investor

Huffington Post…

One of the characteristics of toiling in obscurity is the limited shelf life. No sentient being, or company for that matter, can stand anonymity for long. Fortunately, there are three solutions; pray for a miracle, change the perception or shuffle off this mortal coil. In the case of most SmallCap companies, the equivalent of the third eventuality would be to shut the doors. Let’s deal with door number two — change the perception — as the most viable, since miracles only happen infrequently and, dare I say, in obscurity. Other than a fraternity party I attended many years ago in Ithaca, New York, but I digress. Let’s talk fee-based research. Rough segue, but an extremely interesting topic. If you were/are the CEO of a SmallCap company whose stock couldn’t get attention if you yelled ‘open bar’ at an investor conference in Vegas, then you need to familiarize yourself with the genre. As do investors. Once you understand how it works, it amazes me that anyone depends at all on the affectations and frequent conflicts of interest of ‘traditional’ investment dealer research. Begin with the premise that your corporate story or vision is worth telling, which doesn’t include you 40-something game developers eating hot pockets in mom’s basement. The hell of it is, there are some great stories out there: Lifesaving biotech stories, the next Microsoft (or Apple) or a killer electronic device or cost-saving service. If you can objectively conclude the world needs to know, or alternatively hire someone to tell you it has legs, it probably should gain exposure. And inform potential investors. But how do you get noticed? Fee-based research is a viable arrow in the overall IR quiver. I gained some good insight chatting to independent analyst Patrick Murphy, CFA, and principal of www.MurphyAnalytics.com. Some interesting observations: • SmallCaps tend to commission fee-based research when times for the company are good and want those facts disseminated to investors • Disclosures on the report are key. Investors must satisfy themselves that the analyst’s compensation is fully disclosed as well as their ethics • CFA’s are held to very high standards and having that designation ups the independence and credibility of the work • No matter how informational and conflict-free the report, it must be used a one of many research tools. Never make an investment decision based on one report • If a report is too promotional or draws unrealistic conclusions and/or price targets, it should likely be ignored • The majority of fee-based research shops do not take shares as compensation, thereby negating a vested or conflicted interest in the market performance of the shares • The research should work for the investor, not the company In the majority of cases, the company does not see — if the report contains one — the analyst’s price target or rating until publication. The reason is to maintain the independence of the report and not allow the company to exert any influence on the projected price. The company always has the right to spike the report if it feels there are problems, but since investors will never know, the point is moot. The main enigma for investors is that fee-based research is likely going to be positive. A company facing bankruptcy or some other calamity is not going to bring attention to it. Plus, it likely doesn’t have the money to pay for a report. I don’t see this issue as a problem, based on the fact that if these reports are used first and foremost as information sources, the investor takeaway is an in-depth history of the company, good rundown of the financials, comparison to the metrics of peers and a sense of future direction. Analysts, especially those with CFA designations, are not in the habit of making stuff up. The numbers are the numbers and all those used for the report are already freely available to the public. Investors should never confuse a positive tone with a flattering or pandering one; alarm bells should sound if the tenor of the report is overtly gushy. Compared to Wall Street, or traditional investment sealer research, fee-based reports give — or should — a clear picture of all compensation. ‘Traditional’ research rarely does this and while I draw no conclusions as to why, wouldn’t an investor just rather know? All a reputable fee-based analyst receives is a disclosed cash payment. No soft dollar arrangements, no investment banking relationships and no axe to grind. For my money, or rather a SmallCap company’s money, that seems a good deal for all involved.

See more here:
Bob Beaty: Would You Pay For It?

Find our Weekly Commercial Real Estate, Private Equity and Fund Newsletters at www.WeeklyBrief.net

{ 0 comments }

menafn.com…

Aussie Rout May Continue as Investor Sentiment Remains Fragile

Originally posted here:
Aussie Rout May Continue as Investor Sentiment Remains Fragile

Find our Weekly Commercial Real Estate, Private Equity and Fund Newsletters at www.WeeklyBrief.net

{ 0 comments }

Legendary Trader’s Fund Takes Huge Oil Losses

May 9, 2011

NEW YORK – The flagship commodity fund run by top Phibro trader Andrew Hall suffered a 12 percent fall last week as oil prices tumbled, a fund investor said on Monday, demonstrating how the plunge walloped some of the market’s most experienced traders. The Astenbeck II fund, which was worth an estimated $2.6 billion in late April, took the hit as oil prices plummeted and commodities saw the biggest price drop in 2-1/2 years last week. Last week’s losses would have come to just over $300 million, based on those figures, and likely wiped out the year’s 10 percent gains through March. Hall, who made headlines for a giant $100 million bonus while at Citigroup, now serves as the head trader of Phibro, a unit of Occidental Petroleum since 2009. He is well-known as an oil bull who often takes large directional bets on the price. The fund, part of Hall’s Astenbeck Capital Management, made returns of 12 percent last year, one investor said. “All the big funds have been hit fairly hard (last week),” said the investor, “Astenbeck is down 12 percent.” Connecticut-based Astenbeck declined comment. (Reporting by Barani Krishnan and Joshua Schneyer; Editing by Alden Bentley) Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

