DOCSLIB.ORG

Prospectus-Fixed-Income.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prospectus-Fixed-Income.Pdf SUPPLEMENT DATED AUGUST 31, 2021 TO THE PROSPECTUS FOR THE MATTHEWS ASIA TOTAL RETURN BOND FUND AND THE MATTHEWS ASIA CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES FUND (THE “FUNDS”) DATED APRIL 30, 2021 (AS SUPPLEMENTED) For all existing and prospective shareholders of the Funds: Effective immediately, the following disclosure is added directly following “Risks of Investing in the Funds – Risks Associated with China, Hong Kong, and Macau – China” on page 29 of the prospectus: Variable Interest Entities. The Funds may invest in certain operating companies in China through legal structures known as variable interest entities (“VIEs”). In China, ownership of companies in certain sectors by foreign individuals and entities (including U.S. persons and entities such as the Funds) is prohibited. In order to facilitate foreign investment in these businesses, many Chinese companies have created VIEs. In such an arrangement, a China-based operating company typically establishes an offshore shell company in another jurisdiction, such as the Cayman Islands. That shell company enters into service and other contracts with the China-based operating company, then issues shares on a foreign exchange, such as the New York Stock Exchange. Foreign investors hold stock in the shell company rather than directly in the China-based operating company. This arrangement allows U.S. investors to obtain economic exposure to the China-based company through contractual means rather than through formal equity ownership. VIEs are a longstanding industry practice and well known to officials and regulators in China; however, VIEs are not formally recognized under Chinese law. Recently, the government of China provided new guidance to and placed restrictions on China-based companies raising capital offshore, including through VIE structures. Investors face uncertainty about future actions by the government of China that could significantly affect an operating company’s financial performance and the enforceability of the shell company’s contractual arrangements. It is uncertain whether Chinese officials or regulators will withdraw their implicit acceptance of the VIE structure, or whether any new laws, rules or regulations relating to VIE structures will be adopted or, if adopted, what impact they would have on the interests of foreign shareholders. Under extreme circumstances, China might prohibit the existence of VIEs, or sever their ability to transmit economic and governance rights to foreign individuals and entities; if so, the market value of the Funds’ associated portfolio holdings would likely suffer significant, detrimental, and possibly permanent effects, which could result in substantial investment losses. Please retain this Supplement with your records. ST062 Matthews Asia Funds | Prospectus April 30, 2021 | matthewsasia.com MATTHEWS ASIA TOTAL RETURN BOND FUND Investor Class Shares (MAINX) Institutional Class Shares (MINCX) MATTHEWS ASIA CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES FUND Investor Class Shares (MCRDX) Institutional Class Shares (MICPX) The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) has not approved or disapproved the Funds. Also, the SEC has not passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this prospectus. Anyone who informs you otherwise is committing a crime. Paper copies of the Funds’ annual and semi-annual shareholder reports are nolonger beingsent by mail, unless you specifically request paper copies of the reports. Instead, the reports will be made available on the Funds’ website matthewsasia.com, andyou will be notified by mail each time a report is posted and provided with a website link to access the report. You may elect to receive paper copies of shareholder reports and other communications from the Funds anytime by contactingyourfinancial intermediary (such as a broker-dealer or bank) or, if you are a direct investor, by calling 800.789.ASIA (2742). Your election to receive reports in paper will apply to all Funds held in your accountifyou invest through yourfinancial intermediary or all Funds held directly with Matthews Asia Funds. Matthews Asia Funds matthewsasia.com Contents FUND SUMMARIES Matthews Asia Total Return Bond Fund 1 Matthews Asia Credit Opportunities Fund 7 Financial Highlights 14 Additional Fund Information Investment Objective of the Funds 18 Fundamental Investment Policies 18 Matthews’ Investment Approach 18 Risks of Investing in the Funds 21 Management of the Funds 35 Investing In The Funds Pricing of Fund Shares 38 Purchasing Shares 38 Exchanging Shares 41 Selling (Redeeming) Shares 41 Market Timing Activities 42 Other Shareholder Information 44 Index Definitions 47 General Information 48 Privacy Statement 48 Please read this document carefully before you make any investment decision. