WEBVTT - BONUS: Future Standard President & CIO Mike Kelly

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:11.840
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. This is Masters in

0:00:11.920 --> 0:00:15.440
<v Speaker 1>Business with Barry Ritholts on Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:16.800 --> 0:00:20.480
<v Speaker 2>This week on the podcast, an extra special guest, Mike

0:00:20.560 --> 0:00:25.080
<v Speaker 2>Kelly has an absolutely fascinating career from Omega to Tiger,

0:00:26.120 --> 0:00:30.800
<v Speaker 2>currently President and Chief Investment Officer at Future Standard. Really

0:00:30.880 --> 0:00:34.879
<v Speaker 2>about as knowledgeable an individual as you'll find, covering private

0:00:34.920 --> 0:00:39.360
<v Speaker 2>credit infrastructures and the wealth channel and what the future

0:00:40.000 --> 0:00:43.600
<v Speaker 2>of what we broadly call alternatives look like. I thought

0:00:43.600 --> 0:00:46.080
<v Speaker 2>this was fascinating and I think you will also, with

0:00:46.159 --> 0:00:50.680
<v Speaker 2>no further ado my conversation with Mike Kelly. Mike Kelly,

0:00:51.040 --> 0:00:52.120
<v Speaker 2>Welcome to Bloomberg.

0:00:52.400 --> 0:00:54.120
<v Speaker 3>Thanks Perry, It's great to be here.

0:00:54.520 --> 0:01:00.400
<v Speaker 2>So I'm fascinated by both your background and your career path,

0:01:00.440 --> 0:01:04.319
<v Speaker 2>which is really really interesting. But let's roll back a

0:01:04.360 --> 0:01:09.720
<v Speaker 2>little bit. Bachelor's at Cornell NBA, from Stanford, what was

0:01:09.720 --> 0:01:10.839
<v Speaker 2>the original career plan?

0:01:12.360 --> 0:01:15.000
<v Speaker 3>So taking a step back, you know, I grew up

0:01:15.080 --> 0:01:18.039
<v Speaker 3>on the border of Queens Long Island. My dad was

0:01:18.080 --> 0:01:22.520
<v Speaker 3>an NYPD cop in really the South Bronx, and Queen's

0:01:23.400 --> 0:01:26.880
<v Speaker 3>mom raised the five of us kids in a traditional

0:01:27.160 --> 0:01:32.600
<v Speaker 3>Irish American household and valued education. I knew from a

0:01:32.760 --> 0:01:36.600
<v Speaker 3>pretty early part of my life that I wanted to

0:01:36.640 --> 0:01:41.160
<v Speaker 3>go into investing. I'll tell you a little stories. So

0:01:41.880 --> 0:01:44.399
<v Speaker 3>when we turned thirteen in my family, you got the

0:01:44.400 --> 0:01:48.400
<v Speaker 3>big gift. And at the time, I was a nerdy kid.

0:01:48.440 --> 0:01:50.920
<v Speaker 3>I was into computers. My dad would drop me off

0:01:50.920 --> 0:01:54.040
<v Speaker 3>at the Queens Village Public Library and I would, you know,

0:01:54.160 --> 0:01:56.360
<v Speaker 3>learn how to program on this Apple computer. They had

0:01:56.440 --> 0:01:58.560
<v Speaker 3>just got the Apple two e in. And for my

0:01:58.640 --> 0:02:03.040
<v Speaker 3>thirteenth birthday, I asked my parents for you got up

0:02:03.080 --> 0:02:04.960
<v Speaker 3>to three hundred dollars. I got three hundred dollars of

0:02:05.000 --> 0:02:09.160
<v Speaker 3>Apple stock. Was my request, really, and the big day

0:02:09.200 --> 0:02:12.040
<v Speaker 3>came they gave me the envelope. Was really excited. I

0:02:12.080 --> 0:02:16.600
<v Speaker 3>opened it up and it was a saving spot for

0:02:16.639 --> 0:02:20.160
<v Speaker 3>a local bank. And my parents noted the disappointment in

0:02:20.160 --> 0:02:22.519
<v Speaker 3>my face and said, you know, Michael was sorry, we

0:02:22.840 --> 0:02:24.000
<v Speaker 3>don't know how to buy stock.

0:02:25.240 --> 0:02:27.519
<v Speaker 2>And this is like late eighties, this is eighty three,

0:02:27.639 --> 0:02:28.799
<v Speaker 2>eighty three, okay.

0:02:28.880 --> 0:02:34.040
<v Speaker 3>So I said, then in there, I am going to

0:02:34.080 --> 0:02:37.400
<v Speaker 3>teach myself how to do this, how to invest in

0:02:37.800 --> 0:02:40.760
<v Speaker 3>these companies, and I set out. I still have it.

0:02:40.800 --> 0:02:42.520
<v Speaker 3>I have the notebook over here. I actually brought it

0:02:42.560 --> 0:02:45.840
<v Speaker 3>with me about stocks and all the things that I

0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:49.480
<v Speaker 3>would read about investing and investing in the stock market.

0:02:49.600 --> 0:02:52.639
<v Speaker 3>And so from an early early part of my life

0:02:52.680 --> 0:02:57.640
<v Speaker 3>I wanted to go into investing. And so throughout you know,

0:02:57.760 --> 0:03:01.800
<v Speaker 3>the years at Cornell. You know, at the time, I

0:03:01.880 --> 0:03:05.040
<v Speaker 3>did some great internships. Wanted a boiler room. They made

0:03:05.040 --> 0:03:08.239
<v Speaker 3>a movie about that one for Steve Winn at the Mirage,

0:03:08.520 --> 0:03:13.320
<v Speaker 3>which was exciting. And then I studied in Japan, studying

0:03:13.320 --> 0:03:16.360
<v Speaker 3>the banking system there for one summer, and as I

0:03:16.400 --> 0:03:19.040
<v Speaker 3>was coming back, the only firm that actually would interview

0:03:19.160 --> 0:03:23.480
<v Speaker 3>me was Solomon Brothers, and so I wound up fortunately

0:03:23.520 --> 0:03:28.000
<v Speaker 3>getting a job at Salomon Brothers in the capacity yeah,

0:03:28.040 --> 0:03:33.160
<v Speaker 3>in the financial institutions banking group. Started as an ibanker,

0:03:34.840 --> 0:03:39.240
<v Speaker 3>loved Salomon Brothers, went up going to the forty second

0:03:39.240 --> 0:03:41.760
<v Speaker 3>floor of seven World Trade Center, which is where Michael

0:03:41.800 --> 0:03:45.040
<v Speaker 3>Lewis wrote the book Liar's Poker. So I wound up

0:03:45.080 --> 0:03:47.240
<v Speaker 3>going to the fixed income trading floor for my third

0:03:47.280 --> 0:03:51.560
<v Speaker 3>year and really got bit by the bug of markets.

0:03:51.640 --> 0:03:55.440
<v Speaker 3>I knew I wanted to make the transition from investment

0:03:55.480 --> 0:03:58.920
<v Speaker 3>banking over to the byside. So as I headed off

0:03:59.360 --> 0:04:03.720
<v Speaker 3>to Stanford Business School, that was my mission, was to

0:04:03.760 --> 0:04:05.320
<v Speaker 3>find my way into the buyside.

0:04:05.480 --> 0:04:08.560
<v Speaker 2>So there's a sort of urban legend that you kind

0:04:08.560 --> 0:04:12.840
<v Speaker 2>of cold called your way from Solomon Brothers into an

0:04:12.840 --> 0:04:19.080
<v Speaker 2>internship with hedge fund legend Lee Cooperman at Omega is,

0:04:19.640 --> 0:04:21.600
<v Speaker 2>first of all, is that a true story? And if

0:04:21.600 --> 0:04:23.600
<v Speaker 2>it is, walk us through that.

0:04:23.560 --> 0:04:28.680
<v Speaker 3>Call, all right. So I was at Stanford and I

0:04:28.760 --> 0:04:32.560
<v Speaker 3>knew I wanted to make this transition into the buyside.

0:04:32.800 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 3>And in looking at the careers of what I was

0:04:37.000 --> 0:04:40.400
<v Speaker 3>looking at the greatest minds in investing, they all seem

0:04:40.480 --> 0:04:43.880
<v Speaker 3>to be relegated to this corner of the market of

0:04:44.400 --> 0:04:47.800
<v Speaker 3>hedge funds and private equity firms. And we're talking about

0:04:48.040 --> 0:04:50.160
<v Speaker 3>the mid nineties here, when people didn't have a lot

0:04:50.160 --> 0:04:53.880
<v Speaker 3>of understanding of what these firms actually did. But it

0:04:53.960 --> 0:04:59.400
<v Speaker 3>struck me as an incredibly intense and exciting career path.

0:04:59.560 --> 0:05:02.560
<v Speaker 3>Many of the people were very young and seemingly making

0:05:02.600 --> 0:05:05.400
<v Speaker 3>a lot of money doing it and really working on

0:05:05.440 --> 0:05:12.960
<v Speaker 3>some dynamic investment investing strategies. And so I had a directory.

0:05:13.000 --> 0:05:15.359
<v Speaker 3>It was called the Van Hedge Fund Directory. It was

0:05:15.360 --> 0:05:18.920
<v Speaker 3>a printed out piece of paper like from a fax machine,

0:05:19.279 --> 0:05:22.000
<v Speaker 3>and it had the names and addresses of at the

0:05:22.040 --> 0:05:25.840
<v Speaker 3>time the top twenty five hedgephones. So had you know,

0:05:26.000 --> 0:05:29.200
<v Speaker 3>Bruce Kubner in there, and you know Paul Tudor Jones

0:05:29.279 --> 0:05:33.080
<v Speaker 3>and George Soros, And so I went through this directory

0:05:33.360 --> 0:05:36.440
<v Speaker 3>and literally called from a payphone.

0:05:36.480 --> 0:05:40.960
<v Speaker 2>These individuals come on, Druckmiller, It's Mike Kelly like that.

0:05:40.960 --> 0:05:41.920
<v Speaker 2>That sort of call.

0:05:42.279 --> 0:05:46.240
<v Speaker 3>Now, the disadvantage is most people were screening their calls.

0:05:46.279 --> 0:05:49.000
<v Speaker 3>Their assistants were like, yeah, he'll never call you back.

0:05:50.320 --> 0:05:54.520
<v Speaker 3>The advantage for me was one of those individuals. Lee Cooperman,

0:05:55.160 --> 0:05:58.760
<v Speaker 3>often didn't use an assistant and answered his own phone.

0:05:58.800 --> 0:06:01.279
<v Speaker 2>He's there five in the morning, he's there at eight

0:06:01.320 --> 0:06:04.200
<v Speaker 2>at night. Absolutely, if you call outside of business hours,

0:06:04.760 --> 0:06:05.720
<v Speaker 2>Lee's the only guy in there.

0:06:05.839 --> 0:06:09.080
<v Speaker 3>He picks up and goes Lee, and that's how he

0:06:09.120 --> 0:06:11.880
<v Speaker 3>starts a conversation. I'm mister Cooperman. You know, I'm a

0:06:11.960 --> 0:06:14.640
<v Speaker 3>kid from the Burrows like you. I just want to

0:06:14.640 --> 0:06:17.479
<v Speaker 3>break into the industry. You know, I've worked at Solomon,

0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:21.799
<v Speaker 3>but I've never been an investor before. I am willing

0:06:21.839 --> 0:06:23.839
<v Speaker 3>to do whatever it takes. I am willing to sleep

0:06:23.839 --> 0:06:26.040
<v Speaker 3>on my parents' couch and work for you for free.

0:06:27.120 --> 0:06:31.560
<v Speaker 3>And he said, I only hire PhDs really, And I said, well,

0:06:31.560 --> 0:06:36.040
<v Speaker 3>I'm getting my MBA right now and he said no, poor, hungry,

0:06:36.120 --> 0:06:38.800
<v Speaker 3>and driven. And I was like, well, I'm all three

0:06:38.880 --> 0:06:42.480
<v Speaker 3>of those. I check those boxes. And he said, well,

0:06:42.520 --> 0:06:46.159
<v Speaker 3>I'm a value investor and I like the price. You

0:06:46.200 --> 0:06:47.040
<v Speaker 3>can come work for me.

0:06:47.000 --> 0:06:50.160
<v Speaker 2>For free, no kidding, Like, oh my god.

0:06:50.240 --> 0:06:56.160
<v Speaker 3>I show up day one at Omega and Lee comes

0:06:56.200 --> 0:06:59.239
<v Speaker 3>to me and says, let's go to breakfast. And I thought,

0:06:59.440 --> 0:07:03.159
<v Speaker 3>this is a heaven first day and I'm going to

0:07:03.200 --> 0:07:06.640
<v Speaker 3>breakfast with the legendary Lee Cooperman. So we go across

0:07:06.680 --> 0:07:08.599
<v Speaker 3>the street. It's one hundred Wall Street. We go across

0:07:08.640 --> 0:07:12.480
<v Speaker 3>the street to an Aubont Pan for breakfast, and we

0:07:12.560 --> 0:07:14.840
<v Speaker 3>get to the counter, we order, and Lee turns to

0:07:14.840 --> 0:07:19.240
<v Speaker 3>me and says, you're buying. So here I am day

0:07:19.240 --> 0:07:23.640
<v Speaker 3>one and I'm already thirty dollars in the whole right

0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:27.679
<v Speaker 3>in my illustrious investment career. But it turned out okay,

0:07:28.720 --> 0:07:31.320
<v Speaker 3>And and that was how that was how I got

0:07:31.360 --> 0:07:34.440
<v Speaker 3>my start in the investment business, and in particular in

0:07:34.520 --> 0:07:37.240
<v Speaker 3>hedge funds and the alternative investment that's unbelievable.

0:07:37.280 --> 0:07:42.480
<v Speaker 2>So after Omega, you leap from Lee Cooperman to working

0:07:42.560 --> 0:07:46.720
<v Speaker 2>under Julian Robertson at Tiger Management. How did that come about?

0:07:47.160 --> 0:07:50.280
<v Speaker 3>So I had worked full time after business school for

0:07:50.560 --> 0:07:53.880
<v Speaker 3>Lee and four Omega Advisors. I received a phone call

0:07:54.920 --> 0:07:57.680
<v Speaker 3>a few years later by Tiger Management. They were looking

0:07:57.720 --> 0:08:03.240
<v Speaker 3>for someone in their macro an analyst group. And at

0:08:03.240 --> 0:08:06.480
<v Speaker 3>that time, you know, getting a call from Tiger was

0:08:06.480 --> 0:08:08.160
<v Speaker 3>like getting a call from the New York Yankees. Sure

0:08:08.160 --> 0:08:11.520
<v Speaker 3>it was like the illustrious, you know, incredible firm. Was

0:08:11.640 --> 0:08:13.679
<v Speaker 3>very honored and flattered interviewed.

0:08:13.960 --> 0:08:16.880
<v Speaker 2>Let me interrupt you a second, just to remind listeners

0:08:16.920 --> 0:08:21.520
<v Speaker 2>that the nineteen eighties and nineteen nineties were peak hedge

0:08:21.520 --> 0:08:25.200
<v Speaker 2>fund years. They were masters of the universe. They put

0:08:25.240 --> 0:08:29.440
<v Speaker 2>up the best numbers. They were the hardest for any

0:08:29.600 --> 0:08:33.120
<v Speaker 2>investor that wanted to allocate to them. Was not easy

0:08:33.160 --> 0:08:36.160
<v Speaker 2>to get into any of those funds. The world changed

0:08:36.160 --> 0:08:40.000
<v Speaker 2>after the financial crisis, but that was the golden era

0:08:40.040 --> 0:08:41.160
<v Speaker 2>of hedge funds, wasn't it?

0:08:41.240 --> 0:08:44.880
<v Speaker 3>Most definitely? And I think what I appreciated the most

0:08:46.080 --> 0:08:50.840
<v Speaker 3>about those first few firms I worked at, Solomon, Omega Advisors,

0:08:51.200 --> 0:08:55.960
<v Speaker 3>Tiger Management. It was a commonality of culture in that

0:08:56.720 --> 0:09:03.079
<v Speaker 3>these were very intense work environments with very intellectually curious

0:09:03.880 --> 0:09:09.000
<v Speaker 3>individuals who were super smart and but like to have

0:09:09.120 --> 0:09:13.199
<v Speaker 3>fun and were a joy to be around and learn from.

0:09:13.280 --> 0:09:17.240
<v Speaker 3>And so I really enjoyed, you know, the aspects of

0:09:17.320 --> 0:09:20.520
<v Speaker 3>the culture of the environments in my early career and

0:09:20.800 --> 0:09:22.199
<v Speaker 3>really got a lot out of it. And it really

0:09:22.240 --> 0:09:25.599
<v Speaker 3>appealed to kind of my personality of kind of an obsessive,

0:09:25.600 --> 0:09:29.280
<v Speaker 3>intense personality. So I really enjoyed that. But going to

0:09:29.360 --> 0:09:33.880
<v Speaker 3>Tiger was incredible, a very young group of people who

0:09:33.880 --> 0:09:35.760
<v Speaker 3>have obviously gone on to do great things in their

0:09:35.800 --> 0:09:41.640
<v Speaker 3>investment careers. A really intellectually challenging place to work. But

0:09:41.679 --> 0:09:45.200
<v Speaker 3>I learned a ton about about investing from from you know,

0:09:45.240 --> 0:09:48.120
<v Speaker 3>from Lee and from Julian and from the other individuals

0:09:48.120 --> 0:09:50.360
<v Speaker 3>that I worked with and sort of shaped my sort

0:09:50.400 --> 0:09:52.240
<v Speaker 3>of investment philosophy as time went on.

0:09:52.600 --> 0:09:56.280
<v Speaker 2>I'm curious because they are obviously such different styles. Lee

0:09:56.360 --> 0:09:59.679
<v Speaker 2>as the value guy, Tigers known as momentum and growth

0:10:00.200 --> 0:10:03.360
<v Speaker 2>and just a hold and technology in a very very

0:10:03.360 --> 0:10:08.480
<v Speaker 2>different opportunity set. What did you learn from from each

0:10:08.480 --> 0:10:12.680
<v Speaker 2>of those? How different were Julian's and Lee's approaches?

