Ideosphere Forum

Re: fx-discuss: Judge's statement entered on $CYC

Author: Neal Gafter
Conversation: fx-discuss: Judge's statement entered on $CYC ( prev | next ) reply!
Topic: fx-discuss ( prev | next )
In-Reply-To: Shawn M. Winnie's post
Followed-Up-By: Shawn M. Winnie's post
Date: Mon May 19, 1997 07:40 am
Shawn M. Winnie
Neal Gafter

From: "Shawn M. Winnie" <>
> I have just entered a statement on $CYC. I would note that $CYC is
> unusual in that it does not rely for its resolution on easily
> interpretable, freely available information. I would advise, not
> merely invite, anyone intending to trade in the claim to moot their
> assumptions on the issue in fx-discuss prior to placing orders.

Well, OK.

"hedged" means investing some portion of the capital as a means of
reducing risk. What portion of the capital in a fund do you require
to be invested in "start-ups" for the fund to be considered a SUHF?
10%? 20%? More? Is a company considered a start-up simply by virtue
of its stock being newly offered to the public? If so, how long after
its initial public offering is it still considered a "start-up"? 2
years? 5 years? If that's not the criteria, what is the definition
of a start-up? Is it a company that was incorporated less than 2
years ago? If so, would this include re-incorporation under a
different name and jurisdiction?

Is it sufficient to find a single such fund that outperforms the
relevant indices for the claim to be judged true? Does it have to be
the same fund for each of those seven out of ten years, or can it be a
different start-up-hedged fund that outperforms the indices in each of
those seven years?

Can you name one single start-up-hedged fund?



All trademarks, copyrights, and messages on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Forum: Copyright (c) 2000-2001 Javien Inc All rights reserved. Distributed under the GPL