10 January 2026

The Snowball

Recommendation

Warren Buffett is “everyman” as multibillionaire. Despite his vast wealth, he has always eschewed ostentation. He pays himself about $100,000 annually, which in today’s U.S. economy places him in the upper-middle-class. He lives in the same simple Omaha, Nebraska, house that he bought in 1958 for $31,500. He prefers an old gray suit to expensive London tailoring. In Buffett’s early days, when he was only a multimillionaire and not a multibillionaire, he walked around with holes in the soles of his shoes. To Buffett, wardrobe doesn’t matter; what matters is making money. He is better at this pursuit than anyone else in the world. In 2008, Forbes magazine ranked him as the globe’s richest man, with a net worth of $62.3 billion. Author Alice Schroeder does a masterful job of chronicling Buffett’s improbable, inspiring life. As a former superstar research analyst, Schroeder uses her expert knowledge of finance and commerce to detail Buffett’s investment philosophy and business activities. BooksInShort praises Schroeder’s remarkable skills as a researcher and writer. Her book is packed with fascinating details and trenchant observations about the “Oracle of Omaha.” One of the best business biographies available, this book shows how the world’s greatest investor amassed the world’s greatest fortune, while staying true to his essential self.

Take-Aways

  • As a boy, Warren Buffett dedicated himself to becoming rich.
  • Now he has more money than anyone else on earth.
  • Buffett earned his fortune by being superb at determining a company’s long-term value and earnings potential, his primary investment criteria.
  • Buffett never lets the ups and downs of the stock market influence his investments.
  • He is always suspicious of stock booms and seldom surprised by stock busts.
  • Buffett carefully looks for undervalued companies.
  • He avoids Wall Street, much preferring to operate from Omaha, Nebraska.
  • Buffett set up his business affairs to operate with a tight center staff. This policy eases his mind about his responsibility to investors.
  • Buffett is a complex man with simple taste, a conventional man who has led an unconventional life.
  • Buffett plans to give the bulk of his massive fortune to charity.

Summary

The World’s Wealthiest Individual

Warren Buffett earned his vast fortune all by himself. Instead of living amid Wall Street’s bustle, Buffett lives and works in Omaha, Nebraska, a bucolic city in the U.S. heartland. Throughout his career, backwater Omaha has been Buffett’s base, though the rest of the business world sees it as a déclassé town of no special significance. To build his enormous wealth, Buffett exhaustively studied the stock market and the world of commerce, learning everything he could about individual companies, and their potential for growth and earnings. This hard-earned knowledge has been his guiding light and his path to becoming the richest man in the world.

“Warren Buffett was a man who loved money, a man for whom the game of collecting it ran in his veins as his lifeblood.”

Buffett’s investment philosophy, adapted from his mentor, investment guru Benjamin Graham, is remarkably simple: Look for companies whose stock values are priced less than the organization’s “intrinsic” value and invest accordingly. Buffett does not concern himself with the market’s temporary ups and downs. He invests for the long term, focusing on companies’ sound business fundamentals and capacity to generate superior earnings year after year. Through this straightforward process, he made his fortune. Of course, the “Oracle of Omaha’s” legendary expertise in separating commercial winners from losers is much easier described than accomplished. How did Buffett become the world’s best company evaluator and stock-picker?

“When Buffett walked into a room, the electricity was palpable. In his presence, people felt brushed by greatness. They wanted to touch him. They became dumbstruck before him, or babbled inane remarks.”

You can find the answer in his single-minded quest, from childhood, to become a millionaire. One of the earliest photographs of Buffett as a little boy shows him proudly holding his favorite toy, a nickel-plated change-maker, a small gizmo with four tubes that dispensed coins. As he grew up, Buffett zealously studied everything he could find about business and investing, including decades-old magazines and newspapers. That he far surpassed his initial financial goal is a testament to his prescience and steely-eyed focus, as well as to his idiosyncratic formula for financial achievement. His story is the classic American tale of hard work that pays off beyond all expectations. How the kid who wanted to make a million actually did that – and more – is a truly amazing tale.

The Early Years

The members of the Buffett clan were Nebraska tradespeople, straightforward, honest, no-nonsense types. Warren’s father, Howard, worked in his own father’s grocery store in Omaha before attending the University of Nebraska. After that, he sold insurance. In 1930, Howard’s second son Warren Edward was born just at the start of the Great Depression. Soon after, Howard opened a stock brokerage, Buffett, Sklenicka & Co. To do so when people were shunning stocks took real courage. However, Howard’s business was a winner from the start.

“Howard Buffett quickly gained a reputation as perhaps the least backslapping congressman ever to represent his state.”

A precocious toddler, Warren loved numbers and collecting things. His hobbies included counting and measuring. Of course, these interests would stand him in good stead. As a boy, Warren was a bona fide businessman. His first products were packs of gum, which he sold to his neighbors. Later, he sold golf balls that he retrieved from the lake at Omaha’s Elmwood Park golf course. He also sold popcorn and peanuts at local football games. Warren saved every penny he made. Even as a youngster, Warren avidly read all the investment books and periodicals at his father’s office. His favorite library book was One Thousand Ways to Make $1,000. He studied it religiously. He vowed to himself that by age 35, he would be a millionaire.