0:10:12.800 --> 0:10:16.079
<v Speaker 3>Well, I think Julian and Lee the inception of that

0:10:16.120 --> 0:10:19.280
<v Speaker 3>both had a very value oriented approach. I think within

0:10:20.280 --> 0:10:23.000
<v Speaker 3>Tiger there was an evolution over time and an adaptation

0:10:23.400 --> 0:10:25.880
<v Speaker 3>even with some of the Tiger cubs, of adopting a

0:10:25.920 --> 0:10:29.839
<v Speaker 3>more growth oriented strategy. But it was a time when

0:10:30.120 --> 0:10:34.840
<v Speaker 3>doing real intense work could uncover really great long and

0:10:34.840 --> 0:10:38.480
<v Speaker 3>short opportunities. I do think you know, years later, decades later,

0:10:38.520 --> 0:10:42.839
<v Speaker 3>it became much more difficult with indexation and ETFs and

0:10:42.600 --> 0:10:46.120
<v Speaker 3>and and the market structure changed. But back then, I

0:10:46.160 --> 0:10:50.240
<v Speaker 3>would say, from an investment philosophy standpoint, there was a

0:10:50.320 --> 0:10:55.880
<v Speaker 3>view that every single day you rebuy your portfolio. It

0:10:55.920 --> 0:10:59.800
<v Speaker 3>doesn't matter if you're losing money or you're in the money,

0:11:00.080 --> 0:11:03.000
<v Speaker 3>made a double already, if you own it, think about it,

0:11:03.040 --> 0:11:05.320
<v Speaker 3>and re underwrite it as if you just bought it today.

0:11:05.520 --> 0:11:08.439
<v Speaker 3>And are you as excited from a long and short

0:11:08.480 --> 0:11:12.680
<v Speaker 3>perspective about that opportunity in the go forward period? And

0:11:12.679 --> 0:11:16.160
<v Speaker 3>I think that discipline of reunderwriting your holdings every single

0:11:16.240 --> 0:11:19.559
<v Speaker 3>day is something that's remained with me. I think, secondly,

0:11:19.600 --> 0:11:23.240
<v Speaker 3>I would say what I would call a variant perception,

0:11:23.400 --> 0:11:25.600
<v Speaker 3>or what is called a variant perception, something that Michael

0:11:25.600 --> 0:11:30.920
<v Speaker 3>Steinhardt popularized of when you make an investment, How is

0:11:30.960 --> 0:11:33.600
<v Speaker 3>your view different from the market, Because if you want

0:11:33.600 --> 0:11:37.160
<v Speaker 3>to outperform the market, you can't just agree with the

0:11:37.160 --> 0:11:39.800
<v Speaker 3>thesis that's already embedded in the price or value of

0:11:39.840 --> 0:11:43.360
<v Speaker 3>an investment. And so that variant perception of how do

0:11:43.400 --> 0:11:46.840
<v Speaker 3>you look at it different? You're either more bullish about

0:11:46.840 --> 0:11:50.960
<v Speaker 3>that opportunity or you think that opportunity is overdone, and

0:11:51.000 --> 0:11:53.680
<v Speaker 3>so you're either selling or your shorting or what have you.

0:11:53.760 --> 0:11:56.000
<v Speaker 3>And so I think the variant perception is really really

0:11:56.600 --> 0:12:02.959
<v Speaker 3>an important aspect of the philosophy. Having investment conviction is

0:12:02.960 --> 0:12:07.760
<v Speaker 3>another principle. You know, go all in, do your work,

0:12:07.880 --> 0:12:11.760
<v Speaker 3>get to a high conviction thesis, but loosely hold it

0:12:11.960 --> 0:12:14.520
<v Speaker 3>like hold on loosely strong opinions.

0:12:14.520 --> 0:12:16.760
<v Speaker 2>Loosely held is the expression I heard.

0:12:17.400 --> 0:12:20.640
<v Speaker 3>That's exactly right, because if you have disconfirming evidence, don't

0:12:20.640 --> 0:12:24.680
<v Speaker 3>ignore it, don't double down with your escalation of commitment,

0:12:25.440 --> 0:12:28.000
<v Speaker 3>you know, reunderwrite it, and ask yourself, well, maybe I

0:12:28.160 --> 0:12:30.640
<v Speaker 3>have to change my mind. The greatest investors in my mind,

0:12:30.679 --> 0:12:33.200
<v Speaker 3>someone like a Stanley Druckn Miller, is willing to change

0:12:33.240 --> 0:12:36.240
<v Speaker 3>his mind all the time, you know, based on new information.

0:12:36.320 --> 0:12:39.760
<v Speaker 3>And so I think these principles form an investment philosophy

0:12:39.800 --> 0:12:42.520
<v Speaker 3>that if if you don't know what your competitive advantage

0:12:42.559 --> 0:12:44.839
<v Speaker 3>is in making an investment, whether you're a private market

0:12:44.880 --> 0:12:48.160
<v Speaker 3>investor or a public market investor, you probably don't have

0:12:48.240 --> 0:12:50.640
<v Speaker 3>a reason to be in that investment in the first place.

0:12:50.880 --> 0:12:54.880
<v Speaker 2>That's exactly right. I love the concept of re underwriting

0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:59.680
<v Speaker 2>so many new investors, and I started on a trading desk.

0:13:00.200 --> 0:13:04.120
<v Speaker 2>Any position you had, you had to justify every moment

0:13:04.160 --> 0:13:06.760
<v Speaker 2>you owned it. Hey, this is capital. I could turn

0:13:06.800 --> 0:13:09.800
<v Speaker 2>this into capital in a millisecond. Would you buy this

0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:13.120
<v Speaker 2>if this was back as cash and not as a

0:13:13.160 --> 0:13:16.800
<v Speaker 2>holding where you bought it, whether you're underwater or head

0:13:17.000 --> 0:13:20.599
<v Speaker 2>is totally irrelevant. Would you continue to re underwrite that?

0:13:20.600 --> 0:13:23.760
<v Speaker 2>That's a great way to describe that. I'm really impressed

0:13:23.800 --> 0:13:27.000
<v Speaker 2>with that. So from Tiger you go to front Point

0:13:27.160 --> 0:13:31.960
<v Speaker 2>Partners and helped turn it into a truly institutionalized hedge fund.

0:13:32.200 --> 0:13:33.760
<v Speaker 2>Tell us a little bit about front Point.

0:13:34.640 --> 0:13:37.720
<v Speaker 3>So I got a call from the two original founders

0:13:37.760 --> 0:13:40.480
<v Speaker 3>of front Point and they asked me to look at

0:13:40.480 --> 0:13:43.560
<v Speaker 3>the business plan and to give them a critique, which

0:13:43.600 --> 0:13:45.840
<v Speaker 3>I did. I thought it was fascinating at the time.

0:13:45.880 --> 0:13:49.000
<v Speaker 3>A lot of hedge funds were frankly run as almost

0:13:49.040 --> 0:13:50.720
<v Speaker 3>like family offices as a business.

0:13:51.520 --> 0:13:54.880
<v Speaker 2>The third of the capital was the founders half the

0:13:54.960 --> 0:13:55.640
<v Speaker 2>time any.

0:13:55.520 --> 0:13:58.920
<v Speaker 3>Way, right, and most of the investment capital came from

0:13:59.040 --> 0:14:03.120
<v Speaker 3>ultra high net worth family offices like Memphis, Mafia and others.

0:14:03.240 --> 0:14:09.240
<v Speaker 3>And so there was a view that institutions would begin

0:14:09.360 --> 0:14:17.040
<v Speaker 3>to embrace alternative strategies, and for them to embrace alternative strategies,

0:14:17.360 --> 0:14:19.920
<v Speaker 3>the firms they would allocate capital to would need to

0:14:19.960 --> 0:14:23.080
<v Speaker 3>look like the institutional asset managers they were used to

0:14:23.120 --> 0:14:25.560
<v Speaker 3>like in the traditional mutual fund business. But a lot

0:14:25.560 --> 0:14:27.240
<v Speaker 3>of hedge funds didn't look and feel that way. They

0:14:27.280 --> 0:14:30.360
<v Speaker 3>were run more like family offices. And so we had

0:14:30.400 --> 0:14:35.520
<v Speaker 3>a view that by forming a real institutional quality asset

0:14:35.560 --> 0:14:42.200
<v Speaker 3>management firm that would house diversified strategies and managers who

0:14:42.240 --> 0:14:46.600
<v Speaker 3>could provide absolute return strategies to these institutional clients, that

0:14:46.600 --> 0:14:49.440
<v Speaker 3>that would be embraced. It would be embraced because of

0:14:49.480 --> 0:14:52.040
<v Speaker 3>the excellence of the investment teams, but also by the

0:14:53.400 --> 0:14:58.600
<v Speaker 3>world class investment asset management infrastructure that we would build

0:14:58.600 --> 0:15:00.600
<v Speaker 3>with front Point. And so that was the thesis. You know,

0:15:00.600 --> 0:15:04.760
<v Speaker 3>you're going back to two thousand now, and to be

0:15:04.880 --> 0:15:08.200
<v Speaker 3>invited to join a firm, and these guys were in

0:15:08.240 --> 0:15:10.400
<v Speaker 3>their fifties. I was, you know, twenty nine, thirty years

0:15:10.400 --> 0:15:12.600
<v Speaker 3>old to build a company. It was an exciting thing

0:15:12.680 --> 0:15:15.840
<v Speaker 3>for me. At the time. I still wanted to become

0:15:16.320 --> 0:15:18.760
<v Speaker 3>Paul tuter Jones. I wanted to be a macro investor.

0:15:18.800 --> 0:15:21.680
<v Speaker 3>I wanted to be an investment manager. But I thought,

0:15:21.960 --> 0:15:25.240
<v Speaker 3>I'll start by helping these individuals help build this firm,

0:15:25.280 --> 0:15:27.960
<v Speaker 3>and then I'll go back to running a fund, probably

0:15:27.960 --> 0:15:30.200
<v Speaker 3>at front point, And didn't you.

0:15:30.200 --> 0:15:34.320
<v Speaker 2>Begin at from point as CIO and eventually became co CEO.

0:15:34.440 --> 0:15:37.240
<v Speaker 3>I was the head of manager's selection and overseeing the

0:15:37.320 --> 0:15:41.200
<v Speaker 3>investment teams. Then I became chief investment officer and head

0:15:41.200 --> 0:15:43.520
<v Speaker 3>of the multi strategy, and then I became co CEO

0:15:43.600 --> 0:15:45.480
<v Speaker 3>of the firm. So it was an evolution over time.

0:15:48.160 --> 0:15:50.560
<v Speaker 3>But at the outset, you know, hiring the investment teams,

0:15:50.600 --> 0:15:53.320
<v Speaker 3>overseeing what they were doing, picking and selecting them was

0:15:53.360 --> 0:15:57.760
<v Speaker 3>a fascinating job for me. I loved learning about different approaches,

0:15:57.880 --> 0:16:00.800
<v Speaker 3>you know, market wizards, stock market wizards, all the different

0:16:00.800 --> 0:16:02.960
<v Speaker 3>ways you could skin a cat with investing. So it

0:16:03.040 --> 0:16:05.400
<v Speaker 3>was like a kid in a candy store and I

0:16:05.520 --> 0:16:09.960
<v Speaker 3>began to reflect on my career at that time, in

0:16:10.000 --> 0:16:13.200
<v Speaker 3>that everyone goes into the investment business with the mindset

0:16:13.240 --> 0:16:15.480
<v Speaker 3>of I want to become a great investor. I want

0:16:15.520 --> 0:16:18.000
<v Speaker 3>to become Warren Buffett, I want to become Julian Robertson.

0:16:18.040 --> 0:16:20.480
<v Speaker 3>I want to become Paul Truder Jones. I was no different.

0:16:21.240 --> 0:16:23.560
<v Speaker 3>That is a very crowded pond and a lot of

0:16:23.680 --> 0:16:26.080
<v Speaker 3>luck and things have to go your way to conspire

0:16:26.160 --> 0:16:28.680
<v Speaker 3>to result that way to become one of the top

0:16:28.680 --> 0:16:32.320
<v Speaker 3>decile quartile managers out there. And I thought at the time,

0:16:32.400 --> 0:16:35.320
<v Speaker 3>you know, building an asset management company like this, like

0:16:35.360 --> 0:16:37.160
<v Speaker 3>I'm doing with my partner's at front Point. You know,

0:16:37.200 --> 0:16:39.280
<v Speaker 3>I'm a young guy, my whole career ahead of me,

0:16:39.520 --> 0:16:41.080
<v Speaker 3>and I thought, you know, actually, if I spent my

0:16:41.160 --> 0:16:45.480
<v Speaker 3>career building asset management companies and managing them, that could

0:16:45.480 --> 0:16:48.720
<v Speaker 3>be a pretty you know, robust career. I could really

0:16:48.800 --> 0:16:50.840
<v Speaker 3>enjoy myself. And it's a pond no one seems to

0:16:50.840 --> 0:16:53.720
<v Speaker 3>be fishing in, and maybe twenty years from now this

0:16:53.800 --> 0:16:57.160
<v Speaker 3>might result in something. And so it was at that moment,

0:16:57.560 --> 0:17:00.640
<v Speaker 3>you know, within front Point, that I began to move

0:17:01.200 --> 0:17:06.080
<v Speaker 3>away from investing professionally in the markets and more building

0:17:06.119 --> 0:17:09.960
<v Speaker 3>investment organizations and overseeing investment managers and strategies.

0:17:10.040 --> 0:17:14.160
<v Speaker 2>So the next step along your career path you join

0:17:14.400 --> 0:17:16.600
<v Speaker 2>ORX asset Management as CEO.

0:17:17.480 --> 0:17:20.920
<v Speaker 3>Right, So we'd sold from point to Morgan Stanley. I'd

0:17:20.960 --> 0:17:23.879
<v Speaker 3>run with my partner there for a few years. I

0:17:24.000 --> 0:17:27.119
<v Speaker 3>was hired away from ORX to be the CEO of

0:17:27.200 --> 0:17:30.720
<v Speaker 3>their asset management unit. So Japanese holding company, they were

0:17:30.760 --> 0:17:33.840
<v Speaker 3>looking to diversify their holdings into the US and into

0:17:33.920 --> 0:17:38.000
<v Speaker 3>various industries, one of them being asset management. They had

0:17:38.040 --> 0:17:40.320
<v Speaker 3>a lot of capital to deploy and a low cost

0:17:40.320 --> 0:17:42.920
<v Speaker 3>of capital being a Japanese holding company, and I thought

0:17:43.200 --> 0:17:47.000
<v Speaker 3>I could exceed that hurdle and build something here. So

0:17:47.040 --> 0:17:49.640
<v Speaker 3>it was back in twenty twelve, and it was during

0:17:49.680 --> 0:17:52.600
<v Speaker 3>the pigs crisis, you know, and thinking about where could

0:17:52.680 --> 0:17:55.920
<v Speaker 3>we acquire compelling asset management.

0:17:56.280 --> 0:17:59.119
<v Speaker 2>Let me interrupt you for the people who might not

0:17:59.280 --> 0:18:02.920
<v Speaker 2>have been traded through Brexit, Grexit, whatever the pigs crisis

0:18:03.720 --> 0:18:07.159
<v Speaker 2>was Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain, that.

0:18:07.480 --> 0:18:12.200
<v Speaker 3>Correct, that's correct, And at that time the European Central

0:18:12.240 --> 0:18:14.960
<v Speaker 3>Bank and some of the local national banks of these

0:18:14.960 --> 0:18:20.200
<v Speaker 3>European countries were encouraging financial parties to divest of their

0:18:20.240 --> 0:18:23.760
<v Speaker 3>non core holdings. And so as we were thinking about,

0:18:24.000 --> 0:18:26.400
<v Speaker 3>you know, where in the world could we deploy capital

0:18:26.520 --> 0:18:31.560
<v Speaker 3>to acquire asset management capabilities, Europe seemed a logical place

0:18:31.840 --> 0:18:36.960
<v Speaker 3>because there was a force selling happening and so there

0:18:37.000 --> 0:18:40.840
<v Speaker 3>was a jewel in the Crown of Rabobanks Holdings private

0:18:40.840 --> 0:18:45.440
<v Speaker 3>bank in the Netherlands, and they needed to divest of Robiko,

0:18:45.600 --> 0:18:49.359
<v Speaker 3>which had been around for which giant three hundred billion

0:18:49.400 --> 0:18:55.280
<v Speaker 3>dollars plus and they had purchased that historically and had

0:18:55.320 --> 0:18:57.800
<v Speaker 3>owned it, but it was non core to their to

0:18:57.840 --> 0:19:02.360
<v Speaker 3>their private bank, and so we positioned ourselves as an

0:19:02.400 --> 0:19:08.240
<v Speaker 3>advantageous buyer to them. We purchased it a very attractive valuation,

0:19:09.240 --> 0:19:13.560
<v Speaker 3>was the largest in orcx's history. We acquired that capability,

0:19:13.800 --> 0:19:18.399
<v Speaker 3>and you know, at the time, it was exciting to

0:19:18.400 --> 0:19:21.679
<v Speaker 3>get that deal done. We had bought another stakes and

0:19:21.720 --> 0:19:26.800
<v Speaker 3>other managers in the alternative space, but really I wanted

0:19:26.800 --> 0:19:31.920
<v Speaker 3>to do something more entrepreneurial again, and so I began

0:19:32.000 --> 0:19:35.280
<v Speaker 3>to look at what is the next business with an

0:19:35.359 --> 0:19:38.359
<v Speaker 3>asset management like From point that I could, you know,

0:19:38.400 --> 0:19:41.240
<v Speaker 3>set my career out to build. And that is how

0:19:41.640 --> 0:19:45.200
<v Speaker 3>the inception of coming across what was then Franklin Square

0:19:45.240 --> 0:19:46.920
<v Speaker 3>now Future Standard came about.

0:19:47.200 --> 0:19:51.040
<v Speaker 2>So when you joined, did you join as CIO or

0:19:51.080 --> 0:19:53.080
<v Speaker 2>president or what was the initial role?

