Michael Green

Steve Hou Verified account @stevehou · 15h

“The risk of passive investing” is one of the crappiest theories invented and beloved by veteran Wall Street cranks. It’s crappy bc it’s almost entirely rejected by empirical data but its adherents won’t support espousing and trumpeting it esp every time we get a little sell off.

God, passive and index investing has grown in market share for decades and gotten seriously big like over 50% of US market by some estimates. And it’s not like we haven’t some serious shocks over the last 10 years to really test the resiliency of the equilibrium and expose the real risk of passive investing.

What have we seen? Na-da. Have the cranks gotten the message and gone away? Nope. That’s how you know it’s not a serious theory. It’s a religion for these people. They have a conclusion and are on the search for affirmative evidence.

It’s honestly just sad at this point.

View quoted post on X

Kris Sidial🇺🇸 Verified account @Ksidiii · 4d

For the second year in a row Ambrus won Volatility hedge fund of the year!!!!

Super grateful for all of our investors that continue to trust us and allow us to perform the way we do as a vol hedge fund that specializes in carry-neutral tail risk hedging.

When we started this business 6 years ago, our goal was to bridge the gap between the art of tail risk hedging and good volatility trading. Truly humbling to reflect on how far we have come as a firm.

Lots of more work to do, and we will continue to keep our heads down and do it.

View quoted post on X

Founder Mode Verified account @Founder_Mode_ · Oct 31

Marc Andreessen revealed how Harvard Business School was built on a broken 1941 theory, and how it's now collapsing...

Andreessen co-founded Netscape in 1994 and a16z in 2009.

He has sat on Meta's board since 2008.

He has spent 30 years backing founders and watching managerial CEOs lose to them.

The pattern traces back to one book: James Burnham's The Machiavellians (1941).

Burnham argued every great company had been founder-run.

Henry Ford ran Ford. Bob Noyce ran Intel.

Today, Elon Musk runs Tesla, SpaceX, and Starlink.

Then, he said, something broke.

Between the 1880s and the 1920s, a new philosophy replaced the founder. It was called managerialism.

The professional manager would now hold a portable skill, usable across any business.

The consequences were:

- Harvard Business School
- Stanford Business School
- Management as a universal skill
- The 1970s conglomerate

"That assumes the managers are going to do a good job," Andreessen says.

For 30 years, they haven't.

Managers can run something static, he says. Soup is soup. A bank is a bank. A car is a car.

But when the industry changes, the manager freezes.

Look at SpaceX.

"Imagine being a professionally trained manager, trained at a top management school, working for a rocket launch company, competing with SpaceX."

Then Elon's rockets started landing on their butt.

"Your management skills ... what good are they at that point?"

Andreessen's conclusion:

"You're much more likely to build something important in the 21st century if you start with the founder and train them on management."

View quoted post on X

Dominika Langenmayr @D_Langenmayr · Oct 29

As far as I see, *none* of the public finance economists on this side (no matter where they lean politically) find the criticism on the Saez/Zucman "evaluation" page valid. Every positive tweet comes from someone from outside the field who likely doesn't know the papers. 1/2

View quoted post on X