“Since Warren looked at every dollar as $10 someday, he wasn’t going to hand over a dollar more than he needed to spend.”

During the 1940s, Howard, a rock-ribbed Republican, was elected to Congress. He and his family moved to Washington, D.C., where Warren entered junior high school and became a newspaper boy. In 1944, Warren submitted his first income tax return. By age 14, he had saved $1,000. Through hard work, he doubled it and purchased a 40-acre tenant farm in Nebraska. As a teenager, Warren also went into the pinball business, buying and installing the machines in local barbershops. Additionally, he became a horse race handicapper, selling a tip sheet he entitled Stable-Boy Selections.

“He never hosted backyard barbecues, lazed around a swimming pool, stargazed or simply went for a walk in the woods. A stargazing Warren would have looked at the Big Dipper and seen a dollar sign.”

After high school, Warren briefly attended the University of Pennsylvania, which he did not like. He was shocked when Harvard turned him down. He got admitted to Columbia University, where he took classes with Benjamin Graham, the famous author of The Intelligent Investor. He quickly became Graham’s star pupil. Warren read and memorized Security Analysis, the influential book Graham wrote with Columbia professor David Dodd.

“Buffett had a buoyant optimism about the long-term economic future of American business.”

By this time, Buffett was a regular investor on Wall Street. He focused on companies that kept costs low and always made money, such as GEICO, an insurance firm that sold policies over the telephone. Buffett initially bought 350 shares and later bought many more. After graduation, he returned to Omaha, where he sold stocks for his father’s firm and taught investing at the University of Omaha. He married a sensitive, empathetic girl named Susan (“Susie”) Thompson. By 1951, Buffett’s capital was $19,738, which he invested and reinvested.

“The very mention that Buffett had bought a stock could, all by itself, move its price and revalue a company by hundreds of millions of dollars.”

He and Susie lived inexpensively on his earnings as a stockbroker and part-time teacher. This was not hard because Warren was quite cheap. He would wash his car only when it rained, so he could save on water. In 1953, Warren and Susie’s first child, Susan Alice, was born. She became known as “Little Susie.” They later had two sons, Howard and Peter.

“Buffett’s testimony in Congress as the reformer and savior of Salomon had turned him from a rich investor into a hero.”

In 1954, Buffett and his young wife moved to New York, where he went to work at Graham’s investment firm, the Graham-Newman Corporation. He subscribed fully to Graham’s investment philosophy of focusing on companies’ net worth and purchasing stock in firms that Wall Street undervalued. Graham called such companies “cigar butts.” Buffett studied Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, and “with his prodigious ability to absorb numbers and to analyze them,” he quickly became a sensation at Graham’s firm, invariably recommending great buys. Buffett learned a valuable lesson about “capital allocation” – “placing money where it would earn the highest return.” This became one of his bedrock investment principles. When Graham retired, he offered Buffett a partnership to keep him at the firm. But Buffett had come to New York to be close to Graham. With him gone, Buffett saw no reason to stay. He moved his family back to Omaha.

“Buffett would undertake almost anything from his short list of most-loathed tasks – get into an angry, critical confrontation; fire someone; cut off a long friendship carefully cultivated; eat Japanese food...almost anything – [rather] than make a withdrawal from the Bank of Reputation.”

Buffett Associates Ltd. By 1956, Buffett had $174,000. Although only 26, he planned to retire and live off the investment income that he could make from his nest egg. He invited some friends and relatives to benefit from his investment expertise. Six initial partners joined the new Buffett Associates Ltd., including his father-in-law, Doc Thompson ($25,000), his Aunt Alice ($35,000), and his sister Doris and her husband ($10,000). Buffett was the seventh partner. As a management fee, he charged his new partners “half the upside above a 4% threshold.” He also “took a quarter of the downside.” Soon others joined the partnership, which made money rapidly. Buffett set up numerous additional partnerships with other investors, including attorney Charlie Munger, who also operated his own investment firm. He eventually became Buffett’s primary partner. By now Buffett was making a large return from each partnership. He constantly reinvested his earnings, so his wealth kept increasing. Indeed, Buffett’s “snowball” was starting to grow substantially.

“In the short run, the market is a voting machine. In the long run, it’s a weighing machine.”

Buffett was managing more than a million dollars a year by 1958. His goal was to outperform the Dow by 10% annually. He was doing so well he no longer recruited new partners. Now someone who wanted his investment advice had to solicit him. In 1962, Buffett merged his partnerships into Buffett Partnership Ltd. (BPL), with assets of $7.2 million. Buffett was now a millionaire. His early $3 million investment in American Express paid handsomely, but his investment in Berkshire Hathaway, a New England textile firm, initially did not. In 1962, he bought 2,000 shares of Berkshire at $7.50 per share. Then he bought more. Eventually, he bought the company, as well as the Blue Chip Stamps Company, Illinois National Bank and Trust Company of Rockford, Sun Newspapers in Omaha, See’s candy company and, over time, many more.