0:19:53.400 --> 0:19:57.560
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? So I was introduced to Michael Forman, the founder

0:19:57.560 --> 0:20:01.040
<v Speaker 3>of Franklin Square, through a head hunter friend of mine,

0:20:01.040 --> 0:20:04.919
<v Speaker 3>Scott Fletcher, and I was also introduced by Bennett Goodman

0:20:05.000 --> 0:20:09.240
<v Speaker 3>and Doug Ostrover at GSO and Blackstone, and they had

0:20:09.400 --> 0:20:11.320
<v Speaker 3>encouraged me to go and meet with their partner who

0:20:11.400 --> 0:20:14.520
<v Speaker 3>they had partnered with. As I was describing what I

0:20:14.520 --> 0:20:18.480
<v Speaker 3>thought the next big thing in asset management would be

0:20:18.640 --> 0:20:22.879
<v Speaker 3>would be the arc of history of bringing alternatives from

0:20:23.119 --> 0:20:26.280
<v Speaker 3>family offices and ultra high network throughout the eighties and nineties,

0:20:26.320 --> 0:20:29.880
<v Speaker 3>and then the endowment model with David Swinson. Eventually institutions

0:20:29.920 --> 0:20:33.879
<v Speaker 3>began adopting it. The one constituency that was still left

0:20:33.920 --> 0:20:37.760
<v Speaker 3>out were the individual investors below ultra high net worth

0:20:37.840 --> 0:20:42.640
<v Speaker 3>and family offices. And so I had a view that

0:20:42.800 --> 0:20:44.840
<v Speaker 3>at some point that would change, and I wanted to

0:20:44.880 --> 0:20:47.520
<v Speaker 3>help effectuate that change. And that is where I was

0:20:47.560 --> 0:20:51.160
<v Speaker 3>introduced to Michael Foreman and his vision for what he

0:20:51.200 --> 0:20:54.159
<v Speaker 3>was doing with Franklin Square and had been doing. And

0:20:54.200 --> 0:21:01.439
<v Speaker 3>he had built this incredible chassis around productizing andributing income

0:21:01.480 --> 0:21:06.160
<v Speaker 3>strategies and convinced me to join up with him as president.

0:21:06.240 --> 0:21:09.000
<v Speaker 3>To go join him and you know, be the chief

0:21:09.040 --> 0:21:15.440
<v Speaker 3>investment officer, help build out the asset management capability. Now,

0:21:15.480 --> 0:21:21.560
<v Speaker 3>at the time, Franklin Square was a product and distribution firm,

0:21:21.760 --> 0:21:24.159
<v Speaker 3>so they were creating the rappers and distributed them. But

0:21:24.359 --> 0:21:28.480
<v Speaker 3>other external parties at the time Blackstone were the ones

0:21:28.520 --> 0:21:32.600
<v Speaker 3>subadvising and providing all of the investment acumen. And as

0:21:32.640 --> 0:21:36.359
<v Speaker 3>I would describe it today, and I use this analogy

0:21:36.440 --> 0:21:40.680
<v Speaker 3>of Netflix, it was like seeing the red envelopes and DVDs,

0:21:40.400 --> 0:21:45.200
<v Speaker 3>but Michael had created this incredible distribution engine, one hundred

0:21:45.200 --> 0:21:48.880
<v Speaker 3>million person mailing list type of you know, distribution capability.

0:21:48.880 --> 0:21:52.560
<v Speaker 3>And just like Netflix figured out how to digitize their

0:21:52.600 --> 0:21:56.360
<v Speaker 3>business and create their own in house TV and movie studio.

0:21:57.080 --> 0:21:58.639
<v Speaker 3>You know, that was my pitch to Michael, as you

0:21:58.640 --> 0:22:02.120
<v Speaker 3>could eventually diversify this product base and you could bring

0:22:02.160 --> 0:22:05.720
<v Speaker 3>in house capabilities so long as the quality is still

0:22:05.840 --> 0:22:09.600
<v Speaker 3>very high, you can put it through these channels and

0:22:09.960 --> 0:22:13.600
<v Speaker 3>offer them to private wealth clients. And so that's what

0:22:13.640 --> 0:22:15.040
<v Speaker 3>we set out to do.

0:22:16.080 --> 0:22:20.800
<v Speaker 2>Really fascinating coming up we continue our conversation with Mike Kelly,

0:22:21.080 --> 0:22:25.640
<v Speaker 2>chief investment Officer and president of Future Standard, discussing how

0:22:25.680 --> 0:22:29.320
<v Speaker 2>he helped build the company into a ninety billion dollar

0:22:29.880 --> 0:22:34.880
<v Speaker 2>multi strategy platform for wealth management clients. I'm Barry Ridults.

0:22:34.880 --> 0:22:50.600
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I'm

0:22:50.640 --> 0:22:54.000
<v Speaker 2>Barry Ridults. You're listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

0:22:54.280 --> 0:22:57.960
<v Speaker 2>My extra special guest this week is Mike Kelly. He's

0:22:58.040 --> 0:23:01.600
<v Speaker 2>president and chief investment officer a Future Standard. They are

0:23:01.640 --> 0:23:05.879
<v Speaker 2>an alternatives manager focused on the wealth channel, running over

0:23:06.400 --> 0:23:11.040
<v Speaker 2>ninety billion dollars in client assets. You know, when you

0:23:11.280 --> 0:23:15.600
<v Speaker 2>joined what was Franklin Square before it became Future Standard

0:23:16.040 --> 0:23:21.240
<v Speaker 2>FS Investments, they effectively had one credit strategy plus whatever

0:23:21.280 --> 0:23:24.720
<v Speaker 2>they were reselling on behalf of other people all over

0:23:24.800 --> 0:23:28.640
<v Speaker 2>ten billion dollars. You're almost ten times the size now

0:23:28.640 --> 0:23:33.520
<v Speaker 2>with a full multi strategy platform. How did that evolution

0:23:33.680 --> 0:23:37.280
<v Speaker 2>come about? What were the key inflection points? Was that

0:23:37.400 --> 0:23:42.280
<v Speaker 2>a tough sale to get everybody in house to accept that, hey,

0:23:42.280 --> 0:23:44.119
<v Speaker 2>we have a nice little business here, Mike, why do

0:23:44.119 --> 0:23:45.000
<v Speaker 2>you want to mess with it?

0:23:45.920 --> 0:23:51.000
<v Speaker 3>Well, there was a nice business there, and change comes

0:23:51.040 --> 0:23:58.160
<v Speaker 3>with resistance. But I think we've had a fortuitous progress

0:23:58.160 --> 0:24:00.800
<v Speaker 3>of change over the last twelve years. And I would

0:24:00.800 --> 0:24:07.640
<v Speaker 3>say it started out with forming multiple partnerships with various

0:24:07.680 --> 0:24:11.920
<v Speaker 3>outside firms that Michael and I had relationships with the

0:24:12.080 --> 0:24:17.240
<v Speaker 3>likes of KKR and Golden Tree, Rialto and real Estate EIG,

0:24:17.640 --> 0:24:25.080
<v Speaker 3>Magnetar Wilshire in order to create some diversified strategies that

0:24:25.119 --> 0:24:28.440
<v Speaker 3>we could offer to clients with best of breed managers

0:24:28.440 --> 0:24:31.520
<v Speaker 3>across various disciplines. And so that was the first stage

0:24:31.520 --> 0:24:37.000
<v Speaker 3>of evolution, was moving into more of a multi manager architecture.

0:24:37.800 --> 0:24:41.800
<v Speaker 3>Concurrent to that, I began to hire internal talent, which

0:24:41.840 --> 0:24:44.000
<v Speaker 3>is something similar to what I had done at front Point,

0:24:44.160 --> 0:24:47.320
<v Speaker 3>and brought in individuals like Andrew Beckman and helped him

0:24:47.560 --> 0:24:51.479
<v Speaker 3>build out his internal private credit team. We made some

0:24:51.520 --> 0:24:57.480
<v Speaker 3>acquisitions as well and Chiron Asset Management, Portfolio Advisors, Post

0:24:57.560 --> 0:25:01.479
<v Speaker 3>Road Group in various disciplines, and so it was a

0:25:01.520 --> 0:25:09.800
<v Speaker 3>combination of an evolution of external partnerships, in house hiring

0:25:09.840 --> 0:25:13.600
<v Speaker 3>and talent and development and growing those and acquisitions sort

0:25:13.640 --> 0:25:17.919
<v Speaker 3>of inorganic acquisitions of capabilities and managers to bring on.

0:25:18.640 --> 0:25:23.320
<v Speaker 3>And I'd say starting from this inception of packaging and distribution,

0:25:24.240 --> 0:25:31.200
<v Speaker 3>we then evolved into a diversified asset manager. And then

0:25:31.800 --> 0:25:37.840
<v Speaker 3>after this series of in house capabilities and acquisitions, we

0:25:37.920 --> 0:25:42.680
<v Speaker 3>adapted the firm into what I would call a true

0:25:43.359 --> 0:25:46.679
<v Speaker 3>alternative platform. You know, a platform, And I'll distinguish a

0:25:46.680 --> 0:25:49.120
<v Speaker 3>platform from a diversified asset management because I do think

0:25:49.160 --> 0:25:53.439
<v Speaker 3>they are different. Diverse fied asset manager, you have different

0:25:53.440 --> 0:25:56.640
<v Speaker 3>strategies that you offered to clients, but those strategies don't

0:25:56.640 --> 0:25:59.159
<v Speaker 3>have to interrelate at all with one another, and there

0:25:59.240 --> 0:26:03.920
<v Speaker 3>may be no shared set of relationships or gleaned insights

0:26:03.960 --> 0:26:08.440
<v Speaker 3>or what have you. A platform, as I would call it,

0:26:08.480 --> 0:26:13.280
<v Speaker 3>is more interwoven. There's more collaboration, there's shared underwriting, their

0:26:13.280 --> 0:26:18.240
<v Speaker 3>shared origination and relationships for deal flow, there's an exchange

0:26:18.240 --> 0:26:25.600
<v Speaker 3>of insights and specializations, all with the intention of improving

0:26:25.720 --> 0:26:32.199
<v Speaker 3>outcomes for clients. And that evolution if you will. You know,

0:26:32.240 --> 0:26:35.119
<v Speaker 3>it's easy to wipeboard that out and describe we're going

0:26:35.160 --> 0:26:38.679
<v Speaker 3>to do this to your point, it's really hard to

0:26:38.800 --> 0:26:40.760
<v Speaker 3>actually execute on that.

0:26:41.400 --> 0:26:45.920
<v Speaker 2>So there's an underlying thesis in this. Once this full

0:26:46.000 --> 0:26:50.320
<v Speaker 2>platform is built out, Hey, there is a giant wealth

0:26:50.400 --> 0:26:53.159
<v Speaker 2>channel that a lot of alts are not tapping. Into

0:26:53.720 --> 0:26:57.960
<v Speaker 2>it's the next great frontier. High net worth mass affluent

0:26:58.520 --> 0:27:01.720
<v Speaker 2>wants the same sort of access to strategies that they

0:27:01.760 --> 0:27:06.560
<v Speaker 2>see foundations and Dowmans institutions having access to tell us

0:27:06.600 --> 0:27:10.080
<v Speaker 2>a little bit about how you see that opportunity, How

0:27:10.160 --> 0:27:13.560
<v Speaker 2>large is it, how much has already been captured? Where

0:27:13.600 --> 0:27:16.840
<v Speaker 2>are we in the cycle of this getting pushed out

0:27:16.920 --> 0:27:18.320
<v Speaker 2>to mom and pop investors.

0:27:19.280 --> 0:27:24.320
<v Speaker 3>So backing up to when Michael first started Franklin Square,

0:27:25.080 --> 0:27:28.199
<v Speaker 3>this is now back in seven eight, launched the fund

0:27:29.080 --> 0:27:34.320
<v Speaker 3>in January vote nine. So auspicious, great timing for a

0:27:34.359 --> 0:27:39.240
<v Speaker 3>credit strategy and delivering income to individual investors through the

0:27:39.240 --> 0:27:43.000
<v Speaker 3>independent broker dealer channel. And you know, if you remember

0:27:43.040 --> 0:27:48.679
<v Speaker 3>that time, you had this declining yield environment and the

0:27:48.720 --> 0:27:52.000
<v Speaker 3>FED cutting rates over that course of time, and so

0:27:52.040 --> 0:27:54.680
<v Speaker 3>there was a search for income, particularly for retirement accounts.

0:27:55.000 --> 0:27:56.680
<v Speaker 3>And so in the early days, a lot of our

0:27:56.720 --> 0:28:00.960
<v Speaker 3>offerings were income strategies, income oriented, whether it's middle market

0:28:01.040 --> 0:28:07.159
<v Speaker 3>lending clos offering, our real estate lending strategies and so

0:28:07.240 --> 0:28:12.680
<v Speaker 3>for so generating income. And I think we saw that

0:28:14.760 --> 0:28:18.359
<v Speaker 3>post Great post a Great financial crisis, banks would begin

0:28:18.440 --> 0:28:22.280
<v Speaker 3>to withdraw from those lending activities and see those over

0:28:22.359 --> 0:28:26.000
<v Speaker 3>to asset managers and direct lenders like ourselves, but also

0:28:26.960 --> 0:28:30.480
<v Speaker 3>that private wealth and individual investors would begin to embrace

0:28:30.760 --> 0:28:35.040
<v Speaker 3>these strategies to pick up income sources. And so those

0:28:35.040 --> 0:28:38.680
<v Speaker 3>two trends I think we got correct. What we probably

0:28:40.440 --> 0:28:43.600
<v Speaker 3>didn't foresee was the adoption curve. I think we probably

0:28:43.640 --> 0:28:45.600
<v Speaker 3>assumed it would be more linear than it actually turned

0:28:45.640 --> 0:28:47.880
<v Speaker 3>out to be. It took longer you think about it.

0:28:47.920 --> 0:28:49.920
<v Speaker 3>This is now going back. I mean, Franklin Square has

0:28:49.920 --> 0:28:52.880
<v Speaker 3>started almost twenty years ago. It's very topical today, and

0:28:52.920 --> 0:28:54.760
<v Speaker 3>we've seen a lot of flows in the last five

0:28:54.840 --> 0:28:58.160
<v Speaker 3>plus years, but it has been more recent that adoption

0:28:58.800 --> 0:29:02.560
<v Speaker 3>picking up and being spoken about across the entire industry.

0:29:03.200 --> 0:29:07.840
<v Speaker 3>So I do think there's been this arc of evolution

0:29:08.160 --> 0:29:12.120
<v Speaker 3>and adoption, but I would tell you Barry, it's still

0:29:12.280 --> 0:29:14.960
<v Speaker 3>very much in the early days, given the dynamics of

0:29:15.000 --> 0:29:16.560
<v Speaker 3>private companies and their capital needs.

0:29:16.600 --> 0:29:20.440
<v Speaker 2>So let's put that into a little context. The twenty tens,

0:29:21.160 --> 0:29:24.200
<v Speaker 2>you not only had zero interest rate policy of ZYRUP,

0:29:24.280 --> 0:29:27.400
<v Speaker 2>you had QE, you had Operation Twist, like the FED

0:29:27.480 --> 0:29:30.440
<v Speaker 2>did everything it could do to make cash trash and

0:29:30.560 --> 0:29:35.800
<v Speaker 2>force people off the sidelines. Hence, Tina, there is no

0:29:36.120 --> 0:29:41.000
<v Speaker 2>alternative became popular. In hindsight, it's kind of surprising that

0:29:41.080 --> 0:29:45.560
<v Speaker 2>it took private credit as long as it did to

0:29:45.720 --> 0:29:48.840
<v Speaker 2>really find a bit Like you would think in that

0:29:48.960 --> 0:29:51.760
<v Speaker 2>era of zero interest rates, Hey we're going to give

0:29:51.760 --> 0:29:54.680
<v Speaker 2>you seven percent, but it's variable. If the Fed raises rates,

0:29:55.120 --> 0:29:58.240
<v Speaker 2>we should see you bump up in yields. What was

0:29:58.280 --> 0:30:02.720
<v Speaker 2>it like building out into that environment as a not

0:30:02.840 --> 0:30:05.680
<v Speaker 2>just as an executor, but also as an investor as.

0:30:05.520 --> 0:30:09.720
<v Speaker 3>A c Yeah, I would say two things. One's a

0:30:09.800 --> 0:30:13.200
<v Speaker 3>market backdrop issue in one's more of an operational issue

0:30:13.480 --> 0:30:16.520
<v Speaker 3>on the market backdrop issue, I define this golden era

0:30:16.560 --> 0:30:20.040
<v Speaker 3>of investing is post vulker like nineteen eighty seven up

0:30:20.120 --> 0:30:23.360
<v Speaker 3>until twenty twenty one. As we're coming out of COVID,

0:30:23.600 --> 0:30:26.520
<v Speaker 3>And if you look at a chart of spectacle US

0:30:26.560 --> 0:30:32.760
<v Speaker 3>stocks and bond prices, sixty forty made incredible sense. You

0:30:32.880 --> 0:30:38.080
<v Speaker 3>had disinflationary forces, you had benign demographics, you had globalization,

0:30:39.200 --> 0:30:41.560
<v Speaker 3>and it was great to set it and forget it

0:30:41.600 --> 0:30:42.960
<v Speaker 3>with a sixty forty mix.

0:30:43.680 --> 0:30:47.320
<v Speaker 2>That era was a thirty five year bull market in bonds.

0:30:47.320 --> 0:30:48.200
<v Speaker 3>That incredible.

0:30:48.520 --> 0:30:53.320
<v Speaker 2>There are long stretches where fixed income is outperforming equity

0:30:53.040 --> 0:30:54.440
<v Speaker 2>in that run.

