You're watching...
FBN's Charlie Gasparino breaks down how hedge fund giant SAC Capital is operating amid government investigations.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Well thanks as always.
A SAC capital coming under pressure from the government investigators recent weeks but has any impact on business -- Gasparino has kind of surprising answer throat.
You know so far from tentatively.
-- many caveats on this as possible no.
As you know -- under withering sort of investigations probes by the Grassley senator Grassley is looking -- the FC SEC is looking at them.
Is this is a pretty big deal for SEC capital when the biggest most prominent one of the best hedge funds out there run by Steve -- on one of the best investors I guess the last twenty years.
But the early indication shows that SEC capital is weathering the government -- what do we mean by that they continue to take in assets.
Despite these investigations.
And this is what I hear and we're getting this from sources close to SEC the fund has taken and has raised.
One point five billion dollars since when he and that's a lot of money since mid 2010.
And -- tea that's when a lot of this stuff sort apple we started hearing about the -- probes gallium and some of the other funds.
And other people that were attached to yelling which have connections SEC capital.
So so far this fund which has fourteen billion dollars on the man who seems to be weathering this I will say this.
If these if these investigations continue as you know.
And there's a lot of them out there I mean you could just put a question market future clearly is uncertain but so far investors like what they see this in the guy returns -- gives -- a good return every.
OK so fourteen billion dollar fund we know Goldman settle with the SEC for what was at 500000005.
Or so.
Made me believe investors are looking at like worst case scenario that.
Fine penalty would ever want to -- drop in the bucket compared to what this -- is you know here's -- thing is -- -- we have it that these two sides of the story we were the first to report back in November.
That clearly when you look at this how the big government is going -- this investigation.
Post gallium post -- Rogers now has been convicted they look like they're circling around SEC -- clearly they got.
There's a bullseye on this guy that said.
No evidence where's the -- he did anything wrong and here's a thing you have to remember.
And maybe this is what his investors realize that look at this guy forever and if you sort of dissect some of this investigation that's going on right now.
The -- is senator Grassley for example.
He had a referral from -- brought the self regulatory organization of of of of Wall Street to give them trades that look suspicious vehicle -- SEC capital made money.
But the real ice -- if you know looks like the SEC's looked at those in the past and this is not like -- -- -- those trades go back ten years.
So investors I think are saying listen -- been through this before.
This -- -- need to look at them forever and where's the beef right right my other question for you Stephen Cohen -- -- into ultimate success of SEC capital as he was initially.
If you like -- Steve Jobs is you know do the analogy he got out and it's a kind of getting me it's a great.
If it's a great question and you would think so and but remember you know Steve Cohen.
That was ever made a specific allegations about him they just with what they do is they look at -- fund and look at the performance.
And they look at some some it may look at some of the people around them that have been nailed in this in this -- remember two of his fund managers Freeman and I can't remember the other guy.
You know they they were caught on tape you know what I'm saying and one of them pled guilty and when I think is going trial.
That's what we have here we have a lot of smoke around the -- in the middle.
I would say yes though to your question I mean the fund is named after him he's a brilliant investor.
We should point go elusive and mysterious or just you -- actually that people say that its interest I would point Vanity Fair article DI know I don't believe he's that mysterious I mean I think -- -- -- -- would -- plugged -- -- -- -- -- He is a rich guy.
Okay he is a guy that you know runs a -- funny that you want to keep his proprietary sort of treating secretive as one of the last of all over the place.
I mean I expect the guy like that not to be out about on TV every day I mean deal -- to quit that to be mysterious and secretive I think is wrong.
One thing you cannot -- -- though okay is that they're clearly look at that.
And they circle the wagons and you know there this is you know if you're investing you say well.
You know can -- be in a fund where guys constantly on the investigation or you say this and he's been on the investigation so many times nothing's ever come up where the charges where's the beef.
-- got -- and by the way he's a good fund -- so I think that -- any investors appreciate that I think some Charlie we appreciate you know it's important except for expensive now.
