocre hedge fund manager, and average Mutual Fund manager or in other words, nobody we should even be discussing on this board I don't know how this is so hard to get. He beat the market over a decade. The majority, actually the vast majority, of people don't do that. Therefore his performance is above average by definition. Actually I've seen evidence that with fees and taxes and transaction costs and slippage, less than 15-20% beat the market. This isn't even a matter of opinion. You can debate that Tilson is not a great investor (or superinvestor, which he is not) or that he is lucky or something, but it is a fact that his past performance has been above average. So it's not even that I disagree with you're opinion it's that you're lying. If you want to change the definition of terrible to anyone who's performance is out of the top 2% of investors that is fine, but you need to lobby Websters not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 I know investors that are retired businessmen, guys with 1-10 million that literally invest as their only source of income, and have been doing so for several decades. These guys have all had better performance than Tilson or else they would be eating into their principal. $10 million is that magical point where you could just hang it in things like JNJ, collect $1,000 per day in dividend, and watch your $1,000 per day payout grow faster than inflation. Just ignore the advice about diversifying into bonds at that point. Depending on how cheap your thrills are, you can get by with a lot less without needing any fancy returns. $1m is certainly too tight, definitely need some skills or luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hester Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 I know investors that are retired businessmen, guys with 1-10 million that literally invest as their only source of income, and have been doing so for several decades. These guys have all had better performance than Tilson or else they would be eating into their principal. It's important for equity investors to also measure their performance net of tax and many fund managers fool their LP's with their numbers which most of the time include significant portion of gains charged as Income. Tax-Free bond funds have been delivering 5 % a year fairly easily, tax free. Compounded over a decade that blows guys like Tilson out of the water, with no volatility and less risk. I know a guy at UBS that lost over a billion. I know guys who have blown up in the last year. I know every single stock investor in the world and Tilson beat most of them. Benchmarking him against the best performing asset classes is another great idea! Why not benchmark him against Gold, or Apple? Shoot, I could of invested all my money, on heavy margin, in AAPL 10 years ago and done so much better than Tilson. What a loser, this guy. If you can't beat the Apple you shouldn't even be allowed to live... That's a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 MooreCapital you are by definition wrong when you call Tilson's performance mediocre. Tilson has beat the market over the last decade net of fees. The vast majority of fund managers underperform the market over a random 10 year period net of fees. Therefore his performance is by definition above average. I thought Tilson was benchmarked to the S&P 500, but according to you apparently he is benchmarked to some guy named Ezra Kalir. I guess Tilson is just a pathetic loser until he has beaten every random fund manager in bumf*ck Canada. Anything less is mediocre. LOL. I see both ends, Tilson's performance is nothing to write home about, but its by definition better then most isnt it? My guess is there is more to the story, MooreCapital is fairly involved in hitting Tilson. Action = Reaction, I started this thread with an intention of just hearing peoples thoughts, but was surprised so many defended his performance as though it was even worthy of defense :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 I know investors that are retired businessmen, guys with 1-10 million that literally invest as their only source of income, and have been doing so for several decades. These guys have all had better performance than Tilson or else they would be eating into their principal. It's important for equity investors to also measure their performance net of tax and many fund managers fool their LP's with their numbers which most of the time include significant portion of gains charged as Income. Tax-Free bond funds have been delivering 5 % a year fairly easily, tax free. Compounded over a decade that blows guys like Tilson out of the water, with no volatility and less risk. I know a guy at UBS that lost over a billion. I know guys who have blown up in the last year. I know every single stock investor in the world and Tilson beat most of them. Benchmarking him against the best performing asset classes is another great idea! Why not benchmark him against Gold, or Apple? Shoot, I could of invested all my money, on heavy margin, in AAPL 10 years ago and done so much better than Tilson. What a loser, this guy. If you can't beat the Apple you shouldn't even be allowed to live... That's a fact. Hester with this kind of rhetoric you should consider a career in politics. Good luck to you with your definition of "better than average". It is a petty way of looking at things and is just wasting space on the board. Why are you even wasting time preaching definitions? The heart of the debate is whether Tilson is worthy of praise. I never once debated what better than average means, I took an issue with the statement by