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact a Matthews Asia Funds representative at 800.789.ASIA (2742) or visit matthewsasia.com. Please keep this prospectus with your other account documents for future reference. Matthews Asia Total Return Bond Fund FUND SUMMARY Investment Objective Totalreturnoverthelongterm,withanemphasisonincome. Fees and Expenses of the Fund This table describes the fees and expenses that you may pay if you buy and hold shares of this Fund. SHAREHOLDER FEES (fees paid directly from your investment) Investor Class Institutional Class Maximum Account Fee on Redemptions (for wire redemptionsonly) $9 $9 ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSES (expenses that you pay each year as a percentage of the value of your investment) Management Fees 0.55% 0.55% Distribution (12b-1) Fees 0.00% 0.00% Other Expenses 0.60% 0.45% Administration and Shareholder Servicing Fees 0.15% 0.15% Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses 1.15% 1.00% Fee Waiver and Expense Reimbursement1 (0.03)% (0.10)% Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses After Fee Waiver and Expense Reimbursement 1.12% 0.90% 1 Matthews has contractually agreed (i) to waive fees and reimburse expenses to the extent needed to limit Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses (excludingRule 12b-1 fees, taxes, interest, brokerage commissions, short sale dividend expenses, expenses incurred in connection with any merger or reorganization or extraordinary expenses such as litigation) of the Institutional Class to 0.90% first by waiving class specific expenses (e.g., shareholder service fees specific to a particular class) of the Institutional Class and then, to the extent necessary, by waiving non-class specific expenses (e.g.,custody fees) of the Institutional Class, and (ii) if anyFund-wide expenses (i.e., expenses that apply to both the Institutional Class and the Investor Class) are waived for the Institutional Class to maintain the 0.90% expense limitation, to waive an equal amount(in annual percentage terms) of those same expenses for the Investor Class. The Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses After Fee Waiver and Expense Reimbursement for the Investor Class may vary from year to year and will in some years exceed 0.90%. Pursuant to this agreement, any amount waived for prior fiscal years with respect to the Fundisnot subject to recoupment. This agreement will remain in place until April 30, 2022 and may be terminated at any time by the Board of Trustees on behalf of the Fundon 60 days’ writtennotice to Matthews. Matthews may declinetorenew this agreement by writtennotice to the Trust at least 30 days before its annual expiration date. EXAMPLE OF FUND EXPENSES This example is intended to help you compare the cost of investing in the Fund with the cost of investing in other mutual funds. The example assumes that you invest $10,000 in the Fund for the time periods indicated and then redeem all of your shares at the end of those periods. The example also assumes that your investment has a 5% return each year and that the Fund’s operating expenses remain the same. The example reflects the expense limitation for the one year period only. Although your actual costs may be higher or lower, based on these assumptions your costs would be: One year Three years Five years Ten years Investor Class $114 $362 $630 $1,395 Institutional Class $92 $308 $543 $1,216 MATTHEWS ASIA TOTAL RETURN BOND FUND 1 PORTFOLIO TURNOVER of an Asian country and addresses at least one of the other The Fund pays transaction costs, such as commissions, when above criteria. The term “located” and the associated criteria it buys and sells securities (or “turns over” its portfolio). A listed above have been defined in such a way that Matthews higher portfolio turnover may indicate higher transaction has latitude in determining whether an issuer should be costs and may result in higher taxes when Fund shares are included within a region or country. held in a taxable account. These costs, which are not reflected in annual fund operating expenses or in the example of fund The Fund may invest a significant portion of its total net assets, 25% or more, in securities of issuers from a single coun- expenses, affect the Fund’s performance. During the most