U.S. Dollar Index Continues To Gain Ground As Investor Sentiment Remains Weak

May 9, 2011

U.S. Dollar Index Continues To Gain Ground As Investor Sentiment Remains Weak

Read the full article →

Marty Zwilling: Ten Ways To Optimize Your Investor Pitch Time

April 29, 2011

The average length of a funding pitch to angel investors is 10 minutes. Even if you have booked an hour with a VC, you should plan to talk only for the first 15 minutes. The biggest complaint I hear from investors is that startup founders often talk way too long, and neglect to cover the most relevant points. Or they get sidetracked by a technical glitch due to poor preparation. If you start by pitching your extended life story, that’s the wrong point. Equally bad is an extended pitch on your new disruptive technology. Investors are more interested in your solution and your business, rather than your technology. Here are some tips on the right approach and the right points to hit: Match your material to the time allotted. If you have 10 minutes, that means no more than 10 slides. Then match your pace to cover all the material. I’ve seen several presentations that never moved past the first slide before running out of time. An obvious effort to keep talking after the time limit won’t save your day with investors. Remember you are pitching to investors, not customers. Some entrepreneurs seem to think that their product pitch is also their investor pitch. I outlined what investors expect to see in an earlier article (” Ten Slides Make a Killer Investor Presentation “). These are tuned to the 10-minute limit, but are just as adequate if the investor gives you an hour. Check the setup and set the stage. If the projector doesn’t work, or won’t connect to your laptop, you are the one that loses. Have at least one backup plan, such as copies of your slides to hand out and discuss, in case all else fails. The first words out of your mouth should be “Can everyone hear me and read the screen?” Research your audience before presenting. The most respected presenters are the ones who have done the research before hand to know who is in the audience, and have tailored their message to these interests. If you know only a few people in the audience, acknowledge them, and convince the others that this is not a random cold call for you. Dress appropriately and professionally. It’s always better to be over-dressed than under-dressed. Business casual is the standard. Remember that most investors are from a generation where faded and torn jeans were on the wrong side of success in business. Let the top person do all the talking. Tag team shows don’t work in short venues. More importantly, investors want to see and hear the top guy — typically the founder or CEO. They will be judging his aptitude, his character and his passion. Others can be present for effect, but deferrals to team members for answers are a sign of weakness. First, get their attention with your elevator pitch. Start with the problem and your solution. These are your hooks, and they better be covered in the first 30 seconds. State your value proposition, and what specifically you are offering to whom. Skip the acronyms, history of the company and the colorful autobiography. Lead with facts, but skip the details. Skip the generic marketing phrases like more user friendly, massive opportunity, and paradigm shifting. “According to Gartner, the opportunity is 100 million by 2015, with 12% compounded growth.” Investors don’t need to know the implementation details of your patent or customer support plan. Don’t forget to ask for the order. How much money do you need, and what percent of your company are you willing give up for that amount? If you want investor interest, the business parameters of a deal should be presented as clearly as the product parameters. Close by asking for questions and promising follow-up. Acknowledging feedback and actually listening for ways to improve will always lead to a positive impression. You should answer questions with data if you have it, but avoid defensive responses in favor of a promise to follow-up after the meeting. Most importantly, don’t forget to practice, practice, practice. Just because you have given a thousand pitches in your life, don’t assume you can finesse this one by reading the bullet points in real time from the slides that your team put together for you. You need to be totally familiar and comfortable with your pitch to give it effectively. Forget the theory that you can “rise to the occasion” and impress everyone with your dynamic speaking ability. If you are pitching the wrong point in the wrong way, the occasion will be more the demise than the rise of your dream.