0:30:54.280 --> 0:31:00.560
<v Speaker 3>Right, So why do you need an alternative right? If

0:31:00.600 --> 0:31:04.960
<v Speaker 3>the music sounds great, you don't need alternative music. When

0:31:05.000 --> 0:31:09.560
<v Speaker 3>the music is all crap. Nirvana comes along, right, and

0:31:09.680 --> 0:31:16.040
<v Speaker 3>so I think the experience that investors had was proved

0:31:16.080 --> 0:31:19.080
<v Speaker 3>to me, I need something else, and it hasn't really

0:31:19.240 --> 0:31:22.760
<v Speaker 3>been you know, particularly with fixed income. Right when you

0:31:22.800 --> 0:31:25.360
<v Speaker 3>think about the experience of the last six years or

0:31:25.440 --> 0:31:28.960
<v Speaker 3>so where high duration fixed income has not been great

0:31:29.000 --> 0:31:31.880
<v Speaker 3>at all, that's forty percent of your traditional portfolio that's

0:31:32.000 --> 0:31:36.720
<v Speaker 3>just stopped working overnight. And so that catalyzed a lot

0:31:36.800 --> 0:31:41.200
<v Speaker 3>more inquiry into diversified sources of private market income, private returns,

0:31:41.240 --> 0:31:44.520
<v Speaker 3>and so forth. The other issue that slowed the adoption

0:31:44.640 --> 0:31:47.680
<v Speaker 3>curve is on the operational infrastructure side, and it's something

0:31:47.720 --> 0:31:51.520
<v Speaker 3>that the likes of Lawrence at I Capital and Matt

0:31:51.400 --> 0:31:54.720
<v Speaker 3>A Case have been solving for. But it was really

0:31:54.720 --> 0:31:57.080
<v Speaker 3>clunky in the early days. You had you know, double

0:31:57.160 --> 0:31:59.440
<v Speaker 3>layers or fees, you had feeder funds, you had high

0:31:59.440 --> 0:32:03.600
<v Speaker 3>loads K one I say, just not something that the

0:32:03.840 --> 0:32:08.120
<v Speaker 3>individual investor and their advisors wanted to embrace, understandably, because

0:32:08.160 --> 0:32:10.600
<v Speaker 3>you had to fill out by hand a subdoc for

0:32:10.720 --> 0:32:16.200
<v Speaker 3>every single investor and so both the MAC market backdrop

0:32:16.720 --> 0:32:21.280
<v Speaker 3>changing and morphing and opening up people's minds, as well

0:32:21.320 --> 0:32:25.959
<v Speaker 3>as access and operational infrastructure. And we'll get to this,

0:32:26.040 --> 0:32:30.640
<v Speaker 3>but education, which we're clumsily, you know, getting our way

0:32:30.640 --> 0:32:34.720
<v Speaker 3>to educating these strategies, how they work, these structures, how

0:32:34.720 --> 0:32:37.680
<v Speaker 3>to embrace them, how to incorporate them into portfolio. You know,

0:32:37.720 --> 0:32:40.080
<v Speaker 3>that took time. It just took time for the whole

0:32:40.080 --> 0:32:42.960
<v Speaker 3>industry to get there. And I feel like we're finally

0:32:43.000 --> 0:32:45.920
<v Speaker 3>at the point where we're arriving. But as I said earlier,

0:32:46.240 --> 0:32:50.360
<v Speaker 3>I still look at this adoption and penetration from these

0:32:50.400 --> 0:32:51.840
<v Speaker 3>investors as very early.

0:32:52.240 --> 0:32:55.120
<v Speaker 2>How much of an accelerant was twenty twenty two with

0:32:55.320 --> 0:32:58.480
<v Speaker 2>the what was it, five hundred and fifty basis points

0:32:58.520 --> 0:33:03.479
<v Speaker 2>of rate hikes if your long duration, well that's going

0:33:03.520 --> 0:33:06.800
<v Speaker 2>to really leave a mark. What did that year do

0:33:07.720 --> 0:33:12.080
<v Speaker 2>to acceptance of alternatives from that wealth channel?

0:33:12.400 --> 0:33:17.280
<v Speaker 3>So two things, One was positive and one was more

0:33:17.280 --> 0:33:19.920
<v Speaker 3>of a challenge. The positive side of things was with

0:33:20.360 --> 0:33:25.400
<v Speaker 3>the backup of duration of the long yields that began

0:33:25.840 --> 0:33:31.040
<v Speaker 3>to challenge the traditional fixed income side of the portfolio.

0:33:31.080 --> 0:33:33.120
<v Speaker 3>So if you think about the traditional fixed income portfolio,

0:33:33.160 --> 0:33:36.680
<v Speaker 3>I think about fixed income risk in three ways liquidity,

0:33:37.480 --> 0:33:40.560
<v Speaker 3>credit risk, and duration. And so most people had very

0:33:40.600 --> 0:33:44.000
<v Speaker 3>long duration, highly liquid, low credit risk investments and treasuries

0:33:44.520 --> 0:33:49.600
<v Speaker 3>and agency bonds and mortgage securities, municipal securities that began

0:33:49.680 --> 0:33:53.280
<v Speaker 3>to fail them and not provide the ballast against equities

0:33:53.320 --> 0:33:56.200
<v Speaker 3>it had been and it didn't provide the income because

0:33:56.280 --> 0:33:59.760
<v Speaker 3>duration was working against you. So that was a positive

0:33:59.760 --> 0:34:04.440
<v Speaker 3>four for let's find something else. The negative force was

0:34:04.440 --> 0:34:07.080
<v Speaker 3>going from zero to five percent. People went from not

0:34:07.160 --> 0:34:10.000
<v Speaker 3>earning anything on their cash and needing to deploy it

0:34:10.040 --> 0:34:12.560
<v Speaker 3>to make any money, to oh, wait a minute, I

0:34:12.600 --> 0:34:15.200
<v Speaker 3>haven't made money on my cash in a long time.

0:34:15.800 --> 0:34:17.239
<v Speaker 3>Five percent sounds pretty good.

0:34:17.400 --> 0:34:21.279
<v Speaker 2>Money market five and change was great it especially when.

0:34:22.440 --> 0:34:25.120
<v Speaker 3>The time Yeah, yeah, for sure. And so you began

0:34:25.200 --> 0:34:30.000
<v Speaker 3>to see some hoarding of cash balances that only began

0:34:30.160 --> 0:34:33.080
<v Speaker 3>to be deployed as the FED started to cut that

0:34:33.239 --> 0:34:34.280
<v Speaker 3>those rates again.

0:34:34.200 --> 0:34:36.520
<v Speaker 2>I would imagine the inverted yield curve around that time

0:34:36.640 --> 0:34:38.920
<v Speaker 2>was problematical. So why do I want to tie up

0:34:38.920 --> 0:34:43.239
<v Speaker 2>money if liquid money market is yielding even more?

0:34:43.360 --> 0:34:44.000
<v Speaker 3>Most definitely?

0:34:44.120 --> 0:34:49.160
<v Speaker 2>Huh really interesting. So, so you've described the current environment

0:34:49.960 --> 0:34:56.000
<v Speaker 2>as having created a new investing imperative, focus, research, flexibility

0:34:56.000 --> 0:35:00.439
<v Speaker 2>to change course, conviction. Tell us about what you see

0:35:00.520 --> 0:35:05.960
<v Speaker 2>is the modern investing imperative around alternatives.

0:35:06.800 --> 0:35:12.440
<v Speaker 3>Right, So we all know about the decline and the

0:35:12.560 --> 0:35:16.400
<v Speaker 3>number of publicly traded companies. If we were coming out

0:35:16.440 --> 0:35:19.040
<v Speaker 3>of college, it was nine thousand. Today you know barely

0:35:19.080 --> 0:35:24.839
<v Speaker 3>four thousand. Both the number of private companies and the

0:35:24.880 --> 0:35:29.719
<v Speaker 3>size of private companies has exploded, and the opportunity to

0:35:29.760 --> 0:35:33.880
<v Speaker 3>invest in these private companies has increased dramatically as well

0:35:33.920 --> 0:35:38.040
<v Speaker 3>as the access and the availability and those companies taking

0:35:38.040 --> 0:35:42.240
<v Speaker 3>advantage of access to private equity and direct lending sources

0:35:42.520 --> 0:35:47.640
<v Speaker 3>of financing. And that allows for a much broader palette

0:35:47.800 --> 0:35:52.400
<v Speaker 3>for investors to build portfolios with by accessing those companies.

0:35:53.000 --> 0:35:57.480
<v Speaker 3>And I would say very increasingly, in order to get diversification,

0:35:57.600 --> 0:36:00.880
<v Speaker 3>or to build diversification, you do have to look outside

0:36:00.920 --> 0:36:05.480
<v Speaker 3>of public stocks and bonds. The stock market is becoming

0:36:05.560 --> 0:36:08.279
<v Speaker 3>less and less representative of the total economy as it

0:36:08.400 --> 0:36:11.840
<v Speaker 3>used to be. It's very concentrated right now in AI

0:36:12.000 --> 0:36:14.640
<v Speaker 3>infrastructure and the mag seven and the build out there.

0:36:15.040 --> 0:36:19.759
<v Speaker 3>And you have, you know, myriad number of private companies

0:36:20.000 --> 0:36:22.920
<v Speaker 3>of you know, small to mid size and some larger

0:36:22.960 --> 0:36:26.120
<v Speaker 3>size that provide you access to what's really driving the

0:36:26.239 --> 0:36:29.200
<v Speaker 3>US economy. We call that the middle market. And the

0:36:29.200 --> 0:36:32.240
<v Speaker 3>middle market are you know, a couple hundred thousand plus

0:36:32.280 --> 0:36:36.400
<v Speaker 3>companies that drive the US economy that are not publicly traded.

0:36:37.120 --> 0:36:39.360
<v Speaker 3>We define the middle market as companies of a billion

0:36:39.400 --> 0:36:42.240
<v Speaker 3>dollars of enterprise value and down, so sort of lower

0:36:42.239 --> 0:36:46.719
<v Speaker 3>and core middle market. And these are businesses that you know, frankly,

0:36:46.920 --> 0:36:51.240
<v Speaker 3>are fast growing, they're fragmented ecosystem, They're hard to find.

0:36:51.280 --> 0:36:55.080
<v Speaker 3>But if you can navigate and invest directly in these

0:36:55.120 --> 0:36:57.920
<v Speaker 3>businesses or lend to these businesses, it's a very attractive

0:36:58.360 --> 0:37:00.000
<v Speaker 3>access for investors.

0:37:00.040 --> 0:37:02.600
<v Speaker 2>Let's talk a little bit about that. I like to

0:37:02.640 --> 0:37:06.000
<v Speaker 2>step back and take the thirty thousand foot view to

0:37:06.480 --> 0:37:09.200
<v Speaker 2>kind of get a sense of how this evolved. My

0:37:09.360 --> 0:37:12.840
<v Speaker 2>general sense was you had a lot of consolidation with

0:37:12.960 --> 0:37:16.480
<v Speaker 2>big money center banks following the financial crisis, even the

0:37:16.560 --> 0:37:21.200
<v Speaker 2>decade leading up to, and it felt like much of

0:37:21.239 --> 0:37:24.960
<v Speaker 2>Wall Street, much of the giant banks, just kept moving

0:37:25.040 --> 0:37:28.800
<v Speaker 2>up market and left these huge swaths of billion dollar

0:37:28.880 --> 0:37:32.480
<v Speaker 2>companies behind because let's be honest, what's a billion dollar company?

0:37:32.520 --> 0:37:36.880
<v Speaker 2>It's small change to them? Is that what created the

0:37:36.920 --> 0:37:42.560
<v Speaker 2>opening for all of this private credit, real estate financing,

0:37:42.760 --> 0:37:45.960
<v Speaker 2>private debt. There's like this whole world that used to

0:37:46.000 --> 0:37:50.000
<v Speaker 2>be traditional banks. Like explain that transition a little bit.

0:37:50.360 --> 0:37:54.000
<v Speaker 3>So, as I spoke about earlier, I started my career

0:37:54.239 --> 0:37:57.799
<v Speaker 3>at Solomon and Fig Banking, and we would talk about

0:37:57.880 --> 0:38:00.960
<v Speaker 3>merging banks, and we had these old that you would

0:38:01.040 --> 0:38:04.279
<v Speaker 3>take with bank information and merge the banking world and

0:38:04.320 --> 0:38:08.000
<v Speaker 3>pitch banks on why they should consolidate. Well they did.

0:38:08.920 --> 0:38:12.520
<v Speaker 3>Throughout the eighties, nineties, and two thousands, the banking world

0:38:12.600 --> 0:38:15.799
<v Speaker 3>became much more consolidated into these four Meggat banks that

0:38:15.880 --> 0:38:17.880
<v Speaker 3>hoovered up a number of regional banks. So that was

0:38:18.200 --> 0:38:20.360
<v Speaker 3>you know, this is a confluence of factors. That was

0:38:20.400 --> 0:38:23.759
<v Speaker 3>one factor the Great Financial Crisis, and Dodd Frank and

0:38:23.840 --> 0:38:28.720
<v Speaker 3>red capitules was another big factor of driving higher capital

0:38:28.760 --> 0:38:32.960
<v Speaker 3>requirements for banks and their activities. You also had banks

0:38:33.080 --> 0:38:40.920
<v Speaker 3>increasingly looking towards generating fee income versus making loans on

0:38:40.960 --> 0:38:42.920
<v Speaker 3>their balance sheet. In other words, they wanted to be

0:38:43.000 --> 0:38:46.520
<v Speaker 3>in the moving business, not the storage business, because that's

0:38:46.520 --> 0:38:49.920
<v Speaker 3>what they're publicly traded shareholders were valuing. And so they

0:38:50.000 --> 0:38:55.880
<v Speaker 3>answered that call, and so increasingly they began to step

0:38:55.960 --> 0:39:01.400
<v Speaker 3>back from those lending activities, particularly to mid size private

0:39:01.440 --> 0:39:06.960
<v Speaker 3>companies and real estate activities. And that allowed for asset

0:39:07.000 --> 0:39:13.600
<v Speaker 3>management companies, who I would estimate have very attractive asset

0:39:13.600 --> 0:39:19.000
<v Speaker 3>liability matches within their lending activities to step into that

0:39:19.400 --> 0:39:24.000
<v Speaker 3>opportunity and provide that financing capital through closed end funds,

0:39:24.200 --> 0:39:29.200
<v Speaker 3>through BDCs, through different structures to be able to lend

0:39:29.560 --> 0:39:32.720
<v Speaker 3>and provide access to the individual investor to generate income

0:39:32.719 --> 0:39:35.120
<v Speaker 3>off those lending activities. And so I think all of

0:39:35.160 --> 0:39:39.200
<v Speaker 3>those things provided the opening and it's been a market

0:39:39.200 --> 0:39:43.080
<v Speaker 3>share shift from the banking system to the direct lending

0:39:43.080 --> 0:39:45.480
<v Speaker 3>and asset management world in private lending.

0:39:45.960 --> 0:39:50.400
<v Speaker 2>Really interesting last question on the evolution of future standard.

0:39:51.400 --> 0:39:55.400
<v Speaker 2>You've served roles both as chief Investment Officer and CEO

0:39:55.640 --> 0:40:02.439
<v Speaker 2>co CEO. As CIO, you think about generating returns. As

0:40:02.440 --> 0:40:05.680
<v Speaker 2>a CEO, you have to think about so many everything

0:40:05.719 --> 0:40:11.640
<v Speaker 2>else but people, infrastructure, clients, culture, systems. How do you

0:40:11.880 --> 0:40:17.880
<v Speaker 2>integrate that those two very different sets of responsibilities.

0:40:17.719 --> 0:40:23.040
<v Speaker 3>Right, So, in terms of thinking about the role, overseeing

0:40:23.120 --> 0:40:27.719
<v Speaker 3>the investment teams and investment strategies is a big part

0:40:27.840 --> 0:40:30.880
<v Speaker 3>of what I do as Chief Investment Officer, I like

0:40:30.960 --> 0:40:34.120
<v Speaker 3>to use the analogy of like I like to be

0:40:34.160 --> 0:40:38.759
<v Speaker 3>the Rick Rubin in the room of really talented professionals,

0:40:39.280 --> 0:40:41.920
<v Speaker 3>provide an environment by which they can do their best work,

0:40:42.160 --> 0:40:44.239
<v Speaker 3>and then get the hell out of the way. And

0:40:44.360 --> 0:40:47.640
<v Speaker 3>so you have to identify the talent you help to

0:40:47.680 --> 0:40:51.160
<v Speaker 3>work and develop them. You have to work with their process,

0:40:51.200 --> 0:40:53.960
<v Speaker 3>how and why they make decisions as individuals and teams

0:40:53.960 --> 0:40:58.799
<v Speaker 3>of individuals. Make sure that their priorities align with our

0:40:58.880 --> 0:41:02.879
<v Speaker 3>clients and the firm overall. Give them all the resources

0:41:03.040 --> 0:41:06.080
<v Speaker 3>that they need to do their job, and increasingly they're

0:41:06.120 --> 0:41:09.719
<v Speaker 3>more sophisticated resource requests like around AI deployment and things

0:41:09.719 --> 0:41:12.120
<v Speaker 3>of that nature. And then get out of their way,

0:41:12.440 --> 0:41:15.239
<v Speaker 3>allow them to do their best work. And you pointed out,

0:41:15.280 --> 0:41:19.040
<v Speaker 3>you know, designing incentives, designing culture, reinforcing behavior is a

0:41:19.160 --> 0:41:22.399
<v Speaker 3>big part of all of that. So that's one big

0:41:22.440 --> 0:41:25.240
<v Speaker 3>part of my job. You know, also interfacing with clients,

0:41:25.320 --> 0:41:29.760
<v Speaker 3>both private wealth clients and institutional clients. Strategy for the firm,

0:41:30.000 --> 0:41:33.040
<v Speaker 3>internal strategy, corporate development, but also M and A and

0:41:33.360 --> 0:41:39.279
<v Speaker 3>new new deployment of acquisition of different strategies, products and

0:41:39.680 --> 0:41:43.719
<v Speaker 3>launching new products and new extensions of existing products is

0:41:43.719 --> 0:41:46.279
<v Speaker 3>a big part of my of my role and then

0:41:46.719 --> 0:41:49.200
<v Speaker 3>reinforcing you know, the culture overall of what we're trying

0:41:49.200 --> 0:41:49.560
<v Speaker 3>to build.

0:41:50.280 --> 0:41:54.319
<v Speaker 2>And you mentioned earlier you were I'm want to say

0:41:54.360 --> 0:41:59.080
<v Speaker 2>that again. Earlier you mentioned that the firm was selling

0:41:59.160 --> 0:42:03.680
<v Speaker 2>into the broker dealer networks. That seems to have evolved

0:42:03.719 --> 0:42:07.640
<v Speaker 2>into more of an RIA networks. Even the big shops

0:42:07.680 --> 0:42:12.120
<v Speaker 2>like Ubs and Morgan Stanley have kind of pivoted away

0:42:12.160 --> 0:42:16.880
<v Speaker 2>from transactions more to fees. How has that transition affected

0:42:17.239 --> 0:42:18.600
<v Speaker 2>who you're selling products to?

