So…an example to be held aloft……an icon and a mascot to active management is a person who has crashed & burned and lost people millions. Really? Is he related to Joe Biden? This is guy is an utter tit. To be successful in life you do indeed need to be 1) different and contrarian 2) it is critical however that you are RIGHT. There are loads of “different people” who remain utterly wrong. Which is fine if you want to live on a beach and smoke weed….but NOT if you are managing peoples money and everyone is living in a MASS PSYCHOSIS thats leading to mini-cults sprouting up all over the place. Thats this guy attempts to defend this example of financial hooliganism suggests he is an inmate.
The point Phil made was that he saw CW as singularly occupying the place of a high profile active fund manager when passive management threatened to swamp the spotlight; I think he made a fair point. He wasn’t speaking to the quality of her analysis, or the the truth of her statements. But she did a huge part to keep the flame of active management alive in the greater consciousness. When fundamental active management returns to the fore, it may return to the spotlight quicker because the idea of active management never completely whithered. That may save some people money in the future. The biggest pushback would be if the losses and quality of analysis compromised the image of the active manager. Phil and Chris covered that in conversation; active managers are often wrong in the best of times, hence the rise of the Vanguard model. For context, I think “Crazy Eyes’ Wood is actively deceptive and dishonest - she’s a promoter and her ‘battle tested models’ are hack promotional material versus qualititative research and analysis.
I agree, fair play. Its really just a shame that the only rabbit he can pull out of his hat is a Cult Leader. She looks mental to me. She has no shame. Awful woman. There are lots of them around. Post-menopausal fruit-cakes.
Chris - I’m glad you and Phil called out some of the promoters and pumpers in btc. It’s one of the biggest points of contention I have with my fellow (bitcoin) cult members; the zombie like zeal to affiliate with whatever big name says ‘bitcoin is good, all hale the bitcoin because bitcoin is good”. Last summer I was discussing this with my research partner; I said then and still think that if push comes to shove there is zero reliable ideological commitment to holding bitcoin if Saylor, Wood, etc need liquidity. There is even greater danger for retail and small capital investors to take these large names at face value without addressing the risk of a liquidity run by those same names (or them just selling off after the affiliate scam has run it’s course). What I like are the large positions taken by relatively quiet names. Afterthought: I’m glad to hear you call out Max Keiser for his ‘red meat for the bitcoin masses’ bs. Still hoping for you to get Pompliano as a guest.
I enjoyed your guest. CW has the same problem we all have, misidentifying the reasons for your success. CW gave too much credit to a very successful team that she commands. Picking disrupters to our current way of life was a gift she had been given from God. Instead of having great success during one of the wildest QE’s in history. She was having success during a period of helicopter money. Then the winds shifted and she did not make adjustments, consequently she ran aground. Is this the end of CW, I doubt it.
The fact that Phil Bak says "Instead of a leveraged NASDAQ, you buy ARKK. You try to pick a bottom, you can’t use leverage, maybe you just use ARKK." and at the same time believes active management is a good thing... I mean, does nobody know what Beta is anymore?
Just thoughts, not market advice, but Is TGT a super buy this am in your opinion?.. down +50 points!.. but balancing with recession, maybe a wait before trying to catch this hypersonic falling knife?….
Here's a line clipped out of a WSJ opinion piece: "In the past six weeks, $1 trillion in cryptocurrency value has evaporated—yes, trillion. Since there was nothing of economic value driving up crypto prices, only mass delusion, there hasn’t been much to cushion their descent."
Wile it may be better to be lucky than good, CW staked a place that few dare. Pick stocks. Trillions get put into VOO and others on auto pilot. Stonks always go up over the long term. Depends on your point of reference Mr. Durden. Some of her picks might have been 30 baggers. Not sure of the takeaway but hindsight is 20/20, but people who bought DJIA equivalents 1950-65 didn't see that return until the mid 90's
So…an example to be held aloft……an icon and a mascot to active management is a person who has crashed & burned and lost people millions. Really? Is he related to Joe Biden? This is guy is an utter tit. To be successful in life you do indeed need to be 1) different and contrarian 2) it is critical however that you are RIGHT. There are loads of “different people” who remain utterly wrong. Which is fine if you want to live on a beach and smoke weed….but NOT if you are managing peoples money and everyone is living in a MASS PSYCHOSIS thats leading to mini-cults sprouting up all over the place. Thats this guy attempts to defend this example of financial hooliganism suggests he is an inmate.
