Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

hindenburgresearch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 430 posts

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#331

Post by sotix »

kqr wrote: post #193
WalterBright wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments Money Magazine a few years ago compared various investment strategies in stocks. The #2 best performing one was investing in the S&P 500. The #1 best performing strategy was the "dead man strategy". The dead man strategy comes into play when the investor dies, and his estate gets frozen until it winds its way through the courts.…

A few years ago cost structures for managing one's investment portfolios were also significantly higher than today! There's an even better alternative for someone willing to put in the leg work: (1) Figure out your investment horizon. For many people, this is way shorter than suggested by generic advice, which makes some diversification beyond "stonks go up" meaningful. (2) Figure out what costs you'll incur by rebal…

I'd be interested in reading more literature (e.g. from Carver) if you have any links!

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#332

Post by [deleted] »

throw10920 wrote: post #288
gmd63 wrote: post #59

I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments because I was naively confident in the market's ability (or as I've come to suspect, willingness) to react to evidence of fraud. The amount of deceit put out into the world and gobbled up, on purpose, in business is obscene and seriously depressing. The magnitude of damage to psyches and thus economies that anyone acting in a fraud…

> Punishment for financial crimes should be calculated based on the average lifetime earnings of a citizen -- if your victims are folks earning at or below the average wage, and you've scammed 100 lifetimes worth of average earnings, it's as if you've murdered 100 people. This seems like utilitarian ethics. I don't subscribe to these. I'd say most people don't either. So why "should" we calculate punishments for crim…

[deleted]

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#333

Post by sgerenser »

ac29 wrote: post #330
sgerenser wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s why these target funds go down to ~50% stocks [edit: at the target date] not 0.

At least at Vanguard the final stage of target date funds is ~30% stocks: https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/mutual-fun...

That fund is currently at 50% stocks. It does get more conservative as you get past the target date, but I was mainly referring to the stock percentage at target date, which the parent poster implied was almost zero.

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#334

Post by tim333 »

patwolf wrote: post #149
whatshisface wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are the only person who thinks that it might fail, one cent put options will be free and you can buy them until the price hits zero, and then you can make a cent. For example, the opportunity to sell $TSLA for $180 in one month costs about thirty cents right now. Keeping this up for ten years would cost $36.

That'd work well for a catastrophic Eron-style collapse, but many companies die a slow death, like Sears.

With Sears like companies you can take a very small short position and then reinvest the money from the sale going long S&P500 type stuff. That's roughly what Chanos did. It has to be small position as a percent of your portfolio in case it decides to go up 10x when you are not looking. I think Chanos's results over a decade were something like 0% on the shorts, 50% on the longs the money was reinvested into.

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#335

Post by bugtodiffer »

gmd63 wrote: post #59

I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments because I was naively confident in the market's ability (or as I've come to suspect, willingness) to react to evidence of fraud. The amount of deceit put out into the world and gobbled up, on purpose, in business is obscene and seriously depressing. The magnitude of damage to psyches and thus economies that anyone acting in a fraud…

> anyone acting in a fraudulent manner in finance

the system incentivises this behavior, no one is punishing the rich guys playing with our livelyhood

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#336

Post by tim333 »

bboygravity wrote: post #209
gmd63 wrote: post #59

I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments because I was naively confident in the market's ability (or as I've come to suspect, willingness) to react to evidence of fraud. The amount of deceit put out into the world and gobbled up, on purpose, in business is obscene and seriously depressing. The magnitude of damage to psyches and thus economies that anyone acting in a fraud…

Here I was thinking Hindenberg was part of the problem and you seem to think the opposite? To me they seemed like partners of shorting hedge funds (similar to CNBC) who just spit out bs articles so their hedgie friends can trade on it. DOJ seems to agree with me? https://www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2022/02/16/doj-... There are more and better sources.

Not to take a position on those particular accusations but a problem with activist shorting in general is the people running the companies in question are often pissed of and aggressive and will try to take legal and PR action against the shorters.

