David Einhorn is one of my Favorite People
The more I learn about David Einhorn, the more I admire him. Not only does he run a veru successful hedge fund, but he is known as an excellent and ruthless stock picker. He can't open his mouth about a stock without the stock moving.
Someone posted on the Herbalife conference call thread a conspiracy theory that Einhorn maybe be preparing to wage war on public Multi-Level Marketing firms. As a firm hater of the business model I'm hoping this conspiracy is true (for those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about:
The story is not over. At the conference, one of Einhorn's first slides just was completely white and had "MLM" in the middle. He said something like: "Today I want to talk about a company with material issues on many levels." I'm sure everyone though MLM meant multi-level marketing and not Martin Marietta Materials.
David Einhorn if you read this, keep doing what you're doing. You're a badass and an inspiration.
He's also a very good poker player. I started playing online poker at 15 and I've played at a WSOP event. But like Einhorn, poker is just a hobby that I want to continue pursuing as I make more money. He's now playing the biggest tournament ever: the $1 million dollar buy-in charity tournament at WSOP. I hope takes it down.
sorry to burst your bubble,
sorry to burst your bubble, dude but he's married
Just saying...
hmmm, if we roll back 10
hmmm, if we roll back 10 years and look at the top performing guys, you'll see a fair few have been busted for insider trading/market manipulation. There were similar news articles about Madoff et al.
He's been clearly found out on one insider deal, and that was pretty clear cut (i read the full transcript). I like the guy, find him fun, and if he is as is, then I share your sentiments. However I can't help think there's something missing.
What insider deal are you
What insider deal are you referring to trazer?
andyinsandiego: What insider
What insider deal are you referring to trazer?
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/library/communication/pr/201...
that would be this one.
edit: and if someone of that net worth is willing to risk that much for such a little reward, it does make you wonder how he actually earns his money.
Unforseen: Not only does he
Not only does he run a veru successful hedge fund, but he is known as an excellent and ruthless stock picker.
Don't these 2 go hand in hand, especially if you run a long/short equity fund? Thats like saying hes a really good linebacker, but he is also known for being great at tackling
David Einhorn and Bill Ackman
David Einhorn and Bill Ackman are cool people, man.
The difference between successful people and others is largely a habit - a controlled habit of doing every task better, faster and more efficiently.
"Einhorn is known for
"Einhorn is known for shorting Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. before it collapsed in September 2008."
LOL
ai215: Unforseen: Not only
Not only does he run a veru successful hedge fund, but he is known as an excellent and ruthless stock picker.
Don't these 2 go hand in hand, especially if you run a long/short equity fund? Thats like saying hes a really good linebacker, but he is also known for being great at tackling
Not necessarily...you can be an excellent stock picker and achieve great alpha consistently, but a ruthless stock picker shorts lehman prior to bankrupcy and obtains a reputation that pretty much bars him from saying any opinion on stocks in public.
Check out my Blog
trazer985: andyinsandiego:
What insider deal are you referring to trazer?
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/library/communication/pr/201...
that would be this one.
edit: and if someone of that net worth is willing to risk that much for such a little reward, it does make you wonder how he actually earns his money.
I'm no expert on insider trading laws but isn't this bullshit? They called him up with information to see how he'd react, he declined to listen to that information. In the US it would be legal for him to act on the phone call since he didn't agree to be party to inside information.
trazer985: andyinsandiego:
What insider deal are you referring to trazer?
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/library/communication/pr/201...
that would be this one.
edit: and if someone of that net worth is willing to risk that much for such a little reward, it does make you wonder how he actually earns his money.
Really? If you thought that was insider trading then I've got a bridge to sell and an excellent investment opportunity for you.
If your broker called you up and asked you if you wanted to be involved in equity offering for a company in distress, what would you say? I'd say shit, no I don't want that... what company? Oh. I own them already. Ya I don't like them if they need to raise equity, I should probably sell them actually. It's not insider information it's no different than when a boiler room sees that you're a whale and calls you to buy XYZ Dogshit Inc., but it wasn't worth enough to Einhorn to fight it at a $9M fine... the publicity alone isn't worth it.
I hate victims who respect their executioners
Follow BH & Co. on Twitter: @DumbLuckCapital
twitter.com/DumbLuckCapital
Unforseen: ...Not only does
...Not only does he run a veru successful hedge fund...
Anyone else think the OP has
Anyone else think the OP has a garage full of Amway products he's never gonna sell?