Read the full article →

José Viñals: Government Bonds: No Longer a World Without Risk

March 25, 2011

The risk free nature of government bonds, one of the cornerstones of the global financial system, has come into question as the global crisis unfolds. One thing is now very clear: government bonds are no longer the risk-free assets they once were. This carries far reaching implications for policymakers, central bankers, debt managers, and how the demand and supply sides of government bond markets function. After a recent IMF conference on a new approach to government risk, I’d like to highlight three key aspects: In a world without a risk free rate, the health of the financial sector and the government are closely interconnected. We need to better understand the linkages between sovereign and financial risks, and conduct a thorough analysis of the channels of cross-border spillovers. Policies to help manage sovereign risk will have a positive impact on financial stability, and measures to stabilize the banking sector will have a favorable impact on sovereign balance sheets. Countries with large potential liabilities from their banking sectors need to identify, assess, monitor, and report related risks closely. The impact of these contingent liabilities on the government’s financial position, including its overall liquidity, needs to be assessed when making borrowing decisions. The risks involved call for stronger emphasis on stress tests. There is anecdotal evidence that some debt managers are complementing existing analytical approaches with a greater focus on stress scenarios, including extreme financing shocks. Policymakers could take the extra step and contemplate the role for a joint stress test for systemically important financial institutions and sovereigns. The outcomes of such stress tests could help inform crisis preparedness, debt strategies, as well as financial supervision and regulation. Implications for supply and demand These views are the result of some recent profound changes in the way government bond markets operate. On the demand side of the market, dealers and investors no longer treat these bonds as purely interest rate products. Far from it, government bonds have assumed characteristics typical of credit products, for which prices mainly provide measures of borrowers’ probabilities of default. Many are not as liquid as before and their investor base is not as diversified as it used to be. During phases of risk aversion, they do not benefit from flight to quality flows. On the contrary, they correlate with risky assets. Credit rating downgrades play a procyclical role and can exacerbate these adverse dynamics. Central bankers generally accept government bonds as collateral in refinancing operations, but, below certain thresholds, lower ratings could trigger sizeable haircuts, in other words, revaluing the bonds substantially below their market value. Regulators could also assign them a non-zero risk weight under the standardized approach and suddenly these bonds are not risk-free rates any longer. And even if bonds such as United States Treasuries and German Bunds have retained most of their risk-free characteristics, the once solid dividing line between interest rate and credit products has become blurred. In the long run, such changes can profoundly affect investors’ choices. One example of these changes is that more capital may flow towards emerging markets. These economies have been able to absorb the recent inflows, but the increase in corporate and financial leverage, rising asset prices, and building inflationary pressures may soon translate into growing imbalances and open the door to a new set of challenges to financial stability. On the supply side of the market, debt managers in advanced economies have started behaving a bit like their emerging market colleagues. Given the increased exposure to economic and financial risks, they have started placing stronger emphasis on risk mitigation strategies , well beyond what traditional debt management objectives would indicate. Confronted with the usual trade-off between being predictable or flexible, most of them have erred on the side of flexibility. While retaining an open dialogue with financial markets, they realize that annual programs have to offer sufficient flexibility to cope with the challenges of issuing and managing larger amounts of debt. Finally, debt managers are putting a high premium on proactive and timely communication as well as on understanding the evolving nature of the investor base. These are precisely the elements that were outlined in the ‘Stockholm Principles’ IMF facilitated with the debt managers in September 2010. The global crisis is sending many of us back to the drawing board to take a fresh look at old assumptions and long cherished principles, and the risk free nature of government bonds is no exception. From iMFdirect blog

Read the full article →

Video: Moody’s Byrne Says Japan Quake Won’t Cause Fiscal Crisis

March 14, 2011

March 14 (Bloomberg) — Tom Byrne, a senior vice-president at Moody’s Investor Service, discusses the outlook for Japan’s economy in the aftermath of the nation’s strongest earthquake on record. He talks with Francine Lacqua on Bloomberg Television’s “On The Move.”

Read the full article →

German Business and Investor Confidence Boost Recovery Hopes, UK Retail Sales drop 

January 21, 2011

German Business and Investor Confidence Boost Recovery Hopes, UK Retail Sales drop

Read the full article →

Erik Sebusch Joins CMEA Capital From UPS Pension Plan Investment Group

September 28, 2010

New Partner Brings More Than 15 Years Experience as an Investor

Read the full article →

Spectrem Millionaire Index Turns Sharply Bearish On The Economy

August 25, 2010

NEW YORK (Reuters) — The Spectrem millionaire investor confidence index fell to its lowest level in more than a year in August as wealthy U.S. investors worried about politics and unemployment, according to Spectrem Group. The Spectrem Millionaire Investor Confidence Index fell 11 points in August to -18, its lowest level since June 2009, when it fell a record 18 points to -20 shortly after the S&P 500 index hit a 12-year low.

Read the full article →

Irene Aldridge: Small Investors and the Implications of the Financial Reform Bill

