InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

marketmaven

06/20/05 1:46 PM

#402412 RE: Alexander #402409

Peak Oil and Hedgie Blowup- NO PROBLEMO

Gaag,Blow,BS, Arrg, Dr.GreenieSpam - DROP IT !

Read this....
http://www.otcnet.org/2005/presentations/pdf/OTC05_TL_Simmons.pdf

Bailey Coates Fund to Shut After Falling 20% ray_heritage
NEW 6/20/2005 9:15:01 AM
link

(excerpt)

Bailey Coates Fund to Shut After Falling 20% in 2005 (Update1)

June 20 (Bloomberg) -- The Bailey Coates Cromwell Fund, a London-based hedge fund that had $1.3 billion of assets at its peak in 2004, will shut down after slumping 20 percent this year, becoming at least the second fund in a week to close because of bad performance.

It's 'in the interests of partners to be given the opportunity to voluntarily withdraw their interests before the fund is placed in formal liquidation,' Bailey Coates Asset Management LLP said in a June 17 letter to investors. Investors, known as partners, will get most of their remaining money in July, the letter said.

Bailey Coates was started two years ago by Jonathan Bailey, 36, and Stephen Coates, 33, who worked together at Perry Capital LLP before starting their own firm. Bailey and Coates said as recently as last month that they planned to keep 'the fund going' after assets fell to about $635 million.



RE: Aman Capital: "We Have Not Shut Down Yet" ray_heritage
NEW 6/20/2005 9:21:03 AM
Singapore's Aman Capital: "We Have Not Shut Down Yet"

SINGAPORE (Dow Jones)--Singapore's hedge fund, Aman Capital Management, said Monday it has still not closed operations, refuting an earlier report in the Financial Times that the company was closing down.

"We have not shut down yet" Mayur Ghelani, director at Aman Capital, told Dow Jones Newswires in a clearer statement about the company's current status.

Earlier Monday Ghelani didn't comment on the FT report, but said the company has been fulfilling since April all commitments to its shareholders of a US$240 million hedge fund.

In May, local media reports said Aman Capital had lost tens of millions of dollars through trading derivatives.

RE: Bailey Coates Fund looks like 50% loss Yogibear101
NEW 6/20/2005 9:46:00 AM
...from $1.3B to $635M by a couple wet behind the ears wannabe fund managers. Time to check the books eh?

RE: Bailey Coates Fund looks like 50% loss Bradleto
NEW 6/20/2005 10:25:03 AM
If they charge the typical 1% of assets under management plus a percentage of profits (often 20%), at 1.3 billion dollars, they earn $13,000,000 a year irrespective of the fund's performance. Well, if the fund loses value, their fees go down too proportionally. For obvious reasons, under most circumstances, the typical operators will run these things until the great money is no longer available to them via the 1% fees. It's like tipping the proverbial cow to get the last drop of milk out of the hind teat. BR


icon url

osprey

06/20/05 1:52 PM

#402413 RE: Alexander #402409

Leading indicators down again. Don't bet on much of a rally with a slowing economy, rising interest rates, and $60 oil. The market looks tired. I'm expecting one more lunge up on the nasdaq on TA but not expecting much anymore. Support at 2050, resistance at 2100. All depends on how the nasdaq handles 2100. A double top at 2100 would be bad news. A break of 2050 would be bad news.

Leading Indicators Decline in May
Monday June 20, 12:04 pm ET
By Anne D'Innocenzio, AP Business Writer
Leading Indicators Decline in May, Sign Slower Economic Growth May Lie Ahead This Year

NEW YORK (AP) -- A closely watched gauge of future business activity fell more than expected in May, indicating slower economic growth may lie ahead later this year, a private research group announced Monday.

The New York-based Conference Board reported that its Composite Index of Leading Indicators fell 0.5 percent last month to 114.1. The decline was more than the 0.2 percent drop that analysts had expected.

The May decline follows a revised unchanged level in April and a 0.6 percent decline in March.

In a statement, Ken Goldstein, the board's labor economist, said that the indicators suggest "slower growth setting in during the third quarter." But he added that this is "not just a domestic phenomenon." He noted that six of the eight countries for which the Conference Board monitors a leading economic index have either showed declines or slower growth.

Mark Vitner, senior economist at Wachovia Corp. in Charlotte, N.C., said that he's not worried about the decline, adding "this is a sign of a slower economy, but not anything more serious than that."

Vittner noted that a good part of the weakening in the leading indicators over the past few months has been the decline in financial components of the index -- which include an interest rate comparison and real money supply -- as a result of rising interest rates.

The Conference Board reported Monday that only one of the 10 components of the leading index -- stock prices -- increased in May. The other components that dragged down the index included building permits, vendors performances, the index of consumer expectations, manufacturers' new orders for nondefense capital goods, consumer goods and materials and average weekly initial claims for unemployment insurance.

Vittner added that the Federal Reserve's moves to push short-term interest rates higher over the past year to keep inflation in check is working, and "we are nearing the point that they will leave it unchanged, and let the economy regain momentum." He expects the Fed to raise rates when policymakers meet in June and August.

The index of coincident indicators, which measures the current economy, rose 0.2 percent in May, to 119.7. The gain followed a 0.2 percent increase in April, and no change in March. All four components that make up the coincident index increased in May, led by industrial production. The others were personal income less transfer payments, employees on nonagricultural payrolls and manufacturing and trade sales.

The index of lagging indicators, which looks back to the past six months, increased 0.3 percent to 99.8. That followed a 0.1 percent rise in April, and a 0.2 percent decline in March. Four of the seven components strengthened, led by average duration of unemployment.The negative contributor was a change in the consumer price index for services. The change in labor cost per unit of output and ratio of consumer installment credit to personal income held steady.

On Wall Street, stocks sank as investors appeared to focus on the possible impact of rising oil prices.

In late morning trading, the Dow Jones industrial average fell 35.52, or 0.3 percent, to 10,587.55. The Standard & Poor's 500 index lost 3.68, or 0.3 percent, at 1,213.28, and the Nasdaq composite index dropped 8.95, or 0.4 percent, to 2,081.16.