Skip to main content

Hedge funds: regulations and redemptions

I have to tell you: I'm kind of surprised that last week's news of the Congressional hearings on hedge funds and the financial markets didn't get more attention in the blogosphere and the non-business press.

It sounds a bit funny to say that, as the hearings did secure front page attention from several newspapers (that I happened to see) the following day. This coverage was probably due, in no small part, to the snapshot images of five highly successful and media-shy hedge fund managers being brought before a congressional committee and a bevy of photographers.

Despite this momentous occassion, the hearings did not exactly attract a whirlwind of coverage from bloggers outside the financial sphere, although several business and investing blogs were live-blogging the event. It could be that the weight of this event was lost on bloggers less familiar with the hedge fund industry and the spectacle surrounding some of its prime players.

Still, I have to think that last week's hearings marked an important shift in the hedge fund industry. The push for increased regulation of hedge funds seems to gathering steam here.

In fact, many of the hedge fund managers assembled before the House committee said they supported increased regulations and reporting guidelines, so long as these requirements did not lead to public disclosure of hedge fund positions.

This is an important point, as a hedge fund manager's strategy and the details of his positions may form the core of his business edge, a "secret sauce" not to be divulged to competitors. So I have to wonder: can government regulators be trusted to keep these secrets?

There's also the question of how additional regulation might affect future competition within the hedge fund industry.

Right now, investor redemptions and an ongoing shake-out of existing firms are the immediate concerns for most hedge funds. But what will happen to future entrants in the hedge fund industry if new regulatory demands arise?

Increased regulatory burdens and compliance costs may prevent smaller funds from entering the business, thereby limiting the future competition for larger, more entrenched funds. The costs of regulatory compliance would fall especially hard on small new firms with limited resources. Such costs would effectively serve as a barrier to entry for new funds, while limiting the field for investors and financial entrepreneurs.

This is a crucial point to consider, as even the largest and most successful firms often start life as small and nimble business ventures operating out of a spare room or garage. Just ask Steve Jobs, Henry Ford, or Ken Griffin.

Related articles and posts:

1. Hedge fund hearings: video and notes - Finance Trends Matter.

2. Interview with hearings witness Houman Shadab - All About Alpha.

3. Get Over the Hedge - Forbes.

4. Signs of hope for the hedge fund industry - All About Alpha.

Popular posts from this blog

Seth Klarman: Margin of Safety (pdf)

Welcome, readers! Signup for free email updates at the Finance Trends Newsletter . Update: PDF links removed due to DMCA notice. Please see our extensive Klarman book notes below. New visitors, please check the Finance Trends home page for all new posts. Here's something for anyone who has been trying to get a look at Seth Klarman's now famous, and out of print, 1991 investment book, Margin of Safety .  My knowledge of value investing is pretty much limited to what I've read in Ben Graham's The Intelligent Investor (the book which originally popularized the investment concept of a "Margin of Safety"), so check out the wisdom from Seth Klarman and other investing greats in our related posts below. You can also go straight to Ronald Redfield's Margin of Safety book notes .    Related posts: 1. Seth Klarman interviews and Margin of Safety notes     2. Seth Klarman: Lessons from 2008 3. Investing Lessons from Sir John Templeton 4.

Slate profiles Victor Niederhoffer

Slate's recent profile of writer/speculator, Vic Niederhoffer has been getting some attention from traders and finance types in recent days. I thought we'd take a look at it here too, to offer up some possible educational value from Vic's experiences with trading and loss. Here's an excerpt from Slate's profile of Victor Niederhoffer : " I've enjoyed getting your e-mails. It sounds like you've thought a lot about being wrong. Well, the reason you contacted me, to call a spade a spade, is that I'm sort of infamous for having made a big, notorious, terrible error not once but twice in my market career. Let's talk about those errors. The first was your investment in the Thai baht, which pretty much wiped you out when the Thai stock market crashed in 1997. I made so many errors there it's pathetic. I made one of my favorite errors: "The mouse with one hole is quickly cornered." That is key. There are certain decisions you make in li

Moneyball: How the Red Sox Win Championships

Welcome, readers . T o get the first look at brand new posts (like the following piece) and to receive our exclusive email list updates, please subscribe to the Finance Trends Newsletter .   The Boston Red Sox won their fourth World Series title of t he 21st century this we ek. Having won their first Se ries in 86 years back in 200 4, the last decade-plus has marked a very strong return to form for one of baseball's oldest big league clubs. So how did they do it? Quick background: in late 2002, team own er and hedge fund manager, John W. Henry (with his partners ) bought the Boston Red Sox and its historic Fenway Park for a reported sum of $ 695 million. Henry and Co. quickly set out to find their ideal General Manager (GM) to help turn around their newly acquired, ailing ship. This brings us to one of my fav orite scenes from the 2011 film , Moneyball , in which John W. Henry (played by Ar liss Howard) attempts to woo Oakland A's GM Billy Beane (Brad Pi