San Francisco Susie

While Buffett made himself and his partners wildly rich, Susie became socially active on behalf of Omaha’s poor black community. She also became a part-time singer, making a separate life for herself though remaining deeply supportive of her husband. By 1966, Buffett’s wealth totaled nearly $10 million, but Berkshire Hathaway was now “on life support.” He tried to sell it to Charlie Munger. But Munger, who deeply respected Buffett’s investment acumen, had no interest in owning a firm Buffett did not want. Eventually, Buffett closed the Berkshire Hathaway plant and laid off the workers. From then on, Berkshire Hathaway became Buffett’s holding company, his main corporate enterprise. By 1974, Buffett, with his many companies, was a business mogul, although a small one. By 1977, his wealth surpassed $70 million. He was only 47. But Susie wanted more. By this time she had moved to San Francisco, where she now lived alone. She loved her husband, but wanted a life outside Omaha. Warren and Susie remained devoted, and talked daily on the phone. In 1978, at Susie’s urging, Astrid Menks, age 32, began to take care of Buffett, eventually moving in with him. The arrangement was an unusual triangle, but Buffett never felt the need to explain it to anyone. It worked well for all the parties concerned.

Richer and Richer

As the years progressed, Buffett continued to expand his fortune, along with those of his partners and fellow investors. By 1980, when Buffett was 50, Berkshire Hathaway was listed for $375 a share. By 1983, the Buffetts were worth $680 million and he was a billionaire by 1985. In 1987, Berkshire Hathaway traded at $2,950 per share and Buffett was worth $2.1 billion, making him the ninth-richest person in the United States. By 1991, he was the second richest, with a net worth of $3.8 billion. Buffett’s initial partners each had made $3 million for every $1,000 they originally invested with him. Year after year, Buffett’s fortune (his “snowball”) grew exponentially. By 2008, he was the richest man in the world. Throughout his climb, he watched his expenses and invested carefully, always investing his profits and letting his funds appreciate at compound interest. Buffett never allowed the fickle stock market to dictate to him, particularly when it plunged into high tech. He freely admitted he didn’t understand it, saying, “The software business is not within my circle of competence...We understand Dilly Bars and not software.” Thus, he avoided high tech’s bubbles, booms and busts. Instead, Buffett dictated to the market.

The Salomon Brothers Debacle

Buffett loved money, but he loved his hard-won reputation for honesty even more. In 1991, Salomon Brothers – a Wall Street investment bank in which Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway had a $700 million investment – tested his reputation. A Salomon executive, Paul Mozer, had engaged in a series of rule-breaking bids in his dealings with the U.S. Treasury. News of his violations hit Wall Street, which went into a fury. It turned out that other Salomon executives, including CEO John Gutfreund, had known of Mozer’s misdeeds. This implicated the firm in the scandal. Gutfreund, who should have fired Mozer and didn’t, had to resign. Salomon’s stock nosedived.

“Balzac said that behind every great fortune lies a crime. That’s not true at Berkshire.” (Buffett)

During this rough period, Buffett put his reputation on the line by assuming the post of Salomon’s interim chairman. He was known worldwide for his probity, honesty, openness and integrity. Thus, his willingness to rescue Salomon Brothers saved it from declaring bankruptcy. During Buffett’s testimony before the U.S. Congress about this affair, he said he had told Salomon’s executives, “Lose money for the firm, and I will be understanding. Lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless.”

Family Matters

In 2004, Buffett’s beloved wife Susie died of a cerebral hemorrhage. Two years later, he married Astrid Menks, his longtime live-in companion. Also in 2006, Buffett announced that he planned to give away his Berkshire Hathaway stock, valued at $37 billion. He stated his intention to donate some 83% of it to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation “for the betterment of the world.” Buffett did not ask the Gates Foundation to memorialize him. He made only one precondition: It should spend the money quickly to help people in distress.

About the Author

Alice Schroeder, initially a CPA, became a respected research analyst. Impressed with her writing skills, Warren Buffett recommended that she become a full-time writer instead.


Read summary...
The Snowball

Book The Snowball

Warren Buffett and the Business of Life

Bloomsbury,


 



10 January 2026

The Pirate's Dilemma

Recommendation

You’ve been sleeping through an earthquake if you haven’t noticed teenagers freely creating and sharing digital music, photos and videos through the Internet. This is just one example of young pirates blurring the boundaries between ownership and invention, and rebelliously creating new innovations that ultimately transform society and the commercial marketplace. In a book that is both hipster and academic, author Matt Mason makes the case that idea pirates and other rebels who draw from pop culture to create new forms (thus often defying intellectual property laws) can, and often do, benefit society. Mason surveys the landscape for piracy and finds it everywhere, from music remixing to viral hip-hop videos. Although he sometimes slips into the youthful delusion that creativity began with his own generation, Mason does highlight an important point: pirate innovations can help steer society’s course. BooksInShort recommends this book to C-level executives seeking to understand changes in the competitive landscape, creative marketers who want to think outside the box and anyone interested in the underground’s influence on mainstream culture.