Parsad that only 50 outperform their benchmark by 3% over a decade and hence we should all "appreciate" Tilson's performance.. IMO Tilson is a dud as evidenced by a decade long track record. And for those not included 2011 when assessing his performance you guys are making a terrible mistake as he's currently down 24% based on what I hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 One thing is for sure you 2 have some high end friends (what the hell do you start with to lose $1 billion, has anyone written what that guy did exactly). If I listed who I know and what they have done, Parsad might ask me to stop posting lol. Carry on... moore_capital54 - I see where you are coming from and had similar thoughts about Tilson, strangely enough he has grown on me over the last 2 years. I dont invest with him, but his appearances have gotten better. I think he has a bit of convention, he was out in front on BP and that was a hairy one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 I know investors that are retired businessmen, guys with 1-10 million that literally invest as their only source of income, and have been doing so for several decades. These guys have all had better performance than Tilson or else they would be eating into their principal. $10 million is that magical point where you could just hang it in things like JNJ, collect $1,000 per day in dividend, and watch your $1,000 per day payout grow faster than inflation. Just ignore the advice about diversifying into bonds at that point. Depending on how cheap your thrills are, you can get by with a lot less without needing any fancy returns. $1m is certainly too tight, definitely need some skills or luck. We have a client who made $15mm selling a company and told me "That's just enough to keep up with the joneses" I thought he was crazy, as I agree with you that $10mm+ is enough for a lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Myth Plenty of people bought BP before Tilson and made a lot more money. Ned Goodman for example. Tilson just spent hours building a presentation with 100 Slides calculating how many trillions of gallons are in the Gulf of Mexico (Quadrillions) and spent several days posting on Seeking/Alpha and Fast Money. Tilson being right on BP did nothing for his investors, as evidenced by his performance. Ultimately, in this business all that matters is your performance. Do you make investors money ? Tilson has not for a decade so why do people think hes so great? Maybe he can be a professor at Harvard, or Columbia, I am sure a lot of guys on this board would pay $5-20k for a course he would teach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 I feel the same way about Denis Gartman and Tim Mcelvaine (Oh no I am really gonna get it now lol) Mcelvaine after Taxes has done about 20-30% over a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 I'm on Morningstar looking at the Tilson Focus Fund. It has a bunch of call options in things like JC Penny, Goldman Sachs, Berkshire Hathaway, Microsoft, and JPMorgan warrants. I figure that's magnifying the decline. Now, if the market goes all the way to zero he'll beat the market as those call strikes will protect him. It's -14.85% vs S&P500 as of Aug 31. However a lot of those names I would think will do very well going forward (vs the S&P500). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Before I get clobbered by the Mcelvaine supporters let me just spellout his performance for you: 2005: 17.21% vs 24.25% for his benchmark 2006: 11.90% vs 17.26% for his benchmark 2007: 0.56% vs 9.84% for his benchmark (unacceptable spread in my view) 2008: (48.75%) vs (33.01%) for his benchmark 2009: 18.07% vs 35.05% for his benchmark 2010: 1.75% vs 17.62% for his benchmark (unnaceptable spread in my view) 2011: (5.4%) vs (3.52%) for his benchmark Mcelvaine = Mediocre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 I cant argue with you but I think there are 2 different discussions going on. Many are saying he is better than most, and you are saying where is the Alpha. Both of you are right inmo. I dont invest in funds primarily because I would rather try my hand and potentially lose half of my money, then sit around getting 2% a year. Its not worth it because as you said I would just buy telecom stocks or a basket of large cap value and collect 3% - 8% in dividends. Holding them for a decade and opportunistically selling would do better than most managers. With that said you have to compare him to the benchmark and that fortunately or unfortunately leaves him better than most..... Perhaps you your thoughts say more about the industry then him as a manager. ---- I agree with your basic sentiment though, that value investors do get a bit too hung up on investors who market a bit, knew Buffett, knew Graham, teach at Columbia, or ..... They also get a bit too hung up on what someone says instead of watching what they do. Perhaps that can be said of any group though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 I swear I didn't write this lol Wire: BLOOMBERG News (BN) Date: Sep 21 2011 0:00:01 Netflix’s Plunge Gives Tilson Pyrrhic Victory: Chart of the Day By David Wilson Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Netflix Inc. has finally fallen below the stock price at which a hedge-fund manager made the case against the video-rental company in print and its chief executive officer rebutted him. Whitney Tilson, a managing director and co-founder of T2 Partners LLC, wrote about why Netflix was his firm’s biggest bearish bet last December on the Seeking Alpha website. Reed Hastings, CEO of the Los Gatos, California-based