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#337

Post by gmd63 »

throw10920 wrote: post #288
gmd63 wrote: post #59

I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments because I was naively confident in the market's ability (or as I've come to suspect, willingness) to react to evidence of fraud. The amount of deceit put out into the world and gobbled up, on purpose, in business is obscene and seriously depressing. The magnitude of damage to psyches and thus economies that anyone acting in a fraud…

> Punishment for financial crimes should be calculated based on the average lifetime earnings of a citizen -- if your victims are folks earning at or below the average wage, and you've scammed 100 lifetimes worth of average earnings, it's as if you've murdered 100 people. This seems like utilitarian ethics. I don't subscribe to these. I'd say most people don't either. So why "should" we calculate punishments for crim…

Money grants you the power to influence others' lives. You take that from people illegally, and give it to yourself, you're creating an extreme negative effect on economic efficiency that should not be taken lightly and should be heavily discouraged.

Bill Hwang had settled insider trading charges a decade or so before he caused 30 billion dollars of liquidations after engaging in multiple forms of financial fraud. His insider trading punishment was likely lax and he committed crimes again, causing even more economic damage.

18 years in prison is nowhere near the amount of economic damage he caused. He amassed a net worth of 10-15 billion dollars. That's ten thousand average lifetimes worth of average American work. The punishment should reflect that. The expected value of fraud should be negative so that not even a degenerate gambler would consider it.

Can you explain your views as to why incentives to harm the economy massively via fraud to benefit yourself need to exist?

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#338

Post by gmd63 »

robertlagrant wrote: post #292
gmd63 wrote: post #59

I've ironically lost more money the more closely I've paid attention to my investments because I was naively confident in the market's ability (or as I've come to suspect, willingness) to react to evidence of fraud. The amount of deceit put out into the world and gobbled up, on purpose, in business is obscene and seriously depressing. The magnitude of damage to psyches and thus economies that anyone acting in a fraud…

> Punishment for financial crimes should be calculated based on the average lifetime earnings of a citizen -- if your victims are folks earning at or below the average wage, and you've scammed 100 lifetimes worth of average earnings, it's as if you've murdered 100 people. Can this precedent be extended to the money wasted with failed government projects? But maybe on lifetime taxes rather than lifetime earnings, to b…

That's not even close to comparable. You vote for elected officials to pass bills that are attempted and sometimes failed. And often failed projects produce things of value to society so I'm not sure how you would factor that in, for example if you'd like a refund on the Challenger explosion. You don't vote for criminals to take your money.

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#339

Post by throw10920 »

gmd63 wrote: post #337
throw10920 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Punishment for financial crimes should be calculated based on the average lifetime earnings of a citizen -- if your victims are folks earning at or below the average wage, and you've scammed 100 lifetimes worth of average earnings, it's as if you've murdered 100 people. This seems like utilitarian ethics. I don't subscribe to these. I'd say most people don't either. So why "should" we calculate punishments for crim…

Money grants you the power to influence others' lives. You take that from people illegally, and give it to yourself, you're creating an extreme negative effect on economic efficiency that should not be taken lightly and should be heavily discouraged. Bill Hwang had settled insider trading charges a decade or so before he caused 30 billion dollars of liquidations after engaging in multiple forms of financial fraud. Hi…

> Can you explain your views as to why incentives to harm the economy massively via fraud to benefit yourself need to exist?

I never said that I hold that view nor do I believe it.

Between you falsely ascribing views to me I do not hold and/or lying about my words, avoiding answering my question, and your emotional manipulation, it's clear that you're a troll and I don't have any need to respond to you beyond pointing out your logical fallacies.

Re: I have made the decision to disband Hindenburg Research

#340

Post by gmd63 »

throw10920 wrote: post #339
gmd63 wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money grants you the power to influence others' lives. You take that from people illegally, and give it to yourself, you're creating an extreme negative effect on economic efficiency that should not be taken lightly and should be heavily discouraged. Bill Hwang had settled insider trading charges a decade or so before he caused 30 billion dollars of liquidations after engaging in multiple forms of financial fraud. Hi…

> Can you explain your views as to why incentives to harm the economy massively via fraud to benefit yourself need to exist? I never said that I hold that view nor do I believe it. Between you falsely ascribing views to me I do not hold and/or lying about my words, avoiding answering my question, and your emotional manipulation, it's clear that you're a troll and I don't have any need to respond to you beyond pointin…

If you don't support the current punishments, which evidently don't deter the crime, what's your idea of how they should be strengthened to adequately deter financial crime? I'm not trolling.
Post reply on HN