July 27, 2010

About the time of the “flash crash” of May 6, 2010, many small investors appear to have left the U.S. stock markets, according to a recent Wall Street Journal article . The Financial Reform Bill, passed and celebrated with much fanfare last week, is sometimes thought to help bring those investors and their cash back into the equity markets. This articles takes a close look at the likely causes underlying the investor exodus, the Bill and its probable effect on investor behavior. First, a bit about the Bill. The Financial Reform Bill is certainly an accomplishment for the current administration. Earning a consensus on the complicated subject of financial regulation is a coup in its own right. By carefully reading through the text of the Bill itself, however, one may surmise that the Bill is really designed to benefit the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) the most. The Bill gives the SEC the authority it needs to collect and analyze information on market activity, to gain more control over the regulation of commodities, futures (currently regulated by the Commodities and Futures Trading Commission), other non-equity securities, as well as large hedge funds with assets under management exceeding $100 million. The Bill also imposes tighter capital requirements on banks, but only the largest banks, those with total capitalization of at least $500 billion. Smaller banks (and in the U.S., one can open a bank with as little as $10 million in capital), are largely left to their own devices in the Bill. While it will probably take the SEC another year to interpret and implement the Bill into actionable regulatory items, some implications for investors are already predictable. According to the research I conducted during my PhD studies, stricter SEC regulation typically reduces volatility in the financial services sector, stabilizing stock prices of financial services firms. Reduced volatility, in turn, will translate into lower volatility for major stock market indexes, such as the Dow Jones or the S&P 500, infusing some confidence into investors. Yet, it remains to be seen whether the stability of the market will be enough to entice investors to bring out their cash. And the rationale for the investors’ reticence is simple. While many a traditional broker blames the investor exodus from the markets on the latest technological innovations, like high-frequency trading, many investors have taken out their cash out of stocks for more prosaic reasons: concerns about deflation and the dire financial situation of their local municipalities. Due to deflation , every $1000 kept in cash from the beginning of April 2010 through the end of June now has the purchasing power of $1004 ($4 increase) in comparison with April. In other words, an investor who held on to his $1000 cash from April through the end of June can buy $4 more in average goods now than he could in April. In comparison, an investor who kept his $1000 in the S&P 500 from the start of April through the end of June lost $9 in his investment over the same period, reducing his original $1000 to $995 in nominal terms and to $991 in deflation-adjusted April purchasing power. Naturally, as long as deflation continues and the S&P 500 generates return insufficient to cover deflation, stuffing cash into one’s mattress is an attractive “investment” strategy. Then there is all this mess with the municipalities. To finance even the most basic local services, such as public schooling and garbage collection, the local governments rely on municipal taxation of its residents. Due to the high unemployment rate lingering in the U.S. economy, tax revenues were pitiful in the past couple of years, draining government coffers. And while the Federal government can always solve this situation by printing more money, municipalities’ two options are 1) issuing additional debt, and 2) cutting public services. Some municipalities have such a low credit rating that they have to resort to option 2. Now imagine investors facing the following option: whether to invest the money into the stock market or to have the money in cash or bonds in order to pay for their basic daily services, like children’s school arrangements — avoiding the stock market clearly takes the upper hand in this situation. Overall, however, things are likely to look up in the stock market, at least until the Fall Elections. According to the latest research by Axel Dreher and Roland Vaubel ( Journal of International Money and Finance , 2009), the governments have tools at their disposal to create temporary bursts of economic activity. Predictably, these bursts are often summoned ahead of elections to buoy voters’ confidence in the incumbent politicians. As a consequence, the U.S. investors are likely to see solid returns in the markets through October 2010. Yet the future of the markets beyond the election date is highly uncertain, regardless of whether the Financial Reform Bill is acted upon or not.

Read the full article →

German Investor Confidence Falls to the Lowest Level Since May 2009, Fitch Sees Concern of Double-Dip Recession in the Euro-Zone

June 15, 2010

German Investor Confidence Falls to the Lowest Level Since May 2009, Fitch Sees Concern of Double-Dip Recession in the Euro-Zone

Read the full article →

Paul Abrams: Ignored by Everyone: The Simple, Fair and Correct Solution to Capital Gains Tax Rates