Take-Aways

  • Rebellious youth often channel their creative energy into “piracy” to fly in the face of the societal or cultural status quo.
  • These cultural pirates appropriate existing resources, art, music or other intellectual property, and then alter and splice it to create new hybrids.
  • Rightful owners often challenge such piracy as theft or plagiarism, yet cultural pirates typically provide a service or product the marketplace wants.
  • Pirates have innovated in many areas, from music and art to software development.
  • Modern-day pirates who have ignored existing boundaries and broken new ground include dance club disc jockeys, graffiti artists and remix hip-hop artists.
  • Public spaces can become a canvas for pirates’ self-expression.
  • Jaded by ubiquitous ads, youthful consumers reject inauthentic marketing.
  • Businesses and pirates are both motivated by social benefit as well as self-interest.
  • Once pirates create new hybrid forms, or “remixes,” their work threatens existing vested interests, which engage the pirates in power struggles.
  • Smart enterprises find ways to compete with pirates or to co-opt their efforts.

Summary

Playing the Piracy Game

Game theorists study a hypothetical situation called “The Prisoner’s Dilemma.” In this scenario, police are trying to make a case against either or both of two suspects they have apprehended for the same crime. Each possible outcome carries risks and opportunities. If the two prisoners refuse to incriminate each other, they both will receive the lightest sentence, six months in jail. If one fingers the other, he will go free and the other will serve five years. If they blame each other, both must serve two years. Usually, the prisoners act out of self-interest and not for the good of their mutual two-person community. As a result, this situation typically leads to a suboptimal outcome for both criminals. Neither wants to risk the heaviest sentence if the other tattles. So they point the finger at each other, and both get the medium sentence. If they had kept quiet, essentially working together as a community, they’d each have gotten the lightest sentence.

“From radio pirates to graffiti artists to open-source culture to the remix, the ideas behind youth cultures have evolved into powerful forces that are changing the world.”

Game theory illuminates the issue of modern cultural piracy in a similar fashion. This analysis does not deal with maritime pirates who hijack boats. Instead, it addresses the type of pirate that appropriates intellectual property and public space. Today’s cultural pirates are innovators working outside common boundaries and reworking existing art forms, software, music, digitized information and other creative expressions. The other participants in these industries, including the rightful owners of the pirated intellectual property, face a problem that could be called “The Pirate’s Dilemma.” How do existing enterprises deal with pirates who encroach on their territory and commercial marketplace? A legal battle is one possibility. But turf wars that suppress creativity and restrict new developments are rarely the wisest choice for those in power.

Pirate Playlist

In numerous situations, pirates have commandeered popular music and culture, and, in turn, have left a lasting impact. History shows that cultural pirates made many advances. In fact, the word “Yankee” derives from the Dutch slang for “pirate,” because early colonial Americans were reputed to be bootleggers. Working musicians initially saw Thomas Edison, inventor of the first sound recordings, as a pirate who stole their music. Later pirates who employed Edison’s filmmaking technology for their own profit ended up establishing Hollywood when they fled west to escape the inventor’s demands for licensing fees.

“Illegal pirates, legitimate companies, and law-abiding citizens are now all in the same space, working out how to share and control information in new ways.”

The punk rock music genre was born from a pirate sensibility. It expressed youthful rebellion and the idea that just doing something is more important than being an expert at it. Punk music is played with such simple musical chords that anyone can create it. Amateurs with a do-it-yourself sensibility and do-it-yourself haircuts execute this music meant for everybody. As a cultural trend, it empowered ordinary youth, and blurred the line between the band and the audience. Grabbing modern culture by the throat, punk rockers believed they could benefit the world while acting in their own self-interest.

“Youth cultures often embody some previously invisible, unacknowledged feeling in society and give it an identity.”

Some former punksters went on to make names for themselves in businesses, including Suroosh Alvi, Gavin McInnes and Shane Smith, publishers of Vice, an international anti-establishment magazine. Punk’s do-it-yourself impulse spurred Dov Charney to create American Apparel, a hipster brand devoid of corporate logos that now generates $250 million a year, all without using sweatshop labor. Rock stars turned philanthropists, such as U2 singer Bono, use the term “punk capitalism” to refer to a system where society’s interests merge with marketers’ interests.

“Punk was an angry outburst, a reaction to mass culture, but it offered new ideas about how mass culture could be replaced with a more personalized, less centralized worldview.”

Urban disc jockeys followed the defiant punk rockers. These pirate DJs used vinyl LPs to piece together, or “remix,” idiosyncratic continuous dance music to play in underground clubs. Another type of common piracy occurs over the airwaves. Outlaw radio stations broadcast forbidden ideologies or music. One set of broadcasters used an abandoned sea base off the shore of England to establish a pirate radio station. The sea base’s new owners declared that their manmade island was, in fact, an independent sovereign nation, “The Principality of Sealand.” Their unusual micro-nation later became home to a variety of dubious (i.e., pirate) enterprises that other countries rejected.