The point Phil made was that he saw CW as singularly occupying the place of a high profile active fund manager when passive management threatened to swamp the spotlight; I think he made a fair point. He wasn’t speaking to the quality of her analysis, or the the truth of her statements. But she did a huge part to keep the flame of active management alive in the greater consciousness. When fundamental active management returns to the fore, it may return to the spotlight quicker because the idea of active management never completely whithered. That may save some people money in the future. The biggest pushback would be if the losses and quality of analysis compromised the image of the active manager. Phil and Chris covered that in conversation; active managers are often wrong in the best of times, hence the rise of the Vanguard model. For context, I think “Crazy Eyes’ Wood is actively deceptive and dishonest - she’s a promoter and her ‘battle tested models’ are hack promotional material versus qualititative research and analysis.
I agree, fair play. Its really just a shame that the only rabbit he can pull out of his hat is a Cult Leader. She looks mental to me. She has no shame. Awful woman. There are lots of them around. Post-menopausal fruit-cakes.
Chris - I’m glad you and Phil called out some of the promoters and pumpers in btc. It’s one of the biggest points of contention I have with my fellow (bitcoin) cult members; the zombie like zeal to affiliate with whatever big name says ‘bitcoin is good, all hale the bitcoin because bitcoin is good”. Last summer I was discussing this with my research partner; I said then and still think that if push comes to shove there is zero reliable ideological commitment to holding bitcoin if Saylor, Wood, etc need liquidity. There is even greater danger for retail and small capital investors to take these large names at face value without addressing the risk of a liquidity run by those same names (or them just selling off after the affiliate scam has run it’s course). What I like are the large positions taken by relatively quiet names. Afterthought: I’m glad to hear you call out Max Keiser for his ‘red meat for the bitcoin masses’ bs. Still hoping for you to get Pompliano as a guest.
Pomp has an open invite and he knows it. Almost had him on the one time but then he started ducking me. Such is life.
I enjoyed your guest. CW has the same problem we all have, misidentifying the reasons for your success. CW gave too much credit to a very successful team that she commands. Picking disrupters to our current way of life was a gift she had been given from God. Instead of having great success during one of the wildest QE’s in history. She was having success during a period of helicopter money. Then the winds shifted and she did not make adjustments, consequently she ran aground. Is this the end of CW, I doubt it.
Garret Van Wagoner is still around too.
“We’ve had people say you should sell your home and mortgage your home to buy bitcoin!”
Michael Saylor can say this bcz #₿itcoin isn't a security but a digital property. That's why Jack Dorsey can say it too.
This blog has been harping on the drawbacks of crypto. We all know crypto is crap. Don't be a broken record. Move on!
#₿itcoin is the only real innovation. Be humble & learn.
Thanks for the article!
The fact that Phil Bak says "Instead of a leveraged NASDAQ, you buy ARKK. You try to pick a bottom, you can’t use leverage, maybe you just use ARKK." and at the same time believes active management is a good thing... I mean, does nobody know what Beta is anymore?
Cathie Wood=Kim Kardashian of finance. She always gets a seat at the media’s table. It’s just disgusting.
Great podcast episode with Phil Bak
Just thoughts, not market advice, but Is TGT a super buy this am in your opinion?.. down +50 points!.. but balancing with recession, maybe a wait before trying to catch this hypersonic falling knife?….
down another 8 today.. getting tempting
Here's a line clipped out of a WSJ opinion piece: "In the past six weeks, $1 trillion in cryptocurrency value has evaporated—yes, trillion. Since there was nothing of economic value driving up crypto prices, only mass delusion, there hasn’t been much to cushion their descent."
Phil lost me at "I’m a fan of Cathie Wood..."
Wile it may be better to be lucky than good, CW staked a place that few dare. Pick stocks. Trillions get put into VOO and others on auto pilot. Stonks always go up over the long term. Depends on your point of reference Mr. Durden. Some of her picks might have been 30 baggers. Not sure of the takeaway but hindsight is 20/20, but people who bought DJIA equivalents 1950-65 didn't see that return until the mid 90's