BlackHat: trazer985: andy
What insider deal are you referring to trazer?
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/library/communication/pr/201...
that would be this one.
edit: and if someone of that net worth is willing to risk that much for such a little reward, it does make you wonder how he actually earns his money.
Really? If you thought that was insider trading then I've got a bridge to sell and an excellent investment opportunity for you.
If your broker called you up and asked you if you wanted to be involved in equity offering for a company in distress, what would you say? I'd say shit, no I don't want that... what company? Oh. I own them already. Ya I don't like them if they need to raise equity, I should probably sell them actually. It's not insider information it's no different than when a boiler room sees that you're a whale and calls you to buy XYZ Dogshit Inc., but it wasn't worth enough to Einhorn to fight it at a $9M fine... the publicity alone isn't worth it.
lmfao read the fucking legal documents you retard. Within 2 minutes of the conversation ending, he issues sell orders, basically being the only person selling the entire day.
6. Even though the Punch Call was expressly set up on a ‘non-wall crossed’ basis, inside
information was disclosed to Mr Einhorn during the call. The inside information
disclosed to Mr Einhorn was that Punch was at an advanced stage of the process
towards the issuance of a significant amount of new equity, probably within a timescale
of around a week, with the principal purpose of repaying Punch’s convertible bond and
creating headroom with respect to certain covenants in Punch’s securitisation vehicles.
or if you want to read the rules about wall crossing, here they are:
3.10. In the context of a proposed transaction, the purpose of the wall crossing is to share
inside information with the third party in order to be able to discuss the third party’s
views on the transaction. These views would usually include an indication of the third
party’s interest in and/or support for the transaction.
3.11. Once a third party agrees to be wall crossed, it can be provided with inside information
and it is then restricted from trading. The party is only able to trade in the company’s
shares again once the information it has been given is made public. In the context of a
transaction, the information will be made public either when the transaction is
announced to the market, or in cases where a transaction does not proceed, when an
announcement is made to the market stating that a transaction was contemplated, but
did not proceed. This announcement may be referred to as a cleansing statement.
note the part about not trading.
or some figures from the day:
Trades effecting the sale of Punch shares commenced through an external UK broker
less than 30 minutes after the Punch Call ended. On 9 June, Greenlight sold 3,456,000
shares of Punch which accounted for approximately 63% of the day’s volume.
Greenlight continued to sell Punch shares between 10 - 12 June and dominated trading
in Punch shares on the London Stock Exchange on these days:
• 10 June – Punch’s stock closed at 154.75p. Greenlight traded 2,000,000 shares,
62.28% of the daily volume;
• 11 June – Punch’s stock closed at 154p. Greenlight traded 6,100,000 shares,
85.52% of the daily volume;
• 12 June – Punch’s stock closed at 148.5p. Greenlight traded 100,000 shares,
6.15% of the daily volume.
Are you STILL standing by him on this? That doesnt seem at all odd to you?
It's not odd, it's smart. If
It's not odd, it's smart. If anything it's hilarious. Considering he basically made it as clear as possible that he wanted no part in the offering and there was technically no wall-cross by David or anyone at Greenlight, he wasn't acting on inside information. Ask anyone with legitimate knowledge on the situation and they'll tell you exactly what happened - the argument for punishing him was that a sophisticated and privileged investor like David should have known better than to do what he did because it's gaming the system. Not that he deliberately traded on inside information, since by technical definition he did not. Don't you think they would have prosecuted him criminally rather than fine him an insignificant amount (relatively speaking) if it was legit insider trading? I'm not gonna get in a flame war about it because we basically agree to disagree: my point is that it was a shrewd move by David because he knows better than 99% of HF managers how these rules work and he knew he hadn't come over the wall, wanting no part in the offering, and that gave him the ability to start dumping his shares right after the call. The argument against him is that while not technically insider trading, he knew what was going on and used the information in what most would consider an "unfair" way, and ended up gaming the system because he's smarter than the regulators (which isn't hard to do).
And you said it best in one of your earlier and hilariously ignorant posts, why would someone of that net worth be willing to risk that little amount of money? Because it was within the rules for him to do so. You think he was insider trading on Allied? I work with guys that were sitting in the damn room when they were ripping Penni Roll a new asshole. I'm sure you know him a lot better than I do but David's the kind of dude who goes out to dinner with his wife and doesn't order anything because he's too busy reading a 10-K to eat. And I'm sure he wrote that whole speech at Ira in '02 as a fucking cover up. Same with GAAP-uccino.