What’s That Music?

The history of musical remixing began in Jamaica with a man named Duke Reid. In 1967, a fortuitous accident at Reid’s recording studio led to the first “dub version” of a song, an instrumental track without vocals. This track became a building block for remixing popular dance music. The second step in remixing’s emergence occurred in New York in 1972 at The Loft, an underground club where inventive DJs collaborated on dance versions of long-playing disco. Here, dance music originated from the concept of sharing.

“The barriers to entry are being kicked down, and this new breed of fans-turned-performers...is rushing the world stage.”

Hip-hop represents the maturation of the remix. A 1981 record called “The Adventures of Grandmaster Flash on the Wheels of Steel” ushered in this innovation, followed a year later by Afrika Bambaataa’s “Planet Rock.” Its innovators wanted hip-hop to bring peace to former gang enemies, using dance to unite people away from the violence of the streets. The essence of remixing is separating elements and reorganizing them into a new whole.

“The history of modern dance music, rave and club culture as we know it can be traced back to the Loft. Its legacy is difficult to overestimate.”

Remixing hit the screen with the advent of videos, as moviemakers and bootleggers both created movies edited from pieces of other movies. In one famous example, fans were unhappy with the 2001 Star Wars movie. An unknown pirate editor revised the commercially released movie and distributed his own version. In a similar fashion, computer geeks led a phenomenon called “modding,” modifying or remixing computer games. In 1983, three high school kids created a satiric “mod” hit that remixed Smurf cartoon characters, a touch of Monty Python and a Nazi shoot-’em-up computer game. Computer gaming companies ultimately hired many “modders.”

“Some still view the remix as nothing more than plagiarism.”

Remixing even hit the fashion world. Nike kept market dominance by changing elements of its Air Force One sneaker and creating limited editions. A Japanese designer, Nigo, created his own successful riff on the footwear, manufacturing an expensive hip-hop sneaker in glossy, garish colors. Fashion, unlike other commercial arts, does not resist borrowing other people’s designs.

“If suing customers for consuming pirate copies becomes central to a company or industry’s business model, then the truth is that that company or industry no longer has a competitive business model.”

In the 1970s, disc jockeys at New York dance clubs became frustrated because record companies would not share their latest releases with them. They banded together into something called the “Record Pool.” This new collective achieved bargaining clout with the music companies and struck a deal allowing the DJs to receive early releases for test purposes. In turn, they provided the record companies with valuable feedback.

“Wildly successful Net-based businesses such as eBay, Amazon, and MySpace are based on the strength of their communities and the content their users contribute for free.”

A couple of decades later, a 17-year-old pirate named Shawn Fanning cracked conventional music distribution wide open. He created online file sharing through a Web site called Napster, which millions of people used to trade digitized songs. Napster got shut down for copyright infringement, but the concept remains and legal versions are widespread. Online file sharing is just another example of open sourcing or, in many cases, piracy. While several record companies sued their customers for file sharing, others embraced the new distribution format. Traditional copyright law frowns on remixing. Now, a new alternative called “Creative Commons,” allows the original artist to retain power and yet legalizes remixing. This creative, democratic innovation promotes new forms of expression.

Pirate Painters

In the early ’70s, New York City graffiti artists used spray paint to assert their domination over social spaces. A “graffiti war” escalated as “taggers” transformed entire subway cars with elaborate painted designs. Eventually the police and the transit system forced out the graffiti artists. They resurfaced in trendy art galleries that welcomed this hip form of expression. MIT researchers found similarities between graffiti and French cooking. Graffiti artists and French chefs both had tight-knit social groups with informal rule systems and status hierarchies that helped ensure that new creations were credited to the right people. At the same time, both communities welcomed innovative adjustments and interpretations of other people’s work.

“Open source isn’t just a case of letting others use your work; it’s also about allowing your work to be transformative, so both you and others can benefit.”

Street artists are the latest form of graffiti artists. These pirates must work quickly to make their mark and avoid being caught. They transform parking meters into yellow tape lollipops, or create cellophane tape sculptures of ducks and leave them floating in a park pond. Graffiti art often mimics public advertising posters. Yet, companies also sometimes stage such events for publicity. In 2007, one campaign backfired terribly when people confused LED advertising displays with bombs. The authorities levied a huge fine on the perpetrators.

“Each story in this book is about boundaries coming down.”

Graffiti artists rebel against the pervasive advertising culture, which, ironically, often attempts to mimic them. Talking back on this social, artistic level is called “culture jamming.” One example is a magazine called Adbusters, which opposes the “zombie-like consumer culture.” Another example is the work of artist Ji Li, who became disenchanted with working for an ad agency. He began affixing cartoon-like speech bubbles to pictures of people on billboards and would return later to see what passersby had written on them.