May 24, 2010

The ‘crisis’ of the week for the financial sector is the definition of income that qualifies for capital gains tax rate preferences for fund managers. The noise level suggests the apocalypse is again pending. As usual, the country’s inability to have an intelligent discussion, as opposed to the battling of vested interests, will result in bad policies: neither simplicity nor fairness nor principal nor the expected revenue collection will be enacted or achieved. There is a reason for treating capital gains more favorably than salaries for labor and services. It coaxes money into long-term investments that create valuable products and American jobs. That’s it. There is no divine right of hedge fund managers to keep a greater portion of their incomes and thus either force up deficits or have others pay for what they are not paying. And, to my progressive colleagues, I would tell them that if someone is willing to put his money at risk, over time, and create jobs and value, they ought to be pleased with the benefits to society and incomes that provides. The correct and consistent solution to the current brouhaha over taxing “carried interest” — the amounts hedgies receive if the investments they choose for their partners are successful — is to correlate capital gains preferred rates to job creation. The simple way to do that is to provide the capital gains preferences only for direct investments in US companies, where the invested capital goes into the company coffers and not to some other investor with whom all that happened is that the shares have been purchased and traded, and money has gone from the hands of one investor to another. In financial jargon, that would mean that only investments in “newly-issued” stock by the company would qualify for capital gains treatment. All other arguments are self-servingly ridiculous. For example, I heard today on a financial network the argument that hedgies are really like homeowners, borrowing from banks (i.e., it is not “their” money invested) and then getting a gain when their home is sold. Well, no. A homeowner may have borrowed money from a bank, but he is on the hook for the entire amount over time, and is paying off that loan gradually. By contrast, a hedgie is investing other peoples’ money and benefiting if those investments pay off. He is not on the hook for the investment if it goes sour and owes nothing to the investors (those whose money he is managing) if it implodes. For this year, and this year only, I have previously argued that gains from all investments in “newly-issued stock” be taxed at zero regardless of when that investment is sold. That would cause a rapid rush of capital into companies, and provide them with confidence and capital to hire. After that one year, the capital gains rate should be raised back to, say, 20%, for qualifying investments made subsequently. But, the basic point is that capital gains tax preferences should be tied to job creation, and the best way to do that is to define a qualifying investment as one that directly provides new money to the company — i.e., “newly-issued stock” from the company to the investor. This policy is simple, fair, productive, and consistent with the rationale for a capital gains preference in the first place. Will it be discussed and considered? Of course not. It does not pit one set of absurd arguments against another, so it has no value as spectacle. (Disclosure: I invest and help manage a fund that only makes investments in newly-issued stock and thereby creates jobs. My investment far outweighs my management portion, so this proposal is of no great importance to me personally, but I thought it should be disclosed).

Read the full article →

Paul Abrams: Ignored by Everyone: The Simple, Fair and Correct Solution to Capital Gains Tax Rates

May 24, 2010

The ‘crisis’ of the week for the financial sector is the definition of income that qualifies for capital gains tax rate preferences for fund managers. The noise level suggests the apocalypse is again pending. As usual, the country’s inability to have an intelligent discussion, as opposed to the battling of vested interests, will result in bad policies: neither simplicity nor fairness nor principal nor the expected revenue collection will be enacted or achieved. There is a reason for treating capital gains more favorably than salaries for labor and services. It coaxes money into long-term investments that create valuable products and American jobs. That’s it. There is no divine right of hedge fund managers to keep a greater portion of their incomes and thus either force up deficits or have others pay for what they are not paying. And, to my progressive colleagues, I would tell them that if someone is willing to put his money at risk, over time, and create jobs and value, they ought to be pleased with the benefits to society and incomes that provides. The correct and consistent solution to the current brouhaha over taxing “carried interest” — the amounts hedgies receive if the investments they choose for their partners are successful — is to correlate capital gains preferred rates to job creation. The simple way to do that is to provide the capital gains preferences only for direct investments in US companies, where the invested capital goes into the company coffers and not to some other investor with whom all that happened is that the shares have been purchased and traded, and money has gone from the hands of one investor to another. In financial jargon, that would mean that only investments in “newly-issued” stock by the company would qualify for capital gains treatment. All other arguments are self-servingly ridiculous. For example, I heard today on a financial network the argument that hedgies are really like homeowners, borrowing from banks (i.e., it is not “their” money invested) and then getting a gain when their home is sold. Well, no. A homeowner may have borrowed money from a bank, but he is on the hook for the entire amount over time, and is paying off that loan gradually. By contrast, a hedgie is investing other peoples’ money and benefiting if those investments pay off. He is not on the hook for the investment if it goes sour and owes nothing to the investors (those whose money he is managing) if it implodes. For this year, and this year only, I have previously argued that gains from all investments in “newly-issued stock” be taxed at zero regardless of when that investment is sold. That would cause a rapid rush of capital into companies, and provide them with confidence and capital to hire. After that one year, the capital gains rate should be raised back to, say, 20%, for qualifying investments made subsequently. But, the basic point is that capital gains tax preferences should be tied to job creation, and the best way to do that is to define a qualifying investment as one that directly provides new money to the company — i.e., “newly-issued stock” from the company to the investor. This policy is simple, fair, productive, and consistent with the rationale for a capital gains preference in the first place. Will it be discussed and considered? Of course not. It does not pit one set of absurd arguments against another, so it has no value as spectacle. (Disclosure: I invest and help manage a fund that only makes investments in newly-issued stock and thereby creates jobs. My investment far outweighs my management portion, so this proposal is of no great importance to me personally, but I thought it should be disclosed).