company, responded on the site four days later. The CHART OF THE DAY displays Netflix’s stock performance during the past 12 months, including its 38 percent plunge from Sept. 15 through yesterday. The chart includes the dates of the dueling posts, a CNBC interview in October in which Tilson said he was betting the stock would drop, and a follow-up posting he wrote in February after covering what was a money-losing bet. “We haven’t had a position in Netflix for quite some time,” Tilson wrote yesterday in an e-mail. He then commented on the company’s plan to split the DVD-by-mail business into a separate company, Qwikster, and to focus on online streaming. “This could pay off big time or be a disaster -- and anyone who claims to know for sure is deceiving themselves,” the New York-based investor wrote. For this reason, he added, Netflix isn’t a good stock to sell short or own. Tilson had bet against Netflix by selling short, or borrowing and selling shares, and buying put options, which increase in value when a stock drops. Netflix traded at about $230 a share when he covered and peaked at $304.79 in July. The stock closed at $130.03 yesterday after its four-day plunge, the steepest since 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Once I hear the word "alpha", I know I'm dealing with an ass, so I usually realize that there is no point arguing. My own investment in my company is up 4,000% over the last five years, so does that mean I'm suddenly a better investor than Buffett and provide more "alpha" than anyone else on the planet? Whatever Tilson is, and I've never liked the guy, he doesn't hide behind an anonymous blog username, posting on here and talking about how he knows so many guys who provide more "alpha." On the weekend, somebody asked Mohnish a question about "alpha", and he said "I've never bothered to learn much about the Greek alphabet". Say what you want about Tilson, McElvaine or whoever else. It doesn't matter at all. They live their life and run their businesses. They are in the public domain and accept any and all criticism. That's more than I can say about you Moore. How someone can compare the results of message board users, who aren't held in check by the same restrictions as fund managers, audit standards, redemption risk, frictional costs, etc and say that it is the same thing, just shows how little you know about comparative analysis. But hey, you know the guys with the most "alpha". Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 I agree with the comparison in that the funds that have restraints that prevent them from achieving Graham's enterprising investor 5% premium of market returns over time. Frankly, when I started looking closely at mutual funds there are very few that beat the 5% bogey due concentration, redemption and diversification restraints. What surprises me is that there are not more private accounts that do not have those constraints and can focus on the best ideas in small niches of the market. The only way to beat the market is to be outside of the consensus and correct, a very hard task with the size and competition constraints most MF managers face. I personally do not like Tilson's marketing spin and think some of his ideas are wrong (Iridium) but he does have some good ideas. The same with McElvaine. I judge a manager primarily on his stock picks. If he gets the weighting/timing wrong that is another issue (and can be corrected - which is what McElvaine is currently doing) and a reason why I would listen to some managers picks and rationale and not buy his funds. Packer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Does anyone know why Mcelvaine hasn't updated his performance figure in a long time? http://mcelvaine.com/our-fund/performance/ Performance Summary as of December 31, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubuy2wron Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Moore, You have made statements about Tilsons and Tims performance. Tilson has just experienced a relatively short term underperformance. I recently read a piece adressing performance , if I recall correctly if you look at the historical performance of the top managers they almost to a man spent periods, sometimes extended periods, when their peformance was below mediocre. By the way ANY manager who beats his bogey after fees for a decade can not be described as mediocre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seshnath Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 My comments towards tilson are based on facts... His performance is just terrible, and I can't believe some of you think otherwise.ment than you are dreaming. Tilson = Mediocre hedge fund manager, and average Mutual Fund manager or in other words, nobody we should even be discussing on this board I don't know how this is so hard to get. He beat the market over a decade. The majority, actually the vast majority, of people don't do that. Therefore his performance is above average by definition. Actually I've seen evidence that with fees and taxes and transaction costs and slippage, less than 15-20% beat the market. This isn't even a matter of opinion. You can debate that Tilson is not a great investor (or superinvestor, which he is not) or that he is lucky or something, but it is a fact that his past performance has been above average. So it's not even that I disagree with you're opinion it's that you're lying. If you want to change the definition of terrible to anyone who's performance is out of the top 2% of investors that is fine, but you need to lobby Websters not me. Hester - I guess Moore's point is that beating