Dominating the Digital Age

The collective creative commons concept permeates music and dance trends. Open-source computing came from the same spirit. The members of the “Homebrew Computer Club,” which formed in California in the 1970s, had a do-it-yourself attitude and a transformative vision of what computers could mean to society. They saw computing as more of a social collaboration than a commercial venture, although a few members went on to form the Apple Computer Company. In 1976, Bill Gates, then 21, objected to the club’s use of his proprietary intellectual product, an early software program called Altair BASIC. Perhaps signaling things to come, the future founder of Microsoft put an end to the hippie, free-love era of computing.

“One man’s copyright terrorist is another’s creative freedom fighter; many forms of piracy transform society for the better.”

Since then, others have led efforts to resume free access via other open-source developments, such as UNIX and Linux. The open-source movement has a fundamentally different operating model than the commercial world. Take Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia created by Jimmy Wales to offer information from anyone who wants to contribute. A 2005 study compared the accuracy of 42 science entries from Wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica, finding four inaccuracies per entry in the former and three per entry in the latter. However, people can and do correct online errors. Wikipedia proves the power of shared information, but it does not “guarantee” accuracy.

“Economist Joseph Schumpeter once said economic development requires ‘gales of creative destruction.’ Punk was a category five hurricane.”

Technology continues to enable more of the punk pirates’ do-it-yourself sensibility. Everyone can become an author at a reasonable cost via Web-based, print-on-demand book publishing. Wannabe musicians and filmmakers can express themselves in music or video with computer gear that’s easily available for the home studio. Technology is decentralizing creative power. Today, bloggers are scooping mainstream news media and amateur videographers are creating YouTube mega-hits. As computing becomes more advanced, graffiti artists and advertisers will probably continue to wrestle for dominance over public spaces. In that battle, even cyberspace can be subject to piracy.

Making the Most of Piracy

Businesses and individuals should remember:

  • Having a bootleg mindset can help you see situations in new ways, making them ripe with creative possibilities.
  • Piracy reflects true democracy; it empowers people to push the envelope.
  • If you stumble on an idea or product with wide appeal, but step on a few toes in the process, it’s possible that governments may even change the law to accommodate your innovation.
  • Be open to capitalizing on new revenue channels once your efforts gain widespread acceptance. Consider forming partnerships with established corporations.
  • New markets opened up by piracy ultimately can add value to society.

About the Author

Former pirate radio DJ Matt Mason is co-founder of WEdia, a Web media portal highlighting worldwide, nonprofit efforts. He was founding editor-in-chief of the alternative music magazine RWD, which created the satiric viral hit, “The Booo Krooo.”


Read summary...
The Pirate's Dilemma

Book The Pirate's Dilemma

How Youth Culture Is Reinventing Capitalism

Free Press,


 



10 January 2026

Guide to Hedge Funds

Recommendation

This brief handbook offers a concise, highly readable introduction to the controversial subject of hedge funds. Philip Coggan demystifies these complex, generally unregulated investment vehicles. He identifies the major hedge-fund investment styles, lists some of the most important hedge funds and explains how they work. He elucidates some of the darker corners of the hedge-fund world, providing one of the most comprehensible accounts yet written of its risks and regulatory challenges. BooksInShort recommends this book to readers who have a basic acquaintance with the language and concepts of finance and investment, and who seek an unbiased, objective introduction to hedge funds.

Take-Aways

  • Hedge-fund managers have become a focus of fascination and even horror.
  • The label “hedge fund” covers many investment styles and is difficult to define.
  • Hedge funds share some characteristics: extraordinarily high compensation for managers, very high risk, greater than expected leverage and a focus on absolute return.
  • Hedge-fund regulation and supervision have been rather lax in the United States.
  • Continental Europeans, especially Germans, have called for tighter regulation of hedge funds, but Britain and the U.S. have preferred a laissez-faire approach.
  • Studies suggest that hedge-fund managers do produce returns even in bad markets, but investors may not get what they pay for, since managers keep so much of the earnings.
  • Activist investors buy corporate equity and push management changes to increase value.
  • The hedge-fund industry is changing as it matures. Some managers are seeking permanent capital; others have diversified into tamer financial activities.
  • The devastating consequences of the subprime mortgage crisis suggest that hedge funds’ future growth may not be as impressive as their past growth.
  • Clearly, the hedge-fund industry has serious work to do on risk control.

Summary

The Hedge-Fund World

Hedge-fund managers are Wall Street’s new public paradigm: the money manipulators who take home the big profits. Mostly male, the managers of hedge funds have proven their power to change the value of currencies, rattle company managers, crash markets and make enormous amounts of money while doing so. Twenty-five hedge-fund managers shared $14 billion in total compensation in 2006, and the three most highly compensated earned $1 billion or more apiece. Moreover, they make that much even though they turn away investment money. The best hedge-fund managers are quite selective about whose money they manage. Indeed, having money with one of the funds at that level is a status symbol that confers bragging rights.

“Those...who run the funds have the power to bring down currencies, unseat company executives, send markets into meltdown and, in the process, accumulate vast amounts of wealth.”