0:42:20.280 --> 0:42:23.640
<v Speaker 3>So over the last you know, fifteen plus years, there

0:42:23.640 --> 0:42:26.800
<v Speaker 3>has been an evolution and a broadening of the types

0:42:26.840 --> 0:42:33.040
<v Speaker 3>of platforms that have been embracing private market strategies, alternative

0:42:33.080 --> 0:42:36.600
<v Speaker 3>investment strategies. You know, there's the wirehouses, so the big

0:42:36.640 --> 0:42:40.960
<v Speaker 3>four names Morgan Stanley, UBS, Merrill, Lynch, Wells Fargo. There

0:42:40.960 --> 0:42:44.839
<v Speaker 3>are the large rias like Rockefeller and Saratae that are

0:42:44.880 --> 0:42:49.839
<v Speaker 3>building out their capabilities for independent advisors and growing quite tremendously.

0:42:50.120 --> 0:42:52.480
<v Speaker 3>And then you have the independent broker dealer channel, the

0:42:52.600 --> 0:42:56.200
<v Speaker 3>lpls of the world, and so there there's an ecosystem

0:42:56.320 --> 0:42:59.319
<v Speaker 3>of wealth platforms just here in the US. You know,

0:42:59.400 --> 0:43:02.600
<v Speaker 3>overse three hundred thousand financial advisors and brokers in the

0:43:02.680 --> 0:43:09.160
<v Speaker 3>United States, and all of those channels are increasingly embracing

0:43:09.320 --> 0:43:13.560
<v Speaker 3>and hosting onto their platforms access to these types of

0:43:13.600 --> 0:43:19.920
<v Speaker 3>strategies through various, you know, phases of development within those platforms.

0:43:20.000 --> 0:43:23.400
<v Speaker 3>I would say there's a real spectrum of adoption, you know.

0:43:24.280 --> 0:43:27.520
<v Speaker 3>You know, when I started at what was then Franklin Square,

0:43:28.160 --> 0:43:32.280
<v Speaker 3>you know, talking to a big wirehouse like Morgan Stanley,

0:43:32.320 --> 0:43:35.000
<v Speaker 3>they would tell you that a very small group of

0:43:35.040 --> 0:43:38.640
<v Speaker 3>their advisors were doing the vast majority of alternatives business.

0:43:39.560 --> 0:43:43.640
<v Speaker 3>Now across you know, fifteen thousand plus advisors, there's a

0:43:43.760 --> 0:43:48.920
<v Speaker 3>much broader and wider democratization of adoption of alternatives across

0:43:48.920 --> 0:43:53.080
<v Speaker 3>THEIRS and other people's platforms. But there's still a lot

0:43:53.120 --> 0:43:56.400
<v Speaker 3>of individual investors and advisors who are still at zero

0:43:57.560 --> 0:44:01.440
<v Speaker 3>percent allocated to something other than a stock under cash,

0:44:01.560 --> 0:44:04.959
<v Speaker 3>and that evolution is that's why I think we're still

0:44:04.960 --> 0:44:06.000
<v Speaker 3>in the very early I.

0:44:05.960 --> 0:44:09.480
<v Speaker 2>Think really really interesting. Coming up, we continue our conversation

0:44:09.560 --> 0:44:13.719
<v Speaker 2>with Mike Kelly, President and Chief Investment Officer of Future Standard,

0:44:14.160 --> 0:44:18.799
<v Speaker 2>discussing the state of alternatives today. I'm Barry Ridults. You're

0:44:18.840 --> 0:44:36.960
<v Speaker 2>listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I'm Barry Redults.

0:44:37.000 --> 0:44:40.120
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My

0:44:40.520 --> 0:44:43.640
<v Speaker 2>extra special guest today is Mike Kelly. He is president

0:44:43.680 --> 0:44:47.400
<v Speaker 2>and chief investment officer of Future Standard. They are a

0:44:47.560 --> 0:44:53.160
<v Speaker 2>ninety billion dollar alternative platform focusing on private credit, private equity,

0:44:53.600 --> 0:44:59.240
<v Speaker 2>real estate, infrastructure, and multi asset strategies. So it's hard

0:44:59.320 --> 0:45:01.040
<v Speaker 2>not to look at I have a credit today and

0:45:01.680 --> 0:45:05.600
<v Speaker 2>not think this is becoming a jug ernaut. Is that

0:45:05.680 --> 0:45:08.600
<v Speaker 2>a sign of maturity or is this, you know, just

0:45:08.680 --> 0:45:11.240
<v Speaker 2>a lot of capital chasing, not a lot of loans.

0:45:12.560 --> 0:45:19.240
<v Speaker 3>So I'd start by saying that there is a misconception

0:45:19.480 --> 0:45:23.160
<v Speaker 3>that private credit generally is becoming a bubble. And I

0:45:23.239 --> 0:45:26.080
<v Speaker 3>consider myself a student of history and calamities, and I

0:45:26.160 --> 0:45:29.719
<v Speaker 3>try to think about and if you look at the

0:45:29.760 --> 0:45:33.240
<v Speaker 3>build of what we call private credit, the asset management's

0:45:33.280 --> 0:45:37.640
<v Speaker 3>direct lending to private companies matching up against you know,

0:45:37.719 --> 0:45:40.200
<v Speaker 3>various you know situations in the past where we had

0:45:40.239 --> 0:45:44.520
<v Speaker 3>true bubbles, you had an outgrowth of capital versus the

0:45:44.600 --> 0:45:48.279
<v Speaker 3>economic driver of activity. We don't have that today. If

0:45:48.320 --> 0:45:50.920
<v Speaker 3>you actually add up the pockets of what we really

0:45:50.920 --> 0:45:53.799
<v Speaker 3>call private credit, which is not just direct lending but

0:45:53.960 --> 0:45:57.960
<v Speaker 3>high yield strategies, broadly syndicated loans and banks and eye loans.

0:45:57.960 --> 0:46:02.759
<v Speaker 3>That's private credit provision. It's grown lockstep with the economy.

0:46:02.800 --> 0:46:05.600
<v Speaker 3>The economy had gone from twelve thirteen billion before the

0:46:05.600 --> 0:46:08.560
<v Speaker 3>Great Financial Crisis, it's thirty trillion today, and so it's

0:46:08.560 --> 0:46:10.800
<v Speaker 3>grown in lockstep. It's just the market share has shifted

0:46:11.160 --> 0:46:14.960
<v Speaker 3>to direct lenders in asset management away from banks, high

0:46:15.000 --> 0:46:19.400
<v Speaker 3>yield and broadly syndicated loans. And so the opportunity in

0:46:19.400 --> 0:46:23.240
<v Speaker 3>private credit is not outgrowing the underlying opportunities. These private

0:46:23.280 --> 0:46:28.000
<v Speaker 3>companies are making themselves. They're availing themselves of this private

0:46:28.040 --> 0:46:31.239
<v Speaker 3>form of financing from asset management companies. And there's a

0:46:31.280 --> 0:46:34.279
<v Speaker 3>lot more of these private companies demanding this capital. So

0:46:34.719 --> 0:46:39.319
<v Speaker 3>there is a balance between the supply and demand of

0:46:39.360 --> 0:46:43.719
<v Speaker 3>this capital for the opportunity. Now, having said that, in

0:46:43.760 --> 0:46:48.040
<v Speaker 3>this search for yield that we talked about, there was

0:46:48.080 --> 0:46:53.360
<v Speaker 3>an outgrowth of evergreen strategies and selling to the private

0:46:53.360 --> 0:46:58.760
<v Speaker 3>wealth community, particularly within private credit strategies, in this demand

0:46:58.760 --> 0:47:02.759
<v Speaker 3>for income, and we did see an explosion and concentration

0:47:03.040 --> 0:47:08.200
<v Speaker 3>and crowdedness in particular funds and pockets of large cap

0:47:08.320 --> 0:47:13.800
<v Speaker 3>lending that did result in you know, very tight spreads,

0:47:14.560 --> 0:47:19.160
<v Speaker 3>covenants being loosened, an increase in paying kind or pick

0:47:19.880 --> 0:47:25.640
<v Speaker 3>over cash financing, and we also sort of a concentration

0:47:25.800 --> 0:47:29.399
<v Speaker 3>of lending to software companies as rates were being cut

0:47:29.440 --> 0:47:32.800
<v Speaker 3>and distributions were being cut. Within BBC's and private credit,

0:47:33.120 --> 0:47:36.760
<v Speaker 3>we began to see that, coupled with the concerns about

0:47:36.840 --> 0:47:41.879
<v Speaker 3>software exposure, begin to result in some redemptions. And that

0:47:42.040 --> 0:47:44.719
<v Speaker 3>is where a lot of the headlines have been focused

0:47:45.320 --> 0:47:50.239
<v Speaker 3>on private credit and negative sentiment around private credit trying

0:47:50.280 --> 0:47:53.960
<v Speaker 3>to get out of these structures when they're having difficulty

0:47:54.000 --> 0:47:58.080
<v Speaker 3>doing so. I think the backdrop, though, is private credit

0:47:58.200 --> 0:48:05.400
<v Speaker 3>is still a very valuable and value enhancing component for

0:48:05.560 --> 0:48:10.239
<v Speaker 3>most portfolios to generate income, despite some of the indigestion

0:48:10.400 --> 0:48:12.160
<v Speaker 3>and negative headlines that I've been developing.

0:48:12.440 --> 0:48:16.239
<v Speaker 2>Let's talk about those retemptions because they always crack me up.

0:48:17.200 --> 0:48:19.160
<v Speaker 2>We saw this a couple of years ago with b

0:48:19.360 --> 0:48:23.080
<v Speaker 2>RET and b cred, which is which part of five

0:48:23.160 --> 0:48:27.560
<v Speaker 2>year lockup is confusing to you. I don't I don't understand,

0:48:28.440 --> 0:48:33.840
<v Speaker 2>and for the listener, a lot of these illiquid alternatives

0:48:34.480 --> 0:48:38.319
<v Speaker 2>have a tiny gait of five percent gate, which is

0:48:38.400 --> 0:48:41.560
<v Speaker 2>really there as an accommodation when you know, I call

0:48:41.600 --> 0:48:45.440
<v Speaker 2>it the widows and orphans clause. If you know, if

0:48:45.680 --> 0:48:49.040
<v Speaker 2>if the surgeon is hit by a bus and he

0:48:49.120 --> 0:48:52.719
<v Speaker 2>leaves behind wife and kids, they perhaps shouldn't be in

0:48:52.760 --> 0:48:56.560
<v Speaker 2>an illiquid alternative in those circumstances. But given that, let's

0:48:56.600 --> 0:48:59.200
<v Speaker 2>let's talk a little bit about the ill liquidity premium,

0:49:00.040 --> 0:49:02.160
<v Speaker 2>which some people look at as a bug, but I

0:49:02.200 --> 0:49:05.680
<v Speaker 2>think is a feature of the this sort of investment.

0:49:05.760 --> 0:49:08.400
<v Speaker 2>Tell us a little bit about how you think about

0:49:08.600 --> 0:49:12.640
<v Speaker 2>ill equidity and how do you communicate ill equidity or

0:49:12.680 --> 0:49:15.400
<v Speaker 2>liquidity issues to potential investors.

0:49:15.719 --> 0:49:18.520
<v Speaker 3>Well, I'd start by saying investing is all about trade offs.

0:49:18.560 --> 0:49:21.360
<v Speaker 3>There's no right or wrong, no black or white. You know,

0:49:21.400 --> 0:49:24.640
<v Speaker 3>alternatives aren't better than traditional in forms of investing. There's

0:49:24.680 --> 0:49:28.040
<v Speaker 3>just trade offs. And the trade offs within private market

0:49:28.080 --> 0:49:31.799
<v Speaker 3>strategies and the structures that offer them is that you

0:49:31.960 --> 0:49:36.000
<v Speaker 3>have the advantages of the potential for enhanced return through

0:49:36.040 --> 0:49:40.560
<v Speaker 3>an illiquidity premium or enhance diversification from your public holdings.

0:49:41.080 --> 0:49:44.839
<v Speaker 3>The tradeoff of that is these are ill liquid strategies,

0:49:45.600 --> 0:49:50.000
<v Speaker 3>They are complex, and they are higher fees than public

0:49:50.080 --> 0:49:53.040
<v Speaker 3>market strategies. ETFs and indices and things of that nature,

0:49:53.239 --> 0:49:58.240
<v Speaker 3>and so you have to balance those before determining whether

0:49:58.320 --> 0:50:01.040
<v Speaker 3>or not the trade offfs make sense for you, for

0:50:01.160 --> 0:50:05.080
<v Speaker 3>your clients, for an institution, what have you. And I

0:50:05.719 --> 0:50:08.440
<v Speaker 3>really mentioned the liquid the liquid part of it, because

0:50:08.440 --> 0:50:11.960
<v Speaker 3>these strategies are a liquid evergreen structures as wrappers around

0:50:11.960 --> 0:50:17.400
<v Speaker 3>these liquid underlying strategies did not make an ill liquid

0:50:18.440 --> 0:50:22.160
<v Speaker 3>private asset class liquid. It was just an access point.

0:50:22.160 --> 0:50:25.600
<v Speaker 3>It provides its own advantages of continuous compounding and no

0:50:25.840 --> 0:50:28.799
<v Speaker 3>capital calls and ten ninety nine's and so forth, but

0:50:28.840 --> 0:50:31.480
<v Speaker 3>it didn't turn an I liquid asset class into liquid.

0:50:31.480 --> 0:50:35.160
<v Speaker 3>I never understood the term semi liquid, which implies half liquid,

0:50:35.160 --> 0:50:38.600
<v Speaker 3>which it's not. These are not half liquid private investments,

0:50:38.880 --> 0:50:43.359
<v Speaker 3>and so that isn't ast as a backdrop. You know,

0:50:43.680 --> 0:50:46.720
<v Speaker 3>a lot of it comes down to managing the expectations

0:50:46.920 --> 0:50:50.239
<v Speaker 3>of what the trade offs are. Going back to the

0:50:50.320 --> 0:50:54.560
<v Speaker 3>advantages you are providing capital and in our case a

0:50:54.640 --> 0:50:58.280
<v Speaker 3>future standard, we're providing capital to a very fragmented ecosystem.

0:50:58.360 --> 0:51:01.440
<v Speaker 3>We cherry pick, you know, a handful of the best

0:51:01.840 --> 0:51:05.640
<v Speaker 3>middle market, mid sized private businesses, and we provide them

0:51:06.000 --> 0:51:10.239
<v Speaker 3>with capital, either through equity capital or through loans that

0:51:10.280 --> 0:51:14.840
<v Speaker 3>we make to these companies. These companies are not massive

0:51:14.880 --> 0:51:18.000
<v Speaker 3>in size, and they can't dictate final terms, and so

0:51:18.040 --> 0:51:21.279
<v Speaker 3>we can lend to them at very advantageous prices that

0:51:21.360 --> 0:51:24.080
<v Speaker 3>work for them because they're growing businesses. They need capital

0:51:24.120 --> 0:51:27.879
<v Speaker 3>to grow, to acquire new businesses, to fund their operations,

0:51:28.000 --> 0:51:31.320
<v Speaker 3>and so they're not going to negotiate to the final

0:51:31.360 --> 0:51:35.200
<v Speaker 3>basis point on spread. So we can provide a very

0:51:35.239 --> 0:51:39.640
<v Speaker 3>attractive form of financing to them and pass along that

0:51:39.760 --> 0:51:44.400
<v Speaker 3>income to individual investors through the private wealth community. And

0:51:44.440 --> 0:51:48.920
<v Speaker 3>so it works for both sides. And that form of

0:51:48.960 --> 0:51:53.920
<v Speaker 3>income is you know, does come with an expectation of

0:51:54.000 --> 0:51:56.920
<v Speaker 3>higher returns than what you'll be able to replicate in

0:51:56.960 --> 0:52:00.359
<v Speaker 3>the sort of megacap market or in the public fixed

0:52:00.400 --> 0:52:00.959
<v Speaker 3>income market.

0:52:01.200 --> 0:52:04.400
<v Speaker 2>It makes a lot of sense. Back in the day

0:52:04.840 --> 0:52:07.680
<v Speaker 2>this was thought of as an institutional product and a

0:52:07.719 --> 0:52:13.399
<v Speaker 2>family office product. It began migrating downstream to ultra high

0:52:13.400 --> 0:52:16.600
<v Speaker 2>net worth and then high net worth. Now the question

0:52:16.760 --> 0:52:19.880
<v Speaker 2>is is this going to be marketed to mass affluent

0:52:20.400 --> 0:52:23.520
<v Speaker 2>for one case? Things like that, who do you see

0:52:23.560 --> 0:52:29.759
<v Speaker 2>as as appropriate buyers of a variety of private credit products.