Read the full article →

Paul Abrams: Ignored by Everyone: The Simple, Fair and Correct Solution to Capital Gains Tax Rates

May 24, 2010

The ‘crisis’ of the week for the financial sector is the definition of income that qualifies for capital gains tax rate preferences for fund managers. The noise level suggests the apocalypse is again pending. As usual, the country’s inability to have an intelligent discussion, as opposed to the battling of vested interests, will result in bad policies: neither simplicity nor fairness nor principal nor the expected revenue collection will be enacted or achieved. There is a reason for treating capital gains more favorably than salaries for labor and services. It coaxes money into long-term investments that create valuable products and American jobs. That’s it. There is no divine right of hedge fund managers to keep a greater portion of their incomes and thus either force up deficits or have others pay for what they are not paying. And, to my progressive colleagues, I would tell them that if someone is willing to put his money at risk, over time, and create jobs and value, they ought to be pleased with the benefits to society and incomes that provides. The correct and consistent solution to the current brouhaha over taxing “carried interest” — the amounts hedgies receive if the investments they choose for their partners are successful — is to correlate capital gains preferred rates to job creation. The simple way to do that is to provide the capital gains preferences only for direct investments in US companies, where the invested capital goes into the company coffers and not to some other investor with whom all that happened is that the shares have been purchased and traded, and money has gone from the hands of one investor to another. In financial jargon, that would mean that only investments in “newly-issued” stock by the company would qualify for capital gains treatment. All other arguments are self-servingly ridiculous. For example, I heard today on a financial network the argument that hedgies are really like homeowners, borrowing from banks (i.e., it is not “their” money invested) and then getting a gain when their home is sold. Well, no. A homeowner may have borrowed money from a bank, but he is on the hook for the entire amount over time, and is paying off that loan gradually. By contrast, a hedgie is investing other peoples’ money and benefiting if those investments pay off. He is not on the hook for the investment if it goes sour and owes nothing to the investors (those whose money he is managing) if it implodes. For this year, and this year only, I have previously argued that gains from all investments in “newly-issued stock” be taxed at zero regardless of when that investment is sold. That would cause a rapid rush of capital into companies, and provide them with confidence and capital to hire. After that one year, the capital gains rate should be raised back to, say, 20%, for qualifying investments made subsequently. But, the basic point is that capital gains tax preferences should be tied to job creation, and the best way to do that is to define a qualifying investment as one that directly provides new money to the company — i.e., “newly-issued stock” from the company to the investor. This policy is simple, fair, productive, and consistent with the rationale for a capital gains preference in the first place. Will it be discussed and considered? Of course not. It does not pit one set of absurd arguments against another, so it has no value as spectacle. (Disclosure: I invest and help manage a fund that only makes investments in newly-issued stock and thereby creates jobs. My investment far outweighs my management portion, so this proposal is of no great importance to me personally, but I thought it should be disclosed).

Read the full article →

FINANCE AUDIO: Exco Resources Limited (ASX:EXS) MD, Michael Anderson Discusses The Project Pipeline Investor Update Presentation

May 21, 2010

FINANCE AUDIO: Exco Resources Limited (ASX:EXS) MD, Michael Anderson Discusses The Project Pipeline Investor Update Presentation

Read the full article →

Victory West Moly Limited (ASX:VWM) Announces European Investor Road Show

April 12, 2010

Victory West Moly Limited (ASX:VWM) Announces European Investor Road Show

Read the full article →

Pan Asia Corporation Limited (ASX:PZC) Annouces European Investor Road Show

April 12, 2010

Pan Asia Corporation Limited (ASX:PZC) Annouces European Investor Road Show

Read the full article →

German Investor Confidence Falls For a Sixth Month amid Hopes Greece Debt Problems to Be Resolved

March 16, 2010

German Investor Confidence Falls For a Sixth Month amid Hopes Greece Debt Problems to Be Resolved

Read the full article →

German Investor Confidence Falls For a Sixth Month amid Hopes Greece Debt Problems to Be Resolved

March 16, 2010

German Investor Confidence Falls For a Sixth Month amid Hopes Greece Debt Problems to Be Resolved

Read the full article →

Euro Slips versus U.S. Dollar/Japanese Yen on Investor Profit-taking

March 15, 2010

Euro Slips versus U.S. Dollar/Japanese Yen on Investor Profit-taking

Read the full article →

What is more profitable: Commercial or Residential real estate …

February 14, 2010

What promises a greater return for the investor? This is in terms of purchasing the property and leasing it to a tenant. Lets say that we kept the total.

Read the full article →

Institutional Investor Magazine Names Toll Brothers to Its 2010 All-America Executive Team

February 9, 2010

HORSHAM, Pa., Feb. 9, 2010 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Toll Brothers, Inc. (NYSE:TOL), (www.tollbrothers.com), the nation’s leading builder of luxury homes, today announced that Institutional Investor has ranked Toll Brothers’ chairman and chief executive officer Robert I. Toll as the top CEO in the Homebuilders & Building Products industry for the third year in a row, chief financial officer Joel H. Rassman as the top CFO within the Homebuilders & Building Products industry for the fifth year in a row, Toll Brothers as the company with the “Best Investor Relations” for the Homebuilders & Building Products industry for the second year in a row and Frederick Cooper, Senior Vice President Finance, International Development and Investor Relations, as the top Investor Relations professional within the Homebuilders & Building Products industry. Institutional Investor went on to name Toll Brothers as the 2010 All-America Executive Team for the Homebuilders & Building Products industry.