the market doesn't make him superinvestor; he has to beat his peers. It is something like A-Rod beating my baseball score Vs. A-Rod beating say, Miguel Cabrera and other Major league players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motownsf Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Much better to succeed in the investment business in relative obscurity and the not put oneself in front of the camera, in the papers, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Once I hear the word "alpha", I know I'm dealing with an ass, so I usually realize that there is no point arguing. My own investment in my company is up 4,000% over the last five years, so does that mean I'm suddenly a better investor than Buffett and provide more "alpha" than anyone else on the planet? Whatever Tilson is, and I've never liked the guy, he doesn't hide behind an anonymous blog username, posting on here and talking about how he knows so many guys who provide more "alpha." On the weekend, somebody asked Mohnish a question about "alpha", and he said "I've never bothered to learn much about the Greek alphabet". Say what you want about Tilson, McElvaine or whoever else. It doesn't matter at all. They live their life and run their businesses. They are in the public domain and accept any and all criticism. That's more than I can say about you Moore. How someone can compare the results of message board users, who aren't held in check by the same restrictions as fund managers, audit standards, redemption risk, frictional costs, etc and say that it is the same thing, just shows how little you know about comparative analysis. But hey, you know the guys with the most "alpha". Cheers! Parsad, I apologise if I offended you on your board. Based on the tone of your post it appears I did, so again, please accept my apologies. As a professional investor I decided to participate in this community, however there are obvious limitations about disclosing my identity or that of our fund. The OSC is very clear as to the rules and we are regulated, and I am quite surprised any hedge fund manager would engage in any banter on this board that would self-market his performance or appear to be soliciting investments. The rules are pretty clear, hedge funds are NOT allowed to solicit. And we don't need to, I joined the board to engage in stimulating discussions. So, if you feel my expressions or criticisims should be followed by a disclosure of my identity, then I will return to "View Only" mode on this board, as I still enjoy reading other's posts. Alpha - What can I say I must be an ass.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hester Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Good luck to you with your definition of "better than average". It is a petty way of looking at things and is just wasting space on the board. lol. There's a saying that you shouldn't argue with crazy people because people watching won't know who's the crazy one. I've seen enough debates to know that when one side starts calling facts and logic "petty" (like the fact that Tilson's returns are better than most so therefore logically cannot be mediocre) then it's time to tune out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baoxiaodao Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Once I hear the word "alpha", I know I'm dealing with an ass, so I usually realize that there is no point arguing. My own investment in my company is up 4,000% over the last five years, so does that mean I'm suddenly a better investor than Buffett and provide more "alpha" than anyone else on the planet? Whatever Tilson is, and I've never liked the guy, he doesn't hide behind an anonymous blog username, posting on here and talking about how he knows so many guys who provide more "alpha." On the weekend, somebody asked Mohnish a question about "alpha", and he said "I've never bothered to learn much about the Greek alphabet". Say what you want about Tilson, McElvaine or whoever else. It doesn't matter at all. They live their life and run their businesses. They are in the public domain and accept any and all criticism. That's more than I can say about you Moore. How someone can compare the results of message board users, who aren't held in check by the same restrictions as fund managers, audit standards, redemption risk, frictional costs, etc and say that it is the same thing, just shows how little you know about comparative analysis. But hey, you know the guys with the most "alpha". Cheers! I wonder how you did that Parsad. It is hard to pull a lot of rabbits from the hat recently. Salute! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hester Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 One thing is for sure you 2 have some high end friends (what the hell do you start with to lose $1 billion, has anyone written what that guy did exactly). If I listed who I know and what they have done, Parsad might ask me to stop posting lol. I don't actually know him, I was trying to make a point that cherry picking a few successful guys that beat Tilson is dumb because I can cherry pick many orders of magnitude more people who have failed and that Tilson has crushed. The UBS rogue trader has been reported about in many places. http://www.bing.com/search?q=UBS%20rogue%20trader&form=CPNTLB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cman Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Moore_Capital Can you post more info on Erez Kalir of Sabretooth? We've trafficed in quite a few of the same obscure stocks so I'm curious about them... Thanks cman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now