Hedge funds have grown more important in the financial system while they have taken on functions that used to belong exclusively to banks, insurance companies, pension funds, mutual funds and so forth. Yet, most hedge-fund managers have a casual, sartorial style that seems out of keeping with their eminence, and that is much more laid-back than the power-suited bankers of the 1980s. Unlike the old “Masters of the Universe” about whom novelist Tom Wolfe wrote in Bonfire of the Vanities, the new breed shuns the heart of Manhattan and prefers to situate its offices in such tranquil suburbs as Greenwich, Connecticut.

“The industry is gradually becoming mainstream. But this is still a weird and wonderful world, with lots of different creatures being dubbed hedge funds, even though they have strikingly different characteristics.”

In the public mind, at least in Great Britain, the face of hedge funds is George Soros, who “broke the Bank of England” in 1992. In the United States, the public may be more apt to recognize the name of Long-Term Capital Management, the fund whose roster of Nobel laureates was unable to prevent it from nearly crashing the entire global financial system in the late 1990s. However, few people outside of the financial industry know much about hedge funds, and even fewer know who manages them. This is partly by design. Most hedge-fund managers shy away from publicity for good reason: in 2003, kidnappers nabbed one of them.

Hedge-Fund Basics

Hedge funds are difficult to define. The category has a startling variety of investment styles, instruments, strategies, fee schemes and other characteristics. Yet, these generalities apply:

  • Hedge funds tend to be private, that is, shares do not trade publicly.
  • They tend to be illiquid – investors are not free to take out capital at will.
  • They tend to be exempt from many of the regulations and taxes imposed on other investment vehicles.
  • They tend to be flexible and to speculate in a wide variety of instruments.
  • They tend to use leverage, that is, to borrow in order to boost returns.
  • Their managers tend to be extremely well paid. They reap sometimes outlandish amounts, even when they don’t succeed. These fees are quite controversial.
“Hedge fund techniques are here for good, even if the industry itself changes out of all recognition – and 2007’s bad publicity will probably slow its growth.”

Hedge funds are riskier than many other investments. Among the risks:

  • Leverage magnifies gains but it also multiplies losses. Some hedge funds were virtually wiped out in 2007, that is, their investors lost most or all of the capital they invested because of speculation in mortgage-backed securities.
  • Exemption from regulation means that fraud may be easier to perpetrate in hedge funds. In fact, some hedge-fund managers have lied, or misrepresented profits or investments.
  • Illiquidity ties investors to the fund, meaning that getting money out in bad times can be difficult.
  • Hedge-fund managers charge high fees, sometimes more than high enough to absorb any excess return an investor may have expected; you may not get what you pay for in some cases.
  • Hedge funds are not transparent, and their opacity makes it difficult for investors to know where funds are invested. And again, leverage makes this opacity even riskier.
“Hedge fund fees are high enough to raise questions about whether they make more money for themselves than for their clients.”

One scholar referred to hedge funds as “the Galapagos Islands of finance,” meaning that intense competition among managers leads to rapid, multifaceted evolution and an astonishing proliferation of innovation. Investors flock to hedge-fund managers who have good reputations, but caveat emptor – a sterling reputation gives no real assurance that the manager will succeed.

“Traditionally, activists were seen as a force in the American market, but they have been moving their attention to Europe. This helps explain why they have been the subject of controversy; in continental Europe, shareholders have traditionally been seen

Some investors may seek hedge funds to diversify their portfolios. Because hedges can make money whether the market is rising or falling, they have generally logged good records. However, unlike conventional money managers, hedge-fund managers do not define success in terms of beating a market index. If an index falls, and the conventional managers’ customers do not lose as much as the index did, they may call that a success. However, the investors still lost money. By contrast, hedge-fund managers look to absolute returns. Losing money is failure – period!

“The danger for funds-of-funds may lie in excessive risk aversion.”

Hedge-fund managers make money in falling markets by selling short. Their ability to sell short easily is important to their success, but it is also fuel for controversy. Corporate managers detest it when investors sell their stocks short because that is, in effect, a vote against their management. The short seller bets that a stock’s price is going to fall, borrows shares and sells them now, planning to buy them back later at the lower price and return them to the lender. Short selling serves a valuable economic function. For instance, it helps deflate bubbles and manias. Short selling whispers words of skeptical reason into a market’s euphoric ears. So, hedge funds’ short selling is not shady or immoral, but it is risky – as are many hedge-fund investment strategies.

How Hedge Funds Make Money

In 1990, only 600 hedge funds were active; in 2000, that rose to some 10,000. Hedge funds took in about $65 billion in fees in 2005, and likely more in subsequent years. Traditionally, hedge investors have been rich, but in recent years, even pension funds have bought hedge investments.

“It certainly seems hard to claim, at first sight, that hedge funds earn rewards commensurate with their contribution to society.”

Hedge funds break into four broad categories, each with numerous subcategories:

1. Equity or Stock Market Funds

These funds include:

  • Long-short – Long-short managers buy some stocks and sell others short, hoping to make money when their long positions go up and their short positions go down.
  • Market neutral – This is a subgenre of long-short investing in which the manager attempts to neutralize the portfolio against the market’s up-or-down moves, and make money on the relationship between securities instead of on their directional moves.
  • Short selling – Short funds do not take long positions; they rely only on short selling.

