notices - See details
Notices
K
Ken (not verified)
27th February 2015 | 10:07am

This entire article is ludicrous in its entirety. Most is intellectually damaging, some is grotesque in its mathematical absurdity.
One example:
“We estimate that the costs of stock borrowing are 5% per annum higher today than before 2009, the preponderance of this increase is attributable to the lower level of short-term interest rates.8 For a hedge fund with 40% short exposure, this cost would have detracted from returns by 2% per year or 14.9% cumulatively.”
I really can’t remember seeing anything that is so wrong in its assumption, premise and mathematics in my experience. I spent a couple decades on the other side of securities lending and this leaves me speechless (well, obviously not entirely). Maybe I’m missing something. Desperation in the Hamptons I would guess.