返回列表 发帖
BangBusDriver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Though you would find many many family trusts sort
> of things, they get some lousy people in their
> network to invest for lousy returns, they usually
> stay dormant and die after some time, they like to
> belive that every one is George Soros among them,
> and they call themselves hedge funds, just because
> they manage money and invest it like monkeys. Lack
> of discipline is not a characteristic of a good AM
> shop or hedge fund. So you need to make a
> distinction between such lousy people opening up
> shops in any corner and calling themselves hedge
> funds and AM shops... and the real Hedge funds and
> AM shops which do operate very systematically and
> with discipline, usually such funds have a big
> portfolio and a long history.

As someone who manages money as a third party for large family trusts, I can tell you that this an incorrect characterization. Most people managing large family offices (circa USD 1B or more) that I have encountered have had successful roles in AM and made a lifestyle choice to manage money for a single wealthy client. In the top echelon, these people are certainly on par or better than most others in the industry. Similarly, these roles are extremely difficult to attain, entail a thorough vetting process and require significant prior experience.

I'm sure the hacks you describe are here and there, but generally speaking billionaires (or half-billionaires) didn't get where they are by making poor decisions. Multi-family office is another thing entirely.


On topic, staying in a deal role becomes more sales and relationship driven the longer you remain in that line of work. While the same is somewhat true of AM, for most PMs or even senior analysts remain more engaged in actually doing/reviewing/analyzing the research going into the portfolio..basically remain more involved in the "process." I'm not sure what I'm trying to say here.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Friday, September 9, 2011 at 02:18PM by brain_wash_your_face.

TOP

AM is not "better than anything else" and it's not the "most competitive labor market." IB and PE are deal-driven fields, in general pay higher than AM, and are more competitive to break into.

To the OP, it depends what you want to do. Also you're making a distinction between FO and AM. AM is FO work. If you're in a monitoring role, I'm guessing that's more middle office or back office stuff. It will be difficult to transition to actual investment decision-making roles in the FO but it's possible.

TOP

brain_wash_your_face Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BangBusDriver Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> As someone who manages money as a third party for
> large family trusts, I can tell you that this an
> incorrect characterization.

Apologies bro, I didn't meant to take a swing at serious and professional people in family trust investment management. I was just highlighting "what-not-to" through some cliches.

TOP

返回列表