0:52:31.200 --> 0:52:33.560
<v Speaker 3>So we'll start by saying, you know, one of the

0:52:33.600 --> 0:52:36.520
<v Speaker 3>reasons at future standard. Why we like working with advisors

0:52:36.680 --> 0:52:40.120
<v Speaker 3>is nobody has a better finger on the pulse of

0:52:40.680 --> 0:52:45.640
<v Speaker 3>suitability than the advisor to their clients. They will know

0:52:45.960 --> 0:52:51.600
<v Speaker 3>for their client base, risk preferences, liquidity preferences. You know

0:52:51.640 --> 0:52:56.839
<v Speaker 3>their ability to understand these strategies and have them incorporated

0:52:56.880 --> 0:53:00.960
<v Speaker 3>into their portfolio. We say that if if you're going

0:53:01.000 --> 0:53:04.160
<v Speaker 3>to allocate to a private market strategy like the ones

0:53:04.200 --> 0:53:07.000
<v Speaker 3>we offer, if you're not looking to allocate for at

0:53:07.080 --> 0:53:09.799
<v Speaker 3>least the next four or five years or beyond, don't

0:53:09.800 --> 0:53:12.080
<v Speaker 3>make the allocation. If you need the liquidity in the

0:53:12.120 --> 0:53:15.680
<v Speaker 3>next few years, there's no guarantee to our earlier point

0:53:15.719 --> 0:53:19.440
<v Speaker 3>that you'll be availed of that liquidity, and so the

0:53:19.480 --> 0:53:23.239
<v Speaker 3>determination of suitability is at the advisor level, and I

0:53:23.280 --> 0:53:25.840
<v Speaker 3>think that's where it sits. You could make the argument

0:53:25.920 --> 0:53:30.760
<v Speaker 3>that this should be relegated to those with net worth

0:53:30.840 --> 0:53:33.759
<v Speaker 3>or income of a certain bracket of level. The regulators,

0:53:34.160 --> 0:53:37.480
<v Speaker 3>you know, have their policies on that. But when it

0:53:37.480 --> 0:53:40.319
<v Speaker 3>gets a little bit fuzzy where someone is accredited but

0:53:40.440 --> 0:53:43.120
<v Speaker 3>may or may not be suitable, I think the advisor

0:53:43.200 --> 0:53:45.919
<v Speaker 3>is most positioned to be able to and we would

0:53:46.040 --> 0:53:50.000
<v Speaker 3>rather have fewer but more suitable investors or as a

0:53:50.080 --> 0:53:53.560
<v Speaker 3>client base than more and less suitable investors as our

0:53:53.560 --> 0:53:57.040
<v Speaker 3>client base. You asked a question about retirement accounts. I

0:53:57.080 --> 0:54:00.720
<v Speaker 3>think there's been a lot of you know, lines written

0:54:00.760 --> 0:54:02.920
<v Speaker 3>about the big numbers that are being thrown around, you know,

0:54:02.920 --> 0:54:07.960
<v Speaker 3>twelve to fifteen trillion of DC four oh one K plans. This,

0:54:08.160 --> 0:54:11.120
<v Speaker 3>in my view, should be among the least controversial of

0:54:11.280 --> 0:54:15.960
<v Speaker 3>places to think about incorporating less liquid private market strategies.

0:54:15.760 --> 0:54:18.520
<v Speaker 2>Not tapping it for years ago, donate it for decades.

0:54:18.719 --> 0:54:21.920
<v Speaker 3>Usually for a young person in the retirement account. I

0:54:21.960 --> 0:54:24.440
<v Speaker 3>think about, you know, my little brother who's a school

0:54:24.440 --> 0:54:27.200
<v Speaker 3>teacher and Queen's and you know, if he has a

0:54:27.239 --> 0:54:30.479
<v Speaker 3>thirty year horizon or at a twenty year horizon, why

0:54:30.520 --> 0:54:35.360
<v Speaker 3>shouldn't he have some allocation incorporated in say a target

0:54:35.480 --> 0:54:40.960
<v Speaker 3>date fund, two long duration investments that might pick up

0:54:41.600 --> 0:54:44.279
<v Speaker 3>an illiquidity premium if he doesn't need the capital for

0:54:44.320 --> 0:54:45.160
<v Speaker 3>a very long time.

0:54:45.200 --> 0:54:48.840
<v Speaker 2>And that's a couple of hundred basis points over treasury easily.

0:54:49.080 --> 0:54:54.279
<v Speaker 3>And also, let's face a lot of the best investors

0:54:54.360 --> 0:54:57.600
<v Speaker 3>in the world are still occupied in this world we

0:54:57.680 --> 0:55:01.520
<v Speaker 3>call alternatives, and so why not avail yourself of the

0:55:01.520 --> 0:55:03.960
<v Speaker 3>best investment minds and teams and firms that are out

0:55:04.000 --> 0:55:07.600
<v Speaker 3>there and their capability sets. And so I do think

0:55:07.680 --> 0:55:12.480
<v Speaker 3>there will be in corporation of private market strategies into

0:55:12.600 --> 0:55:15.280
<v Speaker 3>retirement plans into d C four oh one K plans.

0:55:15.320 --> 0:55:17.560
<v Speaker 3>I think it's going to be a much longer evolution

0:55:18.200 --> 0:55:21.560
<v Speaker 3>than maybe some would like. It will also only be

0:55:21.640 --> 0:55:24.560
<v Speaker 3>a subset of the twelfth to fifteen trillion out there,

0:55:24.600 --> 0:55:27.160
<v Speaker 3>because you have to get the planned sponsors comfortable and

0:55:27.239 --> 0:55:31.480
<v Speaker 3>other constituents and players up to speed and comfortable with

0:55:31.520 --> 0:55:34.360
<v Speaker 3>the risks and the fees and the liabilities and so forth.

0:55:34.719 --> 0:55:37.680
<v Speaker 3>And so it's a going to be a small allocation,

0:55:37.880 --> 0:55:41.640
<v Speaker 3>say fifteen percent of a target date fund, and that's

0:55:41.680 --> 0:55:44.040
<v Speaker 3>going to be a subset of all of the capital

0:55:44.080 --> 0:55:49.080
<v Speaker 3>out there. So in the end, it's an opportunity. Long term,

0:55:49.120 --> 0:55:52.080
<v Speaker 3>it will be something that people can elect to have

0:55:52.280 --> 0:55:55.880
<v Speaker 3>or not have in the QDIA. It may be qualified default,

0:55:56.040 --> 0:55:58.720
<v Speaker 3>they may elect in or so forth. That will evolve

0:55:58.719 --> 0:56:02.400
<v Speaker 3>over time. But I do think the headlines are getting

0:56:02.440 --> 0:56:05.080
<v Speaker 3>a little bit ahead of themselves that there's this wave

0:56:05.120 --> 0:56:08.400
<v Speaker 3>of trillions of dollars that are about to go into alternatives.

0:56:08.520 --> 0:56:13.680
<v Speaker 2>So you mentioned sixty forty earlier. I'm kind of hearing, hey,

0:56:13.760 --> 0:56:17.160
<v Speaker 2>sixty forty is going to be changing over the next

0:56:17.200 --> 0:56:21.319
<v Speaker 2>decade to something that's maybe sixty twenty five fifteen. Is

0:56:21.360 --> 0:56:24.240
<v Speaker 2>that sort of a reasonable number set?

0:56:24.440 --> 0:56:29.840
<v Speaker 3>So this will now get into my view on portfolios

0:56:29.880 --> 0:56:34.359
<v Speaker 3>and portfolio allocation generally, which I have a view that

0:56:34.800 --> 0:56:36.360
<v Speaker 3>doesn't match up with those numbers?

0:56:36.640 --> 0:56:41.359
<v Speaker 2>Can I before you say something? I always get into

0:56:41.400 --> 0:56:44.320
<v Speaker 2>trouble when I say this, But hey, if you're twenty

0:56:44.360 --> 0:56:48.279
<v Speaker 2>thirty forty and you have a reasonable risk tolerance, what

0:56:48.320 --> 0:56:51.560
<v Speaker 2>the hell do you need bonds for? Like, people don't

0:56:51.640 --> 0:56:54.919
<v Speaker 2>like hearing that, But sixty forty, how about ninety ten?

0:56:54.960 --> 0:56:59.160
<v Speaker 2>If you have fifty year time horizon, you just have

0:56:59.239 --> 0:57:01.600
<v Speaker 2>to not mess it up at the worst possible moment.

0:57:02.239 --> 0:57:05.480
<v Speaker 2>Where are you going with your pushback to sixty forty?

0:57:05.719 --> 0:57:09.440
<v Speaker 3>So I'm not even though I've used the term alternatives

0:57:09.440 --> 0:57:14.200
<v Speaker 3>throughout the discussion here, I don't really like it. I

0:57:14.239 --> 0:57:17.360
<v Speaker 3>think there's a point in the future where we won't

0:57:17.360 --> 0:57:19.960
<v Speaker 3>call these strategies alternatives.

0:57:19.600 --> 0:57:22.320
<v Speaker 2>Because they're not all the same. There's a broad dispersion

0:57:22.400 --> 0:57:24.760
<v Speaker 2>of risk and returns there.

0:57:24.960 --> 0:57:28.040
<v Speaker 3>That's exactly right, and to use that other analogy. When

0:57:28.040 --> 0:57:32.240
<v Speaker 3>everyone's wearing a Nirvana T shirt, it's no longer alternative music, right,

0:57:32.960 --> 0:57:37.040
<v Speaker 3>And let's face it, there's a much broader embrace of

0:57:37.080 --> 0:57:40.680
<v Speaker 3>these strategies. Although it's early, eighty eight percent of Advisor's

0:57:40.680 --> 0:57:46.840
<v Speaker 3>surveyed have indicated that they plan to allocate capital for

0:57:46.960 --> 0:57:49.680
<v Speaker 3>their clients to private market strategies. So this is not

0:57:49.920 --> 0:57:54.040
<v Speaker 3>a niche embrace. This is a broad embrace. And so

0:57:54.120 --> 0:57:59.920
<v Speaker 3>it's becoming more mainstream. And you know, the reason I

0:58:00.080 --> 0:58:03.360
<v Speaker 3>don't like the numbers of sixty forty versus you know,

0:58:03.400 --> 0:58:07.480
<v Speaker 3>fifty thirty twenty is when you think about alternatives, it's

0:58:07.600 --> 0:58:10.680
<v Speaker 3>just this little peg like a trivial pursuit, you know,

0:58:10.880 --> 0:58:16.120
<v Speaker 3>you know, peg on a circle. Is it doesn't match

0:58:16.200 --> 0:58:20.360
<v Speaker 3>up with with how I think about portfolios. So, if

0:58:20.400 --> 0:58:23.600
<v Speaker 3>you think about private equity, private equity rhymes and looks

0:58:23.640 --> 0:58:27.400
<v Speaker 3>a lot more from a risk standpoint like stocks than

0:58:27.440 --> 0:58:30.280
<v Speaker 3>it does real estate credit. It's right there in the

0:58:30.400 --> 0:58:34.000
<v Speaker 3>name and so yeah, right, it's equity, it's for growth

0:58:34.600 --> 0:58:38.480
<v Speaker 3>and so, and yet we relegate private equity into a

0:58:38.520 --> 0:58:41.320
<v Speaker 3>bucket with things like real estate credit, even though they

0:58:41.360 --> 0:58:44.400
<v Speaker 3>do very very different things for your portfolio. So The

0:58:44.440 --> 0:58:46.920
<v Speaker 3>way I like to look at it is there's a

0:58:46.960 --> 0:58:51.000
<v Speaker 3>part of your portfolio for growth, and those are all

0:58:51.080 --> 0:58:56.760
<v Speaker 3>forms of equity from public stocks and stock indices through

0:58:56.800 --> 0:58:59.840
<v Speaker 3>to private equity and private company access, through to venture

0:59:00.040 --> 0:59:03.360
<v Speaker 3>appital and other forms of growth equity. You have your

0:59:03.360 --> 0:59:09.080
<v Speaker 3>income portfolio, and that's your lower risk, high duration, high

0:59:09.160 --> 0:59:13.320
<v Speaker 3>liquidity treasuries and agency bonds, through to other forms of

0:59:13.320 --> 0:59:18.400
<v Speaker 3>income like less liquid private credit you know, in other

0:59:18.760 --> 0:59:24.320
<v Speaker 3>shorter duration, higher credit risk investment strategies. And then you

0:59:24.360 --> 0:59:27.160
<v Speaker 3>have what I think is probably an introduction of something

0:59:27.160 --> 0:59:29.080
<v Speaker 3>that we haven't had to think about since the seventies,

0:59:29.280 --> 0:59:33.040
<v Speaker 3>like a real asset category and commodities based and precious metals,

0:59:34.200 --> 0:59:36.640
<v Speaker 3>you know, raw land and real estate and things that

0:59:37.120 --> 0:59:39.960
<v Speaker 3>in a more inflationary world and a world where you

0:59:39.960 --> 0:59:43.520
<v Speaker 3>need more diversification of sources, you probably need. A real asset.

0:59:43.600 --> 0:59:46.640
<v Speaker 3>Infrastructure would be another example of that real asset category.

0:59:47.320 --> 0:59:51.040
<v Speaker 3>And within each of those three buckets of a portfolio,

0:59:52.040 --> 0:59:57.040
<v Speaker 3>you have a spectrum of illiquidity and risk profile. And

0:59:57.120 --> 1:00:00.760
<v Speaker 3>so for each allocator they will need to determin within

1:00:00.800 --> 1:00:04.800
<v Speaker 3>their growth bucket how much liquidity they need to generate

1:00:04.840 --> 1:00:07.480
<v Speaker 3>the kind of growth and how much risk. They're willing

1:00:07.520 --> 1:00:11.160
<v Speaker 3>to bear into private equity and venture capital to build

1:00:11.160 --> 1:00:13.360
<v Speaker 3>that growth bucket, and the same thing for their fixed

1:00:13.360 --> 1:00:18.320
<v Speaker 3>income bucket with degrees of credit risk, liquidity duration, and

1:00:18.360 --> 1:00:21.440
<v Speaker 3>then within their real acid bucket. And so I do believe,

1:00:21.480 --> 1:00:24.120
<v Speaker 3>even though the world doesn't really look at it that way,

1:00:24.600 --> 1:00:27.560
<v Speaker 3>that we will eventually get to that point and no

1:00:27.640 --> 1:00:30.919
<v Speaker 3>longer talk about the term alternatives.

1:00:31.120 --> 1:00:34.440
<v Speaker 2>It's going to be different types of income producing properties

1:00:34.480 --> 1:00:35.120
<v Speaker 2>and growth produce.

1:00:35.160 --> 1:00:35.880
<v Speaker 3>That's exactly right.

1:00:36.280 --> 1:00:38.880
<v Speaker 2>It makes a lot of sense. You mentioned earlier we

1:00:38.920 --> 1:00:43.320
<v Speaker 2>saw a big uptick in interest rates, which suddenly is

1:00:43.360 --> 1:00:47.400
<v Speaker 2>a double edged sword. You're getting yield. We now have

1:00:47.480 --> 1:00:51.360
<v Speaker 2>a new FED chair who seems to have surprised everybody

1:00:51.400 --> 1:00:54.960
<v Speaker 2>by being a little bit hawkish in the current environment

1:00:55.480 --> 1:00:59.520
<v Speaker 2>of oil prices and tariffs and hopefully the end of war.

1:00:59.600 --> 1:01:04.000
<v Speaker 2>But how do you think about the role of rates

1:01:04.000 --> 1:01:09.280
<v Speaker 2>and the FED. How does that impact the yield producing

1:01:09.360 --> 1:01:12.360
<v Speaker 2>portion of the alternative portfolios?

1:01:13.360 --> 1:01:16.120
<v Speaker 3>Well, as I said earlier, I do think we've exited

1:01:16.120 --> 1:01:20.160
<v Speaker 3>this golden era that ended roughly five years ago into

1:01:20.200 --> 1:01:27.960
<v Speaker 3>a more inflationary, deglobalized, less benign demographic backdrop. It will

1:01:28.000 --> 1:01:30.920
<v Speaker 3>result in a higher resting heart rate for inflation. I'm

1:01:30.960 --> 1:01:33.720
<v Speaker 3>not suggesting we're going back to the seventies by any means,

1:01:33.760 --> 1:01:36.520
<v Speaker 3>but there's a dozen or so factors that will keep

1:01:36.520 --> 1:01:41.280
<v Speaker 3>inflation more elevated, particularly in this deglobalized, localized world of

1:01:41.400 --> 1:01:42.840
<v Speaker 3>supply chain breakdown.

1:01:42.600 --> 1:01:47.520
<v Speaker 2>The post GFC zero rates, that's it for our lifetime.

1:01:47.920 --> 1:01:49.200
<v Speaker 2>Nobody really expects to see that.

1:01:49.240 --> 1:01:52.200
<v Speaker 3>Again, I don't expect to see that anytime, so.

1:01:52.360 --> 1:01:57.000
<v Speaker 2>Barring media or from out of space. So what does

1:01:57.040 --> 1:02:01.720
<v Speaker 2>that mean for the potential for are various types of

1:02:01.840 --> 1:02:03.200
<v Speaker 2>private credit to generate.

1:02:03.360 --> 1:02:05.800
<v Speaker 3>Right in that backdrop, you're going to have higher rate uncertainty,

1:02:05.880 --> 1:02:10.520
<v Speaker 3>higher volatility, and a need to look for other forms

1:02:10.600 --> 1:02:15.040
<v Speaker 3>of income, other forms of floating rate exposure. Right, if

1:02:15.160 --> 1:02:18.560
<v Speaker 3>rates go up, floating rate exposure pays you more. It

1:02:18.600 --> 1:02:21.280
<v Speaker 3>works against you with high duration investments. You begin to

1:02:21.280 --> 1:02:23.280
<v Speaker 3>lose money on those, and so it does act as

1:02:23.280 --> 1:02:27.479
<v Speaker 3>a balance to your traditional fixed income sources. You will

1:02:27.480 --> 1:02:30.920
<v Speaker 3>need diversification just generally in the world, given this economic

1:02:31.000 --> 1:02:35.720
<v Speaker 3>backdrop and the need for obtaining resources and how you

1:02:35.840 --> 1:02:40.920
<v Speaker 3>build out a diversified portfolio, and so these types of

1:02:41.040 --> 1:02:45.240
<v Speaker 3>income strategies and private equity strategies and real asset, real

1:02:45.360 --> 1:02:50.000
<v Speaker 3>estate and infrastructure strategies are again a broader palette to

1:02:50.120 --> 1:02:54.080
<v Speaker 3>paint from in a different environment than the one in

1:02:54.120 --> 1:02:58.320
<v Speaker 3>which sixty forty was the perfect answer and a simplified

1:02:58.400 --> 1:03:00.720
<v Speaker 3>answer of set it and forget it and be able

1:03:00.760 --> 1:03:05.920
<v Speaker 3>to have you know, diversified, low volatility outcomes. And so

1:03:06.280 --> 1:03:09.000
<v Speaker 3>I do think the role of the FED is trying

1:03:09.040 --> 1:03:13.640
<v Speaker 3>to navigate this tug of war between the inflationary forces

1:03:13.680 --> 1:03:16.760
<v Speaker 3>and perhaps the deflationary forces that AI may introduce to

1:03:16.800 --> 1:03:19.840
<v Speaker 3>pockets of that economy. And so it's a tougher job

1:03:20.120 --> 1:03:24.200
<v Speaker 3>for Kevin worsh And it's he wants to go back

1:03:24.560 --> 1:03:30.520
<v Speaker 3>potentially to you know, less disclosure, maybe more Alan Greenspan,

1:03:30.760 --> 1:03:33.240
<v Speaker 3>like you know, communication style, where we have to divine

1:03:33.240 --> 1:03:35.200
<v Speaker 3>the tea leaves a little bit more and try to

1:03:35.240 --> 1:03:37.640
<v Speaker 3>anticipate what's going to happen. And that makes a trickier

1:03:37.960 --> 1:03:42.600
<v Speaker 3>And if you're building portfolios for the long term, incorporating

1:03:42.600 --> 1:03:47.280
<v Speaker 3>these strategies in a diversified way, you will have you know,

1:03:47.560 --> 1:03:51.880
<v Speaker 3>countervailing balance within your portfolio. It won't matter if the

1:03:51.880 --> 1:03:54.320
<v Speaker 3>Fed's going to raise or lower interest rates by twenty

1:03:54.320 --> 1:03:56.959
<v Speaker 3>five or fifty basis points. If you built a truly

1:03:56.960 --> 1:03:58.200
<v Speaker 3>diversified portfolio.