But what do I know, I'm fucking retarded. And you read the legal documents. I'm sure he's a fraud.
I hate victims who respect their executioners
Follow BH & Co. on Twitter: @DumbLuckCapital
twitter.com/DumbLuckCapital
BlackHat: And you said it
And you said it best in one of your earlier and hilariously ignorant posts, why would someone of that net worth be willing to risk that little amount of money?
like the billionaire at Galleon making a million from that Goldman deal and busted for years? Oh wait.... he made it all from insider, but only 1 case was provable.
Time to start quoting the judgment:
The FSA’s view is that Mr Einhorn’s decision to deal was based on the inside
information he received. It is sufficient that a decision to deal is materially influenced
by the inside information, it need not be the sole reason for the trading.
"Not that he deliberately traded on inside information, since by technical definition he did not." Standing by that still?
OK lets go back to basics: the definiton of insider trading:
he buying or selling of a security by someone who has access to material, nonpublic information about the security.
FSA Judgment:
The information was not generally available
There was no generally available information regarding the timing, size and
shareholder support for the issuance and these factors could not have been deduced
from other public information by market participants. Thus, it was not generally
available information that Punch was at an advanced stage of the process towards the
issuance of a significant amount of new equity, probably within a timescale of around a
week, with the principal purpose of repaying Punch’s convertible bond and creating
headroom with respect to certain covenants in Punch’s securitisation vehicles.
Mr Einhorn’s behaviour amounted to market abuse by way of insider dealing in breach
of section 118(2) of the Act for the following reasons (as detailed further below):
(i) Mr Einhorn was an insider;
(ii) Mr Einhorn dealt in the investment;
(iii) Mr Einhorn had inside information; and
(iv) Mr Einhorn dealt on the basis of that inside information
Ok, if he KNEW what he was doing wasn't wrong, then why the hell would not even consult his own legal/compliance/risk teams? Does he not think, after a 45 minute conversation with insiders to check, you know, just to be sure? Think through how fast you have to be to issue that volume of sell orders in 2 minutes after a call ends.
Although Mr Einhorn’s approach to the Punch Call is not criticised,
following the call Mr Einhorn should have been aware that he had been given
inside information, or at the very least that there was a risk of this. He had a
responsibility to consider whether the information received during the call
constituted inside information before instructing the sale of shares.
In answer to your point about not wanting to be part of the call. I have a great way of not being part of calls. It's called hanging up. Other popular techniques are being polite but really having to go. Less popular ones are standing on the phone asking for specific numbers involved, and how far along the process they are, for 45 minutes.
I'll ask you this, since you point blank refuse that your idol might not be what you adore him as:
The information was not available to the public and therefore insider. What else could someone have done to actually act on this insider information, and therefore be an inside trader?
If it looks like a duck, and it sounds like a duck, it's a duck.
trazer985: If it looks like a
I hate victims who respect their executioners
Follow BH & Co. on Twitter: @DumbLuckCapital
twitter.com/DumbLuckCapital
I do work in the industry,
I've worked at three pretty
I hate victims who respect their executioners
Follow BH & Co. on Twitter: @DumbLuckCapital
twitter.com/DumbLuckCapital
BlackHat: Hell, I could tell
this thread was satisfying.
RIP WSO Chat.
BlackHat: The majority of
...well, he's no use to us if Detroit is his idea of a small town!
Edmundo Braverman: Anyone
Check out my Blog
read the whole thread but can
This thread has the feel of
huethan: This thread has the
I hate victims who respect their executioners
Follow BH & Co. on Twitter: @DumbLuckCapital
twitter.com/DumbLuckCapital
I have no horse in this race
Gray Fox: FWIW, I really
Aren't there some differences
relinquis... Killing the GMAT this December; Over/Under set at: 725 GMATs.
BlackHat: David basically
monkeyc: BlackHat: David
I hate victims who respect their executioners
Follow BH & Co. on Twitter: @DumbLuckCapital
twitter.com/DumbLuckCapital
monkeyc: BlackHat: David
Einhorn to play tomorrow...18
Check out my Blog
I know 99.99% of you do not
Check out my Blog
Unforseen: I know 99.99% of
I hate victims who respect their executioners
Follow BH & Co. on Twitter: @DumbLuckCapital
twitter.com/DumbLuckCapital
David got 3rd place, for a
Check out my Blog
Never thought watching BH