Stats/ML/Quant
semak-semak
Joined March 2011
- Tweets84.8K
- Following3.6K
- Followers11.9K
- Likes29.6K
Pinned Tweet
Adityo Sanjaya, Open to Part-Time / Fractional Opportunities:
Data Science, AI/ML Engineering, Head of Data & VP of Data
Feel free to DM me or reach me at [email protected] or my phone number 085777490099
Reposts and referrals are highly appreciated!
"Pada jangka panjang, kita semua mati"
Prabowo itu kebijakannya jangka panjang (menurut saya).
Karakternya tak peduli sama dolar atau saham. USD hari ini rekor terburuk kita.
Bisa saja bagus secara jangka panjang. Tapi jangka pendeknya memang hancur-hancuran. Dan mungkin rakyatnya keburu mati.
Banyak hal saya setuju sama program Prabowo, KECUALI MBG!
Itu program buang-buang uang yang nggak sebanding antara pengeluaran dan yang didapat. Apalagi pelaksanaannya banyak kelemahan sana-sini.
Jokowi dulu juga mikir jangka panjang ketika bangun tol, bendungan, bandara, dan banyak infrastruktur lain. Tapi saat itu wujudnya langsung terasa.
Sedangkan Prabowo ini "jangka panjang"-nya lebih panjang lagi. Bisa membangkitkan gejolak dari masyarakat, dan sekarang sudah mulai banyak bermunculan.
Boleh berpikir jangka panjang, saya setuju. Tapi jangan sampai membunuh UMKM yang nggak kuat tahan nafas sepanjang itu.
Probably Approximately Correct retweeted
Ex-hedge fund lawyer here. Helped set up these multi-manager multi-strategy hedge funds. There are a few distinctions here:
1. These platforms achieve economies of scale by maintaining a central ‘book’ that aggregates and offsets positions coming from all pods so they don’t pay duplicative fees. The best multi-strat funds have an algo that allocates capital very efficiently across multiple pods as a result. It’s similar to BigLaw’s ‘staffing model’ just that BigLaw never had a sophisticated algo to deploy associate capacity.
2. They prune extremely quickly if a PM doesn’t perform, usually by experiencing a sharp drawdown. It’s called a ‘stop-out’. The PM walks out the door quickly. BigLaw pruning isn’t as brutal once you become an EP.
3. They have strict non compete non solicitation on their PMs. In fact the platform’s anchor investors usually mandate the platform to include those terms into PMs’ contracts to protect the platform’s value, and if the PM sets up their own shop, they must let the platform take a percentage of the new shop’s equity. Whereas the US ABA bans non-compete (Rule5.6)
4. These platforms don’t always hire the PMs fully. Some platforms like Citadel and Point72 just buy strategies/signals from smaller managers (this is called ‘alpha capture’ and deploy their own capital to pursue those opportunities and split profit with those managers. That way they don’t maintain the overhead. We seldom hear BigLaw licensing some lawyer’s templates/knowhow without hiring them.
5. These platforms mostly scale by deploying capital efficiently so PMs don’t need to set up their own fund. In BigLaw, you can’t really deploy work or relationship the same way so eventually it becomes winners take all rather than fully performance based.
In short, these platforms have much more durable value than BigLaw and can survive the departure of rainmaker PMs.
Once had a friend who worked in hedge funds describe to me the multi-manager “pod shop” structure.
Each portfolio manager in the hedge fund is assigned capital and analysts and they pursue their own strategies independently. The fund handles the centralised risk management and operations, technology and analytics.
The structure enables the diversification of risk and pooling of shared resources.
Modern Biglaw seems pretty similar in practice.
Firms diversify across practices to reduce risk e.g. a restructuring practice is a great hedge for a downturn affecting PE and M&A. Each equity partner runs a team that they feed with their “book” that is semi-autonomous in a department. They do however cross collaborate and work with specialist lawyers who are a shared resource (and of course bring in their own work). And it’s much less brutal and volatile.