2. Arbitrage Funds

These funds attempt to profit from mispriced securities. Generally, the managers bet on a theoretical relationship between prices. When a price moves out of the theoretically correct alignment, they invest expecting it to move back. The main types of arbitrage investing are:

  • Convertible – Some bond covenants allow investors to exchange the debt for equity at a certain price. Hedge fund managers analyze these convertible securities as a combination of a bond and an option, and speculate on the underlying price relationships.
  • Statistical arbitrage – Statistical arbitrageurs, who are practitioners of an intensely quantitative discipline, look for patterns in security prices.
  • Fixed-income arbitrage – These investors try to profit from inefficiencies in bond pricing. This was the strategy of the Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM) hedge fund, which failed due to flawed models and insufficient capital.

3. Directional Funds

These types of funds invest in trends:

  • Global macro – Global macro investing has faded in popularity in recent years, partly because it takes a great deal of investors’ faith that a hedge-fund manager will predict the future correctly. George Soros, Julian Robertson and Michael Steinhardt were famous in the early 1990s for their success with this strategy. George Soros, for example, became notorious for allegedly forcing the British pound out of the European exchange rate mechanism in 1992.
  • Managed futures and commodity trading advisors – As the names imply, these funds invest in futures and commodities. Although not, strictly speaking, hedge funds, they do take enormous risks and earn enormous returns. Moreover, some of the best-known hedge-fund managers started out in this sector.

4. Event-driven funds

These funds invest in specific situations. For example:

  • Distressed debt – These funds buy the debts of entities that have fallen on hard times, betting that in the rush to get out of these situations, the owners of that debt are willing to sell at lower prices than the entities’ true prospects justify.
  • Merger arbitrage – Investors bet on the results of acquisitions and mergers.
  • Activist investors – Investors push management changes that increase value.

Hedge Funds: the Good, the Bad and the Future

Hedge-fund regulation has been a contentious subject. Generally speaking, the British and the Americans have favored a free-market approach while continental Europeans, especially the Germans, have called for binding rules. Until recently, the relative absence of hedge-fund scandals in Britain and the U.S. has given strong support to the case for self-regulation. However, recent events in the mortgage market, especially the chaos involving investments in subprime mortgages, may have changed that.

“Academic studies come thick and fast but they seem to agree on one conclusion: Hedge funds do produce alpha [earnings in a down market]. The question is how much of that alpha is kept by the managers.”

To many it seems that hedge fund managers are paid disproportionately to their value to society. It is difficult, they say, to argue that the task of managing a hedge fund is more socially valuable than that of teaching children or healing the sick. Moreover, hedge funds seem remarkably risky. Although champions of hedge funds point to the sophisticated risk-control policies of at least some funds, the subprime market crisis led many to believe that hedge-fund investing has had a deleterious effect on the financial system. These issues came to the fore:

  • Flawed models – Hedge-fund managers tend to have studied at similar schools, so they look at the same data and draw similar conclusions. Because they have the same ideas about what it takes to build a good financial model, instances have occurred in which all their models failed in similar ways simultaneously, leading to the kind of coordinated movement that destabilizes markets.
  • Structured investments – Hedge-fund managers invested heavily in mortgage-backed securities and other sophisticated security structures under the illusion that they had thoroughly analyzed this strategy and understood what they were doing. Events left little doubt that they had, in fact, misunderstood the risks.
  • Carry trade – Managers borrowed in low-interest-rate currencies and invested in high-interest-rate currencies. Over the long term, the carry trade should be unworkable. Indeed hedge-fund managers tend to be on the same side of the same trades, raising the question of just what customer they could sell to in the event of problems.
“Hedge funds are not so much an industry, or an asset class, as a structure.”

Two things are clear about hedge funds: They do seem to generate above-market returns and managers keep a disproportionate share of those returns. However, hedge-fund returns are not dispersed in a normal distribution. They are, according to some research, somewhat skewed to losses and somewhat more than normally vulnerable to extreme events.

“At the risk of being pretentious, you could almost say that hedge funds are a state of mind.”

That said, hedge funds have been remarkably popular among investors in recent years. Some of the more successful American hedge funds have evolved into diversified financial-services holding companies. Predicting what hedge funds will become in the future is difficult. Some evidence indicates that the industry may be consolidating and perhaps growing tamer. Some fund managers are striving to reduce risk and increase transparency. Hedge-fund managers have also been seeking permanent capital so they can insulate themselves against market instability and short-term turbulence. However, an industry notorious for high fees may have difficulty justifying those fees if it is not bearing risk.

About the Author

Philip Coggan writes the “Buttonwood” column for The Economist, where he is also capital-markets editor.


Read summary...
Guide to Hedge Funds

Book Guide to Hedge Funds

What they are, what they do, their risks, their advantages

Bloomberg Press,


 




All Articles
Load More