Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
CNBC Going After Frank Holmes Big-Time Re: Clinton
All of the people on the CNBC desk really going after Holmes for his donations to the Clinton foundation and investments in a uranium company that had connections to the Clintons and whether or not he stood to benefit. It's all a complicated mess, but it makes for a rather uncomfortable interview with the head of US Global Investors.
Franks Holmes loves to talk. His free e-newsletter is one example of excessive "word-smithing". Most of his funds have been destroyed by commodity deflation.
Here's a link to all of his funds and their performance...nothing but poor performance and high fees.
Franks Holmes loves to talk. His free e-newsletter is one example of excessive "word-smithing". Most of his funds have been destroyed by commodity deflation.
Here's a link to all of his funds and their performance...nothing but poor performance and high fees.
PSPFX is such an aggressive fund that it's practically a 2x fund. It's very much one of those funds where the manager doesn't "dial it down" when you have a situation with commodities like you do, they just go, "It's a bad year."
Franks Holmes loves to talk. His free e-newsletter is one example of excessive "word-smithing". Most of his funds have been destroyed by commodity deflation.
Here's a link to all of his funds and their performance...nothing but poor performance and high fees.
Amen!!! But then I am heavily biased against commodity/precious metals funds of any stripe or color. And all a result of a couple years I spent as a futures broker way back in the early 70s.
"And all a result of a couple years I spent as a futures broker way back in the early 70s."
If you were a futures broker, what do you think of futures exchanges (ICE, CME) as investments?
Scott, stocks are not my bailiwick. Plus, based on the wide disparity in our ages, we would have different time horizons. I do note CME is still far below its 2007 highs, a rarity in this market. Albeit it had a spectacular run prior to its 2007 highs. You would know this more than me, but aren't there bears saying that exchanges like CME and ICE will become obsolete at some point in the future because of technological advances? Speaking of the CME, one of the biggest personalities I ever met and had a long conservation with was Leo Malamed. Probably one of the few times I was ever intimated with anyone in the financial industry.
Scott: Thanks for "The New Yorker" link. Some exceptionally good writing every week in that magazine which we subscribe to. Articles tend to be very thorough and factual, although I wouldn't describe them as completely "objective" - since they usually have a viewpoint to express. I've only skimmed the lengthy article you linked.
Here's their staff writer's take-away which I've lifted from the concluding paragraph: "Are the Clintons correct in saying that there is an attack machine geared up to go after them? Of course. But why have they made it so easy?" - I don't watch CNBC, except sometimes with the volume down if travelling and can't get Bloomberg. Gosh TV seems broken. There's no logic anymore to the types of stories different venues offer.
- From The Comedy Channel we get news and analysis.
- From CNBC we get politics.
- From CNN we get mountain climbing and wine tasting.
- And, from our Michigan outlets, for "local news" we get irrelevant stories about police chases on LA freeways or street crimes in Miami.
CNBC was trying to make news with that interview which didn't work out for them. They should stay out of politics unless it affects the markets.
As for Frank Holmes, his mistake was giving money to a foundation that is more of a bank account to the Clintons as it is a charitable function. Due diligence was not done.
The biggest sound of all of this is the sound of Hillary's campaign deflating as this all comes to light. Of course her answer is, what does it matter?
Comments
Regards,
Ted
Here's a link to all of his funds and their performance...nothing but poor performance and high fees.
usfunds.com/our-funds/fund-performance/month-end-returns/
campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/frank-holmes.asp?cycle=08
campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/frank-holmes.asp?cycle=12
Do significant donors expect some form of political payback? Unfortunately, often they do. There's too much money floating around from wealthy donors on both sides of the political aisle and it is a danger to our democracy.
If you were a futures broker, what do you think of futures exchanges (ICE, CME) as investments?
Regards,
Ted
http://performance.morningstar.com/stock/performance-return.action?t=GROW®ion=USA&culture=en_US
Here's their staff writer's take-away which I've lifted from the concluding paragraph: "Are the Clintons correct in saying that there is an attack machine geared up to go after them? Of course. But why have they made it so easy?"
-
I don't watch CNBC, except sometimes with the volume down if travelling and can't get Bloomberg.
Gosh TV seems broken. There's no logic anymore to the types of stories different venues offer.
- From The Comedy Channel we get news and analysis.
- From CNBC we get politics.
- From CNN we get mountain climbing and wine tasting.
- And, from our Michigan outlets, for "local news" we get irrelevant stories about police chases on LA freeways or street crimes in Miami.
http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6
As for Frank Holmes, his mistake was giving money to a foundation that is more of a bank account to the Clintons as it is a charitable function. Due diligence was not done.
The biggest sound of all of this is the sound of Hillary's campaign deflating as this all comes to light. Of course her answer is, what does it matter?