1:03:58.040 --> 1:04:00.640
<v Speaker 2>Makes a lot of sense. You mentioned some of the

1:04:00.640 --> 1:04:04.720
<v Speaker 2>headline risk, and we've had a couple of minor blow

1:04:04.760 --> 1:04:07.919
<v Speaker 2>ups over the past year or so. Some people look

1:04:07.960 --> 1:04:10.400
<v Speaker 2>at that as the first cockroach. I don't know if

1:04:10.440 --> 1:04:15.440
<v Speaker 2>that's the right metaphor. I'm curious what data points do

1:04:15.520 --> 1:04:18.200
<v Speaker 2>you look at to just keep an eye on the

1:04:18.200 --> 1:04:20.520
<v Speaker 2>health of private credit underwrited.

1:04:21.400 --> 1:04:24.560
<v Speaker 3>So when you're looking at private credit underwriting, you're looking

1:04:24.680 --> 1:04:30.360
<v Speaker 3>at default rates versus history. You're looking at, you know,

1:04:30.400 --> 1:04:35.240
<v Speaker 3>the situations where there are defaults and what losses ensue

1:04:35.480 --> 1:04:40.840
<v Speaker 3>post those defaults. You're looking at interest rate coverage ratios,

1:04:40.880 --> 1:04:45.120
<v Speaker 3>so to the extent that the businesses that you're underwriting

1:04:45.120 --> 1:04:48.760
<v Speaker 3>in a diversified portfolio can cover their interest payments. So

1:04:48.760 --> 1:04:51.000
<v Speaker 3>you're watching all of these metrics. You'll need the value

1:04:51.160 --> 1:04:55.760
<v Speaker 3>of the collateral underlying those businesses. And I would say

1:04:56.200 --> 1:05:00.400
<v Speaker 3>there's no systemic crisis broad based within private credit today.

1:05:00.400 --> 1:05:03.480
<v Speaker 3>We're not seeing that. There are idiosyncratic stories, and when

1:05:03.480 --> 1:05:07.240
<v Speaker 3>you have hundreds and hundreds of credits being underwritten, you're

1:05:07.280 --> 1:05:12.320
<v Speaker 3>always going to have individual circumstances of companies that are

1:05:12.320 --> 1:05:16.840
<v Speaker 3>going bad or undertaking one fraud normal default rate, and

1:05:16.880 --> 1:05:18.560
<v Speaker 3>it doesn't By the way, just because of a company

1:05:18.560 --> 1:05:21.240
<v Speaker 3>to false doesn't mean you lose money. I mean historically,

1:05:21.280 --> 1:05:23.520
<v Speaker 3>if you had a default rate of you know, two

1:05:23.640 --> 1:05:26.280
<v Speaker 3>or three percent, and you lose half your money on that,

1:05:26.360 --> 1:05:28.600
<v Speaker 3>you can do the math and how much your actual

1:05:28.800 --> 1:05:32.480
<v Speaker 3>losses will translate over a period of time against the

1:05:32.520 --> 1:05:35.000
<v Speaker 3>income that you're generating in return. And so if you

1:05:35.080 --> 1:05:37.400
<v Speaker 3>might factor in the loss of fifty or one hundred

1:05:37.400 --> 1:05:41.640
<v Speaker 3>basis points of loss against the ability to generate nine

1:05:41.720 --> 1:05:44.120
<v Speaker 3>or ten percent returns, you can do the math is

1:05:44.200 --> 1:05:46.160
<v Speaker 3>what that on a net basis will return for you.

1:05:46.440 --> 1:05:49.960
<v Speaker 3>Defaults today are well within historical ranges and are being

1:05:50.000 --> 1:05:54.480
<v Speaker 3>well managed. Interest rate coverage ratios are well within historical

1:05:54.600 --> 1:05:58.640
<v Speaker 3>ranges and are in a healthy range. Today. What we

1:05:58.680 --> 1:06:04.560
<v Speaker 3>are seeing are pocket of weakness and pockets of vulnerability.

1:06:04.640 --> 1:06:07.000
<v Speaker 3>And again, over the course of we haven't had an

1:06:07.000 --> 1:06:09.640
<v Speaker 3>economic cycle since the Great Financial Crisis. I don't even

1:06:09.640 --> 1:06:12.120
<v Speaker 3>count COVID if it wasn't an economic cycle.

1:06:12.240 --> 1:06:14.960
<v Speaker 2>Even twenty twenty two care a blip.

1:06:15.400 --> 1:06:19.640
<v Speaker 3>And yet we're always going to have some areas that

1:06:19.720 --> 1:06:24.840
<v Speaker 3>are experiencing some disruption or some indigestion. Right now, you

1:06:24.880 --> 1:06:29.560
<v Speaker 3>have software, which is an issue that AI is disrupting,

1:06:29.600 --> 1:06:32.920
<v Speaker 3>but you have to sort through that and healthcare services.

1:06:32.920 --> 1:06:35.920
<v Speaker 3>There are some labor and reimbursement issues that have hit

1:06:36.080 --> 1:06:42.280
<v Speaker 3>certain healthcare companies within software. No one knows. No one

1:06:42.320 --> 1:06:44.480
<v Speaker 3>knows what the true impact of AI is going to

1:06:44.520 --> 1:06:48.080
<v Speaker 3>be on software. My view is most companies will be

1:06:48.200 --> 1:06:51.880
<v Speaker 3>fine and adapt and evolve their business models. There will

1:06:51.880 --> 1:06:55.920
<v Speaker 3>be a subset of those companies that will be truly

1:06:55.920 --> 1:06:59.640
<v Speaker 3>disrupted and where your collateral will not be worth very much.

1:07:00.040 --> 1:07:03.320
<v Speaker 3>But again, if you look at a megacap or large

1:07:03.360 --> 1:07:07.560
<v Speaker 3>cap lent private credit portfolio and you said twenty percent

1:07:07.960 --> 1:07:11.120
<v Speaker 3>is allocated to software, and you thought fifteen percent of

1:07:11.160 --> 1:07:14.640
<v Speaker 3>that was going to have disruption and trouble. So now

1:07:14.720 --> 1:07:18.200
<v Speaker 3>you're relegating this down to about three percent of your portfolio.

1:07:18.760 --> 1:07:21.360
<v Speaker 3>And even if that all went to zero and there

1:07:21.400 --> 1:07:24.800
<v Speaker 3>was no collateral value and no recovery on any of

1:07:24.840 --> 1:07:27.440
<v Speaker 3>those that's going to ensue over the next three to

1:07:27.520 --> 1:07:31.880
<v Speaker 3>five years three points of loss. So assume a straight

1:07:31.920 --> 1:07:34.600
<v Speaker 3>line amortization of those losses about a point a year

1:07:35.000 --> 1:07:37.280
<v Speaker 3>or less than a point a year off of a

1:07:37.320 --> 1:07:41.120
<v Speaker 3>portfolio that generates nine percent ten percent, So instead of

1:07:41.200 --> 1:07:44.120
<v Speaker 3>nine or ten, it's eight or nine if all of

1:07:44.160 --> 1:07:47.760
<v Speaker 3>that gets disrupted as expected. In other words, this is

1:07:47.800 --> 1:07:50.440
<v Speaker 3>not a catastrophe. This is a normal course of business

1:07:50.440 --> 1:07:53.280
<v Speaker 3>with a pocket of sector weakness. I think the private

1:07:53.280 --> 1:07:56.080
<v Speaker 3>credit industry is still healthy. It still provides very attractive

1:07:56.120 --> 1:07:59.640
<v Speaker 3>general returns. And this is all assumptions based, and assumptions

1:07:59.640 --> 1:08:02.520
<v Speaker 3>can change, and of course, but as I look at

1:08:02.560 --> 1:08:06.080
<v Speaker 3>the fundamental health of the private credit business, it's still

1:08:06.200 --> 1:08:07.040
<v Speaker 3>very much intact.

1:08:07.200 --> 1:08:10.320
<v Speaker 2>Huh, really really interesting. I have one or two more

1:08:10.400 --> 1:08:13.720
<v Speaker 2>questions before we get to our favorites, and I have

1:08:13.800 --> 1:08:17.439
<v Speaker 2>to ask you a thirty thousand foot view. Step back

1:08:18.280 --> 1:08:23.320
<v Speaker 2>and look at the private credit landscape three years, five years,

1:08:23.400 --> 1:08:26.479
<v Speaker 2>ten years from now. What does it look like in

1:08:26.600 --> 1:08:30.439
<v Speaker 2>terms of ongoing growth? How much do you think this

1:08:30.479 --> 1:08:35.439
<v Speaker 2>is going to penetrate into the wealth channels? What does

1:08:35.479 --> 1:08:38.520
<v Speaker 2>the industry look like you out a couple of years.

1:08:39.280 --> 1:08:42.920
<v Speaker 3>So when we talk about private credit, and often when

1:08:42.960 --> 1:08:45.639
<v Speaker 3>you read about private credit in the press, it seems

1:08:45.760 --> 1:08:53.240
<v Speaker 3>like one monolithic category within private credit. There are a

1:08:53.320 --> 1:08:58.640
<v Speaker 3>Baskin Robins series of flavors that all get defined as

1:08:58.680 --> 1:09:03.200
<v Speaker 3>private credit. And you have senior credit, junior debt MEZ.

1:09:03.479 --> 1:09:08.080
<v Speaker 3>You have clos, you have sponsored non sponsored opportunistic credit,

1:09:08.400 --> 1:09:12.160
<v Speaker 3>you have asset backed finance, you have royalties and so forth.

1:09:12.560 --> 1:09:17.080
<v Speaker 3>And so there are many different forms of credit to

1:09:17.400 --> 1:09:21.840
<v Speaker 3>private entities and companies that we call private credit. My

1:09:22.160 --> 1:09:28.360
<v Speaker 3>expectation is those flavors will develop, They will begin to uh,

1:09:28.840 --> 1:09:32.559
<v Speaker 3>you know, grow in size, the demands for that capital

1:09:32.600 --> 1:09:36.439
<v Speaker 3>buy those companies' entities will increase. We're seeing the entrance

1:09:36.640 --> 1:09:41.880
<v Speaker 3>of insurance capital and an investment grade. You know, most

1:09:41.880 --> 1:09:44.439
<v Speaker 3>of what we call in private credit is not investment grade,

1:09:44.439 --> 1:09:47.519
<v Speaker 3>but there's the investment grade demand for private capital for

1:09:47.600 --> 1:09:50.439
<v Speaker 3>these companies that is, you know, exploding in size, and

1:09:50.520 --> 1:09:53.240
<v Speaker 3>you know Mark talks about that at Apollo, and you know,

1:09:53.560 --> 1:09:57.519
<v Speaker 3>there is all of this that's developing over time, and

1:09:58.400 --> 1:10:01.400
<v Speaker 3>I expect that to continue. And then on the demand side,

1:10:01.720 --> 1:10:08.320
<v Speaker 3>I expect that private wealth will continue demand income. They

1:10:08.320 --> 1:10:13.759
<v Speaker 3>will continue to struggle with traditional forms of fixed income

1:10:13.760 --> 1:10:17.679
<v Speaker 3>and highduration assets. If my view on the macro world

1:10:17.760 --> 1:10:20.600
<v Speaker 3>transpires as I think it will, they will continue to

1:10:20.680 --> 1:10:24.160
<v Speaker 3>need to search for income through different sources. That's both

1:10:24.200 --> 1:10:26.960
<v Speaker 3>corporate income and real estate income and other forms of

1:10:27.000 --> 1:10:30.200
<v Speaker 3>asset backed income and so those demand that supply and

1:10:30.240 --> 1:10:33.960
<v Speaker 3>demand will continue to grow lockstep with one another, and

1:10:34.880 --> 1:10:37.720
<v Speaker 3>we will have a much larger ecosystem of what we

1:10:37.840 --> 1:10:39.759
<v Speaker 3>call private credit in the future.

1:10:40.400 --> 1:10:44.160
<v Speaker 2>So you were a trustee at the Stanford Graduate School

1:10:44.160 --> 1:10:47.640
<v Speaker 2>of Business. You're currently a trustee of the Tiger Foundation

1:10:48.200 --> 1:10:50.879
<v Speaker 2>as well as a board member at the Spotlight Foundation.

1:10:51.000 --> 1:10:53.080
<v Speaker 2>Tell us a little bit about the work you do

1:10:53.160 --> 1:10:54.320
<v Speaker 2>with these foundations.

1:10:54.800 --> 1:10:58.440
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, So one of the things that Julian Robertson imparted

1:10:58.680 --> 1:11:03.280
<v Speaker 3>on all of us from a young age was give

1:11:03.360 --> 1:11:05.800
<v Speaker 3>back as much as you can, as early as you can.

1:11:05.920 --> 1:11:11.320
<v Speaker 3>Don't wait until you know you're about to die. And

1:11:11.400 --> 1:11:14.280
<v Speaker 3>so I joined the Tiger Foundation, you know, probably over

1:11:14.320 --> 1:11:19.360
<v Speaker 3>twenty years ago, which was Julian's foundation at Tiger Management

1:11:19.479 --> 1:11:24.760
<v Speaker 3>that funds not for profit initiatives in New York City

1:11:24.760 --> 1:11:28.400
<v Speaker 3>to fight poverty and have been doing that now for

1:11:28.880 --> 1:11:30.680
<v Speaker 3>a Tiger Foundation has been around at least twenty five

1:11:30.760 --> 1:11:34.959
<v Speaker 3>years or more, and so that's been an exciting legacy

1:11:35.560 --> 1:11:38.799
<v Speaker 3>for Julian and for all of us that work together

1:11:39.160 --> 1:11:41.639
<v Speaker 3>a Tiger and I'm a trustee on that and work

1:11:43.000 --> 1:11:47.240
<v Speaker 3>hand in hand with the other trustees in undertaking funding

1:11:47.280 --> 1:11:53.280
<v Speaker 3>those initiatives. The Spotlight Foundation was a group of Stanford

1:11:53.280 --> 1:11:56.840
<v Speaker 3>Business School friends of ours. We after we graduated, we

1:11:56.920 --> 1:12:02.120
<v Speaker 3>decided to memorialize our friendship through a foundation that would

1:12:02.120 --> 1:12:07.160
<v Speaker 3>fund not for profit entrepreneurs that were funding education initiatives.

1:12:07.240 --> 1:12:11.840
<v Speaker 3>Seeing how important education was in all of our lives personally,

1:12:12.520 --> 1:12:16.519
<v Speaker 3>wanting to impact those people that didn't have the same

1:12:16.680 --> 1:12:20.400
<v Speaker 3>advantages and opportunities that we had. And so we fund

1:12:20.400 --> 1:12:25.560
<v Speaker 3>a lot of education initiatives, particularly in less advantage communities,

1:12:26.240 --> 1:12:29.120
<v Speaker 3>and we fund the entrepreneurs, the ones we're doing earlier

1:12:29.160 --> 1:12:32.479
<v Speaker 3>stage startups that could become the next Kip, you know,

1:12:32.520 --> 1:12:34.720
<v Speaker 3>in the charter schools of the world, or you know,

1:12:34.720 --> 1:12:38.080
<v Speaker 3>we funded the Seattle Girls School to bring science initiatives

1:12:38.080 --> 1:12:41.600
<v Speaker 3>to girls within the inner city Seattle community. And so

1:12:42.160 --> 1:12:44.760
<v Speaker 3>that's something that you know, is very near and dear

1:12:44.840 --> 1:12:45.920
<v Speaker 3>to my heart.

1:12:46.439 --> 1:12:49.519
<v Speaker 2>Sounds really interesting, all right, Let's jump to our favorite

1:12:49.600 --> 1:12:52.880
<v Speaker 2>questions we ask all of our guests, starting with tell

1:12:52.960 --> 1:12:56.360
<v Speaker 2>us about your mentors who helped shape your career.

1:12:58.320 --> 1:13:01.519
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, well, you know, I've had various mentors over the

1:13:01.640 --> 1:13:06.519
<v Speaker 3>over time. Certainly would put you know, Lee and Julian

1:13:07.000 --> 1:13:10.160
<v Speaker 3>in that category, not as a personal mentorship, but more

1:13:10.200 --> 1:13:16.719
<v Speaker 3>as individuals I observed and admired as investors. But also

1:13:17.000 --> 1:13:20.080
<v Speaker 3>you know, you're looking at someone like Julian, how philanthropic

1:13:20.200 --> 1:13:25.040
<v Speaker 3>he was and giving and the way he treated people.

1:13:25.640 --> 1:13:29.880
<v Speaker 3>I really admired that about him. There was another individual

1:13:30.800 --> 1:13:34.160
<v Speaker 3>who's a mentor to me to this day, Gil Caffrey.

