Fortuna's favor

|
Via Barry Ritholz, here's an absolutely fantastic good-bye letter from a manager who returned 866% last year after betting on the subprime debacle. Good for him!

"Dear Investor:

Today I write not to gloat. Given the pain that nearly everyone is experiencing, that would be entirely inappropriate. Nor am I writing to make further predictions, as most of my forecasts in previous letters have unfolded or are in the process of unfolding. Instead, I am writing to say goodbye.

Recently, on the front page of Section C of the Wall Street Journal, a hedge fund manager who was also closing up shop (a $300 million fund), was quoted as saying, “What I have learned about the hedge fund business is that I hate it.” I could not agree more with that statement. I was in this game for the money. The low hanging fruit, i.e. idiots whose parents paid for prep school, Yale, and then the Harvard MBA, was there for the taking. These people who were (often) truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government. All of this behavior supporting the Aristocracy, only ended up making it easier for me to find people stupid enough to take the other side of my trades. God bless America.

There are far too many people for me to sincerely thank for my success. However, I do not want to sound like a Hollywood actor accepting an award. The money was reward enough. Furthermore, the endless list those deserving thanks know who they are.

I will no longer manage money for other people or institutions. I have enough of my own wealth to manage. Some people, who think they have arrived at a reasonable estimate of my net worth, might be surprised that I would call it quits with such a small war chest. That is fine; I am content with my rewards. Moreover, I will let others try to amass nine, ten or eleven figure net worths. Meanwhile, their lives suck. Appointments back to back, booked solid for the next three months, they look forward to their two week vacation in January during which they will likely be glued to their Blackberries or other such devices. What is the point? They will all be forgotten in fifty years anyway. Steve Balmer, Steven Cohen, and Larry Ellison will all be forgotten. I do not understand the legacy thing. Nearly everyone will be forgotten. Give up on leaving your mark. Throw the Blackberry away and enjoy life.

So this is it. With all due respect, I am dropping out. Please do not expect any type of reply to emails or voicemails within normal time frames or at all. Andy Springer and his company will be handling the dissolution of the fund. And don’t worry about my employees, they were always employed by Mr. Springer’s company and only one (who has been well-rewarded) will lose his job.

I have no interest in any deals in which anyone would like me to participate. I truly do not have a strong opinion about any market right now, other than to say that things will continue to get worse for some time, probably years. I am content sitting on the sidelines and waiting. After all, sitting and waiting is how we made money from the subprime debacle. I now have time to repair my health, which was destroyed by the stress I layered onto myself over the past two years, as well as my entire life — where I had to compete for spaces in universities and graduate schools, jobs and assets under management — with those who had all the advantages (rich parents) that I did not. May meritocracy be part of a new form of government, which needs to be established.

On the issue of the U.S. Government, I would like to make a modest proposal. First, I point out the obvious flaws, whereby legislation was repeatedly brought forth to Congress over the past eight years, which would have reigned in the predatory lending practices of now mostly defunct institutions. These institutions regularly filled the coffers of both parties in return for voting down all of this legislation designed to protect the common citizen. This is an outrage, yet no one seems to know or care about it. Since Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith passed, I would argue that there has been a dearth of worthy philosophers in this country, at least ones focused on improving government. Capitalism worked for two hundred years, but times change, and systems become corrupt. George Soros, a man of staggering wealth, has stated that he would like to be remembered as a philosopher. My suggestion is that this great man start and sponsor a forum for great minds to come together to create a new system of government that truly represents the common man’s interest, while at the same time creating rewards great enough to attract the best and brightest minds to serve in government roles without having to rely on corruption to further their interests or lifestyles. This forum could be similar to the one used to create the operating system, Linux, which competes with Microsoft’s near monopoly. I believe there is an answer, but for now the system is clearly broken.