Read the full article →

John Paulson-Backed OneWest Turns Remains of IndyMac Into Rescuer of Banks

December 23, 2009

By Zachary R. Mider and Linda Shen Dec. 23 (Bloomberg) — The former IndyMac Bancorp , one of the biggest casualties of the U.S. mortgage meltdown, has recovered so much under new owners and a new name that regulators used it to absorb another failed California lender. Now known as OneWest Bank FSB, the Pasadena-based firm assumed most operations of First Federal Bank of California after that lender collapsed on Dec. 18 and was put into Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. receivership. OneWest, whose private- equity backers include billionaire hedge-fund manager John Paulson , acquired IndyMac’s banking operation in March from the FDIC, which hadn’t been able to find a bank to run the company after it failed in July 2008. Regulators are debating how much restraint should be put on private investors while the industry’s capital is running short and bank failures are running at a 17-year high. The FDIC imposed new rules in August to placate lawmakers such as U.S. Senator Jack Reed , the Rhode Island Democrat, who are concerned that private-equity firms may be lax stewards. “The preference is still to have other banks acquire failing banks,” said Gary Townsend , president and co-founder of Hill-Townsend Capital LLC, an investment firm that specializes in lenders. “Some of the smaller names, because of their size, may not really fit the business models of other banks — they’re just too small to make much of a difference — and the FDIC is apt to be looking toward private equity as kind of the buyer of last resort.” FDIC Ownership The FDIC took over IndyMac last year after a run on deposits led to the second-biggest failure of a federally insured bank in U.S. history. When no buyers emerged, the government had to manage IndyMac until the following March, when most of its operations were sold to the investor group that owns OneWest. They’re led by Steven Mnuchin , a former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. banker, with backing from J. Christopher Flowers ’ private-equity firm, hedge-fund manager George Soros and a fund linked to Michael Dell , the founder of computer maker Dell Inc. OneWest pumped $1.55 billion into IndyMac and struck a loss-sharing agreement with the FDIC. Private-equity firms bought at least two other collapsed banks this year: Florida’s BankUnited Financial Corp., which got a $900 million infusion from Carlyle Group, Blackstone Group LP, Centerbridge Capital Partners LLC, and W.L. Ross & Co.; and Flagstar Bancorp Inc. in Michigan, which got $350 million from MatlinPatterson Global Advisers LLC. From the initial $1.55 billion investment in March, OneWest’s equity rose to $2.8 billion as of Sept. 30 as the market value of its loans and other assets increased, according to FDIC regulatory data . California Rank The FDIC said the sale of Santa Monica-based First Federal’s operations to OneWest last week, which included $6.1 billion of assets, will cost the insurance fund $146 million, the least costly option available. The First Federal purchase made OneWest the biggest bank in Southern California by assets, the company said in an e-mailed statement. It didn’t need to raise new capital to fund the transaction. Paulson, whose Paulson & Co. hedge fund made billions betting against the U.S. mortgage market, is now wagering on a rebound by acquiring Bank of America Corp . shares this year. The Charlotte, North Carolina-based company ranked first among U.S. home lenders during the third quarter. Flowers, also a Goldman Sachs alumnus, organized a rescue of Long-Term Credit Bank of Japan Ltd., later known as Shinsei, in 2000, making billions for his investor group. David Rubenstein , co-founder of the Carlyle Group buyout firm, once called it perhaps the most successful private equity deal in history. With the seizure of First Federal and six other banks on Dec. 18, the FDIC has closed 140 lenders this year. To contact the reporter on this story: Zachary R. Mider in New York at zmider1@bloomberg.net ; Linda Shen in New York at lshen21@bloomberg.net

Read the full article →

Pershing Square Investor Letter

December 7, 2009

Lots of discussion on GGP’s bankruptcy (a favorite of distressed debt investors) in the letter. Enjoy: Pershing Square Third Quarter Investor Letter.

Read the full article →

20:20 Investor Series Christmas Event – Connecting Industrty With Investment, 10 December 2009

December 7, 2009

20:20 Investor Series Christmas Event – Connecting Industrty With Investment, 10 December 2009

Read the full article →

Bonds Are Priced As If Almost None Will Ever Be Distressed

December 4, 2009

find a distressed- looking bond, despite the fact that there were tons of these just back in November Distressed Debt Investor: In November of 2008, there was over $230B of corporate debt trading below 50% of par. Today there is less than $10B. As a

Read the full article →

Resourceful Events presents Oil And Gas 20:20 Investor Series

November 11, 2009

Resourceful Events presents Oil And Gas 20:20 Investor Series

Read the full article →

Trading Outlook for General Growth Properties Inc. Issued by InvestorSoup.com

November 9, 2009

DALLAS, Nov. 9, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — InvestorSoup.com announces an investment report featuring General Growth Properties Inc. (Pink Sheets:GGWPQ). The report includes financial, comparative and investment analyses, and pertinent industry information you need to know to make an educated investment decision.