1:13:34.360 --> 1:13:38.160
<v Speaker 3>Gil was a partner at Tiger. He was my partner

1:13:38.200 --> 1:13:43.080
<v Speaker 3>at front Point as we built that firm. And Gil

1:13:44.560 --> 1:13:47.880
<v Speaker 3>is an incredible human being. He's smart, and he has

1:13:47.920 --> 1:13:53.840
<v Speaker 3>the highest integrity. He always treated everyone with respect. He

1:13:53.960 --> 1:13:56.800
<v Speaker 3>was a direct individual, but you know, or is a

1:13:56.800 --> 1:14:02.719
<v Speaker 3>direct individual, but he was never emotional. He just showed

1:14:02.760 --> 1:14:05.599
<v Speaker 3>you how to treat clients with respect, how to treat

1:14:06.160 --> 1:14:09.720
<v Speaker 3>your co workers with respect. And it's just somebody who

1:14:10.720 --> 1:14:14.559
<v Speaker 3>mentored me personally and who I try to emulate every day.

1:14:15.439 --> 1:14:18.720
<v Speaker 2>Really good answer. Let's talk about books. What are some

1:14:18.760 --> 1:14:20.639
<v Speaker 2>of your favorites? What are you reading currently?

1:14:22.800 --> 1:14:27.360
<v Speaker 3>Book I'm reading currently London Falling by Patrick Radden Keith,

1:14:28.240 --> 1:14:32.360
<v Speaker 3>who wrote Empire, Pain and Say Nothing. He's an incredible

1:14:32.360 --> 1:14:38.599
<v Speaker 3>investigative journalist writing this wild story, a true story about

1:14:39.040 --> 1:14:42.679
<v Speaker 3>a boy and a family within London in the eighties

1:14:42.720 --> 1:14:46.400
<v Speaker 3>and nineties and in the backdrop of London undergoing the

1:14:46.479 --> 1:14:50.800
<v Speaker 3>changes it had. It is a fascinating piece of work.

1:14:50.880 --> 1:14:52.800
<v Speaker 3>It's one of the best books I've read, and I

1:14:52.840 --> 1:14:55.519
<v Speaker 3>try to read a lot in the last five years,

1:14:55.560 --> 1:15:01.320
<v Speaker 3>and so I've really enjoyed that best book all time.

1:15:01.960 --> 1:15:05.320
<v Speaker 3>I would say, man Search for Meaning. I read it

1:15:05.320 --> 1:15:08.600
<v Speaker 3>in high school. Victor Victor Francle, I read it in

1:15:08.680 --> 1:15:14.760
<v Speaker 3>high school. I reread it every year, just it has

1:15:15.120 --> 1:15:19.320
<v Speaker 3>It's amazing that Victor had the ability to have the

1:15:19.400 --> 1:15:22.519
<v Speaker 3>mind frame he had through the horrors he faced, and

1:15:22.600 --> 1:15:28.120
<v Speaker 3>how that mindset and your sort of ability to attach

1:15:28.240 --> 1:15:31.880
<v Speaker 3>meaning to what goes on in your life. And you

1:15:31.920 --> 1:15:34.559
<v Speaker 3>can't control what happens to you, but you can control

1:15:34.560 --> 1:15:38.240
<v Speaker 3>how you respond to it. I love all things stoicism

1:15:40.320 --> 1:15:46.240
<v Speaker 3>Marcus Aurelius. Yeah, sure, and and and but Victor Francle's writing.

1:15:46.479 --> 1:15:50.280
<v Speaker 3>It's uh. I still have the torn pages of my

1:15:50.400 --> 1:15:53.000
<v Speaker 3>high school copy with my pen marks and I and

1:15:53.040 --> 1:15:55.600
<v Speaker 3>I reread it every year. It's it's It's an amazing book.

1:15:55.680 --> 1:15:58.720
<v Speaker 2>Really really interesting. What are you streaming these days? Tell

1:15:58.800 --> 1:16:03.400
<v Speaker 2>us what sort of podcasts or Netflix, Amazon Prime you're watching.

1:16:04.240 --> 1:16:08.880
<v Speaker 3>So my wife and I love documentaries We are watching

1:16:10.439 --> 1:16:14.200
<v Speaker 3>The Dark Wizard right now about Dean Potter, who was

1:16:15.040 --> 1:16:22.840
<v Speaker 3>an extreme climber and extreme athlete. I love watching depictions

1:16:22.960 --> 1:16:27.320
<v Speaker 3>of obsessive personalities, I think probably because I see some

1:16:27.400 --> 1:16:30.800
<v Speaker 3>of that in myself. But I like watching based on

1:16:30.880 --> 1:16:36.040
<v Speaker 3>people who are in other fields, so whether they're athletes

1:16:36.200 --> 1:16:40.439
<v Speaker 3>or extreme athletes, or musicians or chefs, like Hero Dreams

1:16:40.439 --> 1:16:45.439
<v Speaker 3>of Sushi, the Bears coming back Out, you know Last Dance.

1:16:45.479 --> 1:16:48.599
<v Speaker 3>I love Kobe Bryant and Michael Jordans. You just people

1:16:48.640 --> 1:16:52.160
<v Speaker 3>who pour themselves into what they do because I always

1:16:52.240 --> 1:16:56.479
<v Speaker 3>learn something about how they think about the world and

1:16:56.720 --> 1:16:59.160
<v Speaker 3>pour themselves into what they do as it applies to

1:16:59.360 --> 1:17:01.080
<v Speaker 3>what I do, what I love to do, and so

1:17:01.960 --> 1:17:03.640
<v Speaker 3>you know, I love It's one of the reasons I

1:17:03.640 --> 1:17:05.240
<v Speaker 3>love watching some of these documentaries.

1:17:05.880 --> 1:17:08.880
<v Speaker 2>So I have a couple of things I have to

1:17:08.920 --> 1:17:12.440
<v Speaker 2>share with you. Have you ever read the book Endurance

1:17:12.479 --> 1:17:17.320
<v Speaker 2>about the chefs like it reads like it's fiction. It's

1:17:17.360 --> 1:17:20.519
<v Speaker 2>just so one of the best and I'm drawing a blank.

1:17:20.640 --> 1:17:23.840
<v Speaker 2>I think it was called Open Andre Agassiz.

1:17:23.560 --> 1:17:26.160
<v Speaker 3>Also one of the best sports biographies.

1:17:27.280 --> 1:17:31.759
<v Speaker 2>Just really really interesting. And then I have to slip

1:17:31.800 --> 1:17:34.599
<v Speaker 2>over to music because you mentioned Nirvana twice. You mentioned

1:17:34.640 --> 1:17:39.919
<v Speaker 2>Rick Rubin. You're big music fan? What what genres?

1:17:39.920 --> 1:17:40.559
<v Speaker 3>What do you? Where?

1:17:40.600 --> 1:17:42.920
<v Speaker 2>Do you what? What ponds do you fish?

1:17:43.200 --> 1:17:48.040
<v Speaker 3>When I was younger, I was really into heavy metal.

1:17:48.080 --> 1:17:51.679
<v Speaker 3>I still am, but Rush and heavy metal and bands

1:17:51.760 --> 1:17:54.559
<v Speaker 3>like that. Yeah, and I and I played bass in

1:17:54.600 --> 1:17:59.439
<v Speaker 3>a band. And nowadays it's really you know, I'll listen

1:17:59.479 --> 1:18:02.720
<v Speaker 3>to Miles day Davis, I'll listen to uh, you know,

1:18:02.800 --> 1:18:08.400
<v Speaker 3>Burning Spear and Reggae. I'll listen to Radiohead, listened to Why.

1:18:08.439 --> 1:18:12.560
<v Speaker 3>I've just finished Michael McDonald's autobiography.

1:18:12.960 --> 1:18:16.439
<v Speaker 2>Uh, I know what you're told you're about to say.

1:18:17.040 --> 1:18:18.240
<v Speaker 2>Did you see it's.

1:18:19.000 --> 1:18:24.080
<v Speaker 3>Yea yacht documentary or something? They called it yacht rock

1:18:24.160 --> 1:18:27.679
<v Speaker 3>doc I love yacht music, yacht rock. It was so

1:18:27.840 --> 1:18:29.920
<v Speaker 3>surprisingly good.

1:18:30.600 --> 1:18:33.519
<v Speaker 2>I'm a big Steely Dan fan. Well, so I expect

1:18:33.560 --> 1:18:36.599
<v Speaker 2>it to hate it. And there's a brilliant line where

1:18:36.640 --> 1:18:38.680
<v Speaker 2>he gets Donald Fagan on the phone and he's just.

1:18:38.680 --> 1:18:40.479
<v Speaker 3>Like and he hated the fact that he called him

1:18:40.520 --> 1:18:42.680
<v Speaker 3>yacht rock and hung up on him. But like in

1:18:42.720 --> 1:18:47.679
<v Speaker 3>the in the Michael McDonald autobiography, he talks about Steely

1:18:47.760 --> 1:18:51.920
<v Speaker 3>Dan and their process. They were super obsessive, you know,

1:18:52.640 --> 1:18:55.559
<v Speaker 3>they every note counted. They would do take after take

1:18:55.560 --> 1:18:58.040
<v Speaker 3>after take. It was very sort of Beatles Beach Boys

1:18:58.280 --> 1:19:02.800
<v Speaker 3>for certain musicians, Miles Davis probably you know, who were

1:19:03.040 --> 1:19:07.600
<v Speaker 3>just so intense about the process of creating music. And

1:19:07.680 --> 1:19:10.160
<v Speaker 3>I love seeing that and I love learning from that.

1:19:10.520 --> 1:19:13.640
<v Speaker 2>So there's a YouTube series, or it's a series that

1:19:13.760 --> 1:19:17.599
<v Speaker 2>ended up on YouTube called Classic Albums and the making

1:19:17.880 --> 1:19:23.360
<v Speaker 2>of Steely dan Asia is insane. But they also give

1:19:23.360 --> 1:19:26.000
<v Speaker 2>you a little history and show you, Hey, you like

1:19:27.400 --> 1:19:31.240
<v Speaker 2>my old school. Here's the forty three different guitar solos

1:19:31.320 --> 1:19:33.639
<v Speaker 2>before they and then they didn't just take one, they

1:19:33.680 --> 1:19:36.879
<v Speaker 2>patched twelve of them together. Yeah, it's it's pretty amazing.

1:19:37.200 --> 1:19:40.360
<v Speaker 2>I think it's called Classic Albums, and you can find

1:19:40.400 --> 1:19:43.280
<v Speaker 2>a bunch of other stuff, But I thought the Steely

1:19:43.360 --> 1:19:46.160
<v Speaker 2>dance stuff was was really it was.

1:19:46.120 --> 1:19:49.200
<v Speaker 3>Really solo every time.

1:19:49.360 --> 1:19:51.800
<v Speaker 2>And I have a couple of years on you, but

1:19:51.920 --> 1:19:54.960
<v Speaker 2>I'll make you a tiny little bit jealous. I was

1:19:55.000 --> 1:19:56.760
<v Speaker 2>in I want to say, high school. I saw a

1:19:56.840 --> 1:20:01.880
<v Speaker 2>Black Sabbath at Madison Square Garden and this unknown band's

1:20:02.000 --> 1:20:05.639
<v Speaker 2>opened for them named Van Halen. Oh gosh, and it

1:20:05.720 --> 1:20:07.960
<v Speaker 2>was insane. I'm not exaggerated.

1:20:08.920 --> 1:20:09.280
<v Speaker 3>Jealous.

1:20:09.560 --> 1:20:11.880
<v Speaker 2>Is this what every concert is supposed to be like

1:20:12.640 --> 1:20:14.880
<v Speaker 2>I want to say I was fourteen something like that.

1:20:15.080 --> 1:20:21.000
<v Speaker 2>Head blown. All right, our final two questions. What sort

1:20:21.000 --> 1:20:23.679
<v Speaker 2>of advice would you give to a recent college grad

1:20:24.320 --> 1:20:28.880
<v Speaker 2>interested in a career in either alternative investments, private credit,

1:20:29.439 --> 1:20:30.000
<v Speaker 2>what have you?

1:20:32.840 --> 1:20:32.960
<v Speaker 1>So?

1:20:34.000 --> 1:20:38.360
<v Speaker 3>In my view, and I have two young sons well

1:20:38.720 --> 1:20:41.800
<v Speaker 3>twenty and seventeen, and it's kind of the advice that

1:20:41.840 --> 1:20:47.120
<v Speaker 3>I've given them. I believe the greatest definition or criteria

1:20:47.160 --> 1:20:53.240
<v Speaker 3>of success going forward is going to be adaptation. So

1:20:54.120 --> 1:20:58.879
<v Speaker 3>learn to adapt. Everything is being disrupted. Jobs are being disrupted,

1:20:58.960 --> 1:21:03.880
<v Speaker 3>not replaced or being dis abrupted, careers, the world. Your

1:21:03.960 --> 1:21:10.800
<v Speaker 3>ability to try and fail and get up again. You know,

1:21:10.880 --> 1:21:14.000
<v Speaker 3>as the Japanese say, you know Rise eight fall seven,

1:21:14.680 --> 1:21:21.960
<v Speaker 3>you know, Nanna koobi yaogi, You're actually supposed to put

1:21:21.960 --> 1:21:24.760
<v Speaker 3>yourself out there and be resilient and adapt, and you're

1:21:24.760 --> 1:21:28.880
<v Speaker 3>going to need to. I think in the future. That's

1:21:29.360 --> 1:21:33.680
<v Speaker 3>a really important I think mindset to have in the

1:21:33.680 --> 1:21:38.360
<v Speaker 3>world we're entering into and is going to transpire. Obsess

1:21:38.479 --> 1:21:40.679
<v Speaker 3>about what you do as much as you can read

1:21:40.720 --> 1:21:44.080
<v Speaker 3>everything you can get your hands on, network to what

1:21:44.520 --> 1:21:47.200
<v Speaker 3>every extent you can meet people, put yourself out there

1:21:47.200 --> 1:21:49.120
<v Speaker 3>and do it in person, don't do it over zoom.

1:21:49.920 --> 1:21:52.720
<v Speaker 3>Get out there and immerse yourself in whatever it is

1:21:52.760 --> 1:21:57.280
<v Speaker 3>that you're doing. And then finally, I would say, be

1:21:57.400 --> 1:22:01.280
<v Speaker 3>the man or woman in the arena. You know, I

1:22:01.320 --> 1:22:05.040
<v Speaker 3>think there's an overfixation on likes and the comment section.

1:22:06.120 --> 1:22:09.320
<v Speaker 3>Forget the comment section, forget the number of likes you have.

1:22:10.240 --> 1:22:13.360
<v Speaker 3>Put yourself in the arena. They are always going to

1:22:13.360 --> 1:22:17.040
<v Speaker 3>be weak critics sitting in the stands throwing rocks at you.

1:22:17.080 --> 1:22:17.719
<v Speaker 3>Ignore them.

1:22:18.160 --> 1:22:22.439
<v Speaker 2>That's the famous quote from Theodore Roosevelt Teddy, Right, yeah,

1:22:22.479 --> 1:22:25.759
<v Speaker 2>that's right, the man in the arena. And our final question,

1:22:26.360 --> 1:22:29.080
<v Speaker 2>what do you know about the world of alternative investments

1:22:29.160 --> 1:22:32.280
<v Speaker 2>and private credit today? Might have been helpful when you

1:22:32.320 --> 1:22:36.000
<v Speaker 2>were first getting started thirty or so years ago.

1:22:37.120 --> 1:22:39.880
<v Speaker 3>So when I was starting out in the business, I

1:22:39.960 --> 1:22:43.200
<v Speaker 3>viewed the markets as this giant puzzle that needed to

1:22:43.200 --> 1:22:46.360
<v Speaker 3>be solved. And I like puzzles, So you know, I thought,

1:22:46.479 --> 1:22:50.559
<v Speaker 3>all right, I'll take all of the classes and read

1:22:50.600 --> 1:22:54.160
<v Speaker 3>all of the books on cracking the code, and you know,

1:22:54.520 --> 1:22:58.080
<v Speaker 3>quantitative finance and derivative math and all of these things.

1:22:58.520 --> 1:23:02.080
<v Speaker 3>And yes, over the years I've used those, But if

1:23:02.080 --> 1:23:04.000
<v Speaker 3>I could go back and do it all over again,

1:23:05.400 --> 1:23:09.480
<v Speaker 3>I would have taken far more psychology and philosophy classes

1:23:09.880 --> 1:23:14.160
<v Speaker 3>and maybe fewer you know, classes on building DCF models,

1:23:14.680 --> 1:23:18.240
<v Speaker 3>because as I think about my career and how it's

1:23:18.240 --> 1:23:22.160
<v Speaker 3>evolved in my daily interactions and even observing the markets,

1:23:23.040 --> 1:23:26.840
<v Speaker 3>it's far more driven by behavior than it is by math,

1:23:27.479 --> 1:23:29.919
<v Speaker 3>at least the world I've occupied. I don't work at rentech,

1:23:30.640 --> 1:23:39.840
<v Speaker 3>but it's irrationality and incentives and behavior for better or

1:23:39.840 --> 1:23:43.960
<v Speaker 3>worse that creates opportunities, that creates management challenges, what have you.

1:23:44.800 --> 1:23:48.080
<v Speaker 3>But I would have studied more of the psychology and philosophy.

1:23:48.320 --> 1:23:51.760
<v Speaker 2>Really really interesting answer. Thank you Mike for being so

1:23:51.880 --> 1:23:54.840
<v Speaker 2>generous with your time. We have been speaking with Mike Kelly,

1:23:55.280 --> 1:23:59.680
<v Speaker 2>President and chief investment Officer at Future Standard. If you

1:23:59.760 --> 1:24:02.600
<v Speaker 2>and enjoy this conversation, well check out any of the

1:24:03.000 --> 1:24:05.240
<v Speaker 2>six hundred and forty nine we've done over the past

1:24:05.280 --> 1:24:10.520
<v Speaker 2>twelve years. You can find those at iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, Bloomberg,

1:24:10.600 --> 1:24:14.759
<v Speaker 2>wherever you find your favorite podcast. I would be remiss

1:24:14.760 --> 1:24:16.800
<v Speaker 2>if I didn't thank our crack staff that helps put

1:24:16.840 --> 1:24:21.719
<v Speaker 2>these conversations together each week. Alexis Noriega is my video

1:24:21.840 --> 1:24:26.280
<v Speaker 2>producer Sean Russo is my researcher. Anna Luke is my

1:24:26.479 --> 1:24:31.080
<v Speaker 2>podcast producer. I'm Barry Ritaults. You're listening to Masters in

1:24:31.160 --> 1:24:39.000
<v Speaker 2>Business on Bloomberg Radio.