Lastly, while I still have an audience, I would like to bring attention to an alternative food and energy source. You won’t see it included in BP’s, “Feel good. We are working on sustainable solutions,” television commercials, nor is it mentioned in ADM’s similar commercials. But hemp has been used for at least 5,000 years for cloth and food, as well as just about everything that is produced from petroleum products. Hemp is not marijuana and vice versa. Hemp is the male plant and it grows like a weed, hence the slang term. The original American flag was made of hemp fiber and our Constitution was printed on paper made of hemp. It was used as recently as World War II by the U.S. Government, and then promptly made illegal after the war was won. At a time when rhetoric is flying about becoming more self-sufficient in terms of energy, why is it illegal to grow this plant in this country? Ah, the female. The evil female plant — marijuana. It gets you high, it makes you laugh, it does not produce a hangover. Unlike alcohol, it does not result in bar fights or wife beating. So, why is this innocuous plant illegal? Is it a gateway drug? No, that would be alcohol, which is so heavily advertised in this country. My only conclusion as to why it is illegal, is that Corporate America, which owns Congress, would rather sell you Paxil, Zoloft, Xanax and other additive drugs, than allow you to grow a plant in your home without some of the profits going into their coffers. This policy is ludicrous. It has surely contributed to our dependency on foreign energy sources. Our policies have other countries literally laughing at our stupidity, most notably Canada, as well as several European nations (both Eastern and Western). You would not know this by paying attention to U.S. media sources though, as they tend not to elaborate on who is laughing at the United States this week. Please people, let’s stop the rhetoric and start thinking about how we can truly become self-sufficient.

With that I say good-bye and good luck.

All the best,

Andrew Lahde"

Being At War With Luck

|
I've alluded to the reasons for the title and theme of this blog quite a bit, but I don't think I've ever explicitly stated the main rationale. Maybe it's obvious to those of you who know me offline, but I'll explain myself to those who don't.

I've always been one those alpha geeks who get overly obsessed with competitive strategy games and so on. Some time in college I discovered blackjack and then poker (thanks C!), from which I have made a nice chunk of change over the years. But sometime before the Moneymaker poker boom took off, I got a real job in finance and missed out on some of that fun (but I plan a comeback -- more later). Applying those same skills that I used in strategy games and poker, I built a business trading futures for institutional clients.

The common skill to all of those things I've been involved with over my life is to recognize and follow the optimum strategy for any given situation. It's a lot easier to do when playing chess, because all the information is right there for you on the board. That's why there's no luck in chess -- just skill. There's a lot of luck in poker, but skill manages luck's impact over the long term. There's just as much luck in trading as in poker and you have to spend lots more time managing the consequences of luck.

Skill is generally in opposition to luck. There are exceptions, such as when a poker player has a small stack of chips and has to shove it in the center and pray to Fortuna. But even that is skillful in that the move is optimum strategy. So being at war with luck is about being as skillful as possible in your actions and being adaptable to the impact of random events.

The way I view it is that you can't control luck -- only Fortuna can. Trying to control Fortuna is delusional and is the opposite of embracing life. What you can control is yourself and the way you handle situations -- whether those situations are a hand of poker, a bad market for trading, or even bad guys stalking you through the parking lot. Skill in anything -- be it chess or football or a musical instrument -- is built on learning from people who know something you don't and practice, practice, practice.

There's a lot more to it than that, but those other tangents go down all kinds of philosophical rabbit holes that I'd rather break down into bite-sized nuggets for blog posting. I'll post more on those as time goes on, but now at least the main point is out here.

Zen master of risk

|
Here's Nassim Taleb trying to explain his views of risk to the market cheerleaders on the TV:



While I hadn't heard him speak on the topic before today, my own view of the market meltdown (that almost exactly jibes with his) was directly informed by reading his books. The man is brilliant, but I think he's a bit too risk adverse. Just because a risk is unknowable doesn't mean it should be avoided at all costs. Rather, in a lot of situations it is better to just embrace the variance. Fortuna favors the bold.

[thanks to Barry Ritholz for the link]

Liveblogging will take place here

|

Don't they look pretty?

|
Perhaps Senator McCain will try to get under Senator Obama's skin tonight, but based on his past performance he'll probably behave collegially senatorial. Pity really, because it would be so much more fun otherwise. Unfortunately, the debate is probably just going to be a bore but the commentariat's parsing of the minutia should be good for a laugh or two.

With all the seriousness the journalistas put into their analysis, you might think something substantive is happening, but the truth is that the debates are purely for entertainment purposes. In the modern communications age, anyone with a minimal amount of drive can already get all the information about a candidate's positions through media and the Web. Barring a complete meltdown by one participant or another, the vacuous minds of the undecided voters are simply going to be filled with whatever random trash wafts through their ears before they finally make their choice based on nothing but sentiment and catchy phrasework.

By any reasonable standard, it matters not at all whether or not a modern politician is a decent speechmaker -- there are plenty of more effective ways to communicate. But voters demand these kabuki debates, obstensibly to get a "sense" of the man behind the political machine. Like a large subset of NASCAR fans, political junkies pretend that they're watching for the race but what they really want to see is a crash.