鲜花( 1181) 鸡蛋( 48)
|
本帖最后由 小黄 于 2015-12-15 19:22 编辑
& V' [$ l% Z: r. u0 [1 x7 L0 e8 M; B3 P! _. g# ~
呵呵
! C9 J: p0 [3 Y9 H: @4 V) E
; V- n/ D9 O% \5 r看看这位“知名投资人”过去5年的战绩:2 z$ A( C5 q$ M" X8 y& r
) T: ^1 c4 e- H. c) k: uhttp://www.cantechletter.com/201 ... d-mortgage-startup/" F5 O! o& ]7 B/ T9 D2 H( K% i
Kevin O’Leary closes failed mortgage startup
6 w9 [2 l P& H7 rAPRIL 15, 2014 BY MARK MCQUEEN 0 COMMENTS k1 r$ T& D, `* f- e L: _
7 u( ?, w: f( ^- _- j, }As retail investors continue to suffer via some of his lagging mutual funds, Kevin O’Leary’s brand took another hit last month when he agreed to “surrender” his mortgage licence to provincial regulators.- e/ j7 f3 ?& f3 J6 o6 R$ l
This came as a surprise, frankly, even to me.4 x3 G0 t9 h8 Y W
It has been only 18 months since KO put his omnipresent profile behind this new business venture via YouTube. As you may recall, it took several years before investors began to flee his mutual funds in the wake of poor returns in several key asset classes (see prior post “O’Leary Funds appear to shed another 20% of assets in 2012” Jan. 27-13). Since the LCBO was able to market O’Leary-branded wine, it came as no shock that Team Kevin figured that Canadians would also buy a mortgage from KO. Apparently, they didn’t do their market research. As with the mutual fund caper, Canadians expect some value add.
4 j$ ~3 {$ Z4 T) v4 u. q1 c+ O! X1 q' ?* c& U4 R
http://www.wellingtonfund.com/bl ... 2012/#axzz2yqzQBjpS
& y8 E9 N1 ?8 r: d% ^5 JO’Leary Funds appear to shed another 20% of assets in 2012) \4 k- e% x8 V8 g" l3 U9 X; r: R1 A
Published on January 27, 2013 by Mark McQueen in Capital Markets, Corporate Governance/ |4 b, K# _, x0 h/ m& g( V' a
Thank God he owns a wine label, as there might be some sorrows to be drowned over at O’Leary Funds Management.
2 d* S0 B& m. S$ O; A& V4 g8 ^
6 G3 [; Q$ }5 `( V) BYou may recall that Kevin O’Leary admitted last Spring to Globe writer Tim Kiladze, after some blogosphere research forced his hand, to losing $253 million of assets to investor redemptions during the 2011 calendar year. According to O’Leary’s crisis management marketing material, the firm started 2011 off with $1.2 billion under management, and ended 2011 with the exact same quantum. In essence, it appeared as though he raised some money during 2011, experienced $253 million of investor redemptions from his various funds (his figure), and ended up static from an AUM standpoint at the end of it all. Mr. O’Leary told the Globe at the time that everyone on Bay Street suffered in 2011, although the writer called that explanation into question:& X5 N. Q# x& |
" Z3 l0 {% B7 W: [“We’ve had our lumps just like anybody else,” he said in an interview, noting that many mutual funds have experienced outflows as investors pile into income and balanced funds. However, he failed to acknowledge that his funds, which are dividend-and-yield heavy, are precisely the kinds of funds that investors have been flocking to.
- p; b3 H, |1 t
; z5 L! G* n' d2 }) _" }( TNow that KO has published the December 2012 monthly reports for his 13 remaining mutual funds, and with the benefit of the December 2012 financial reporting for his four lonely closed-end funds, we can do the math and determine how much of his 2011 figure of $1.2 billion under management remains on hand a year later. At least according to my calculations based upon the net asset figures in O’Leary’s published investor updates.
# I. k; k% ?& O
4 e$ a' [- f5 T0 u4 q6 j: gAccording to these calculations, O’Leary is now managing $961.1 million, which reflects an AUM decrease of $239 million during 2012. The data is current as of Dec. 31st., _3 @9 s" }- x- i1 V
& Q% m3 \: f8 l- P) F
7 ^ C6 M7 N- ]$ i( v1 g- A# W; [2 h! V( c1 m
Read more: http://www.wellingtonfund.com/bl ... 2012/#ixzz3uRk2Lmfl |
|