Read the full article →

Survey Respondents Cite Opportunity For Commercial Real Estate Investors To Buy At Cyclical Lows In 2010, According To Emerging Trends In Real…

November 7, 2009

Focusing on Premium Assets in Top Performing Markets will be Key to Investor Success Commercial real estate industry investors and professionals remain decidedly negative, colored by distress over prospects for an extended period of anemic demand and

Read the full article →

Reis, Inc. to Announce Third Quarter 2009 Results on November 6, 2009

October 29, 2009

NEW YORK, Oct. 29, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Reis, Inc. (Nasdaq:REIS) (“Reis” or the “Company”), a leading provider of commercial real estate market information and analytical tools, announced that it plans to issue an advisory release before the opening of The Nasdaq Stock Market on Friday, November 6, 2009, notifying the public that a complete and full-text financial results press release has become accessible at the Investor Relations portion of Reis’s website (http://www.reis.com). The complete release will be available no earlier than 8:30 AM (EST) on Friday, November 6, 2009, directly at any of the following web pages:

Read the full article →

Major Commercial Real Estate Lender Capmark To File Chapter 11

October 24, 2009

WSJ: In 2006, a group led by KKR & Co., Goldman Sachs Capital Partners and Five Mile Capital Partners acquired the lender GMAC LLC’s commercial – real estate business and renamed it Capmark. As of March 31, the investor group owned about …

Read the full article →

Trading Review for Chimera Investment Corp. Issued by InvestorSoup.com

October 22, 2009

DALLAS, Oct. 22, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — InvestorSoup.com announces an investment report featuring Chimera Investment Corp. (NYSE:CIM). The report includes financial, comparative and investment analyses, and pertinent industry information you need to know to make an educated investment decision.

Read the full article →

Trading Review for Freddie Mac Issued by InvestorSoup.com

October 21, 2009

DALLAS, Oct. 21, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — InvestorSoup.com announces an investment report featuring Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE). The report includes financial, comparative and investment analyses, and pertinent industry information you need to know to make an educated investment decision.

Read the full article →

CMG Holdings, Inc. Presenting at Investor Conference

October 10, 2009

CMG Holdings, Inc. Presenting at Investor Conference

Read the full article →

20:20 Investor Series, ASX bringing together mining companies

October 8, 2009

20:20 Investor Series, ASX bringing together mining companies

Read the full article →

Market Leader to Release Results October 27

October 8, 2009

KIRKLAND, Wash., Oct. 8, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Market Leader, Inc. (Nasdaq:LEDR) today announced it will host a conference call and live Webcast to discuss third quarter financial results on Tuesday, October 27, 2009 at 4:30 p.m. Eastern time. To listen to the live conference call, please dial 719-325-2236. A live Webcast of the call will be available from the Investor Relations section of the company’s Web site at http://www.marketleader.com. An audio replay of the call will also be available to investors beginning at 7:30 p.m. Eastern Time on October 27 through midnight Eastern Time on October 28 by dialing 719-457-0820 and entering the passcode 4656143#.

Read the full article →

ALM launches digital Distressed Assets Investor

October 2, 2009

New YorkALMs Real Estate Media Group, publisher of Real Estate Forum, announced Thursday the debut of Distressed Assets Investor, an interactive digital publication for commercial real estate, financial and investment professionals. DAI is

Read the full article →

QUICK POLL (GlobeSt.com)

October 1, 2009

NEW YORK CITY- ALM’s Real Estate Group, publisher of Real Estate Forum and GlobeSt.com and producer of the Link RealShare Conferences , today announced the launch of Distressed Assets Investor , a new interactive digital publication for commercial real estate, financial and investment professionals.

Read the full article →

(AFX UK Focus) 2009-09-25 00:07 UPDATE 1-Calpers launches online effort against critics (Interactive Investor)

September 24, 2009

By Jim Christie See more here: (AFX UK Focus) 2009-09-25 00:07 UPDATE 1-Calpers launches online effort against critics (Interactive Investor)

Read the full article →

(AFX UK Focus) 2009-09-24 19:45 Calpers website to push back at emboldened critics (Interactive Investor)

September 24, 2009

By Jim Christie More: (AFX UK Focus) 2009-09-24 19:45 Calpers website to push back at emboldened critics (Interactive Investor)

Read the full article →

US- Investor taskforce urges reform, further study of financial regulation

July 19, 2009

US- Investor taskforce urges reform, further study of financial regulation

Read the full article →

US- Investor taskforce urges reform, further study of financial regulation

July 19, 2009

US- Investor taskforce urges reform, further study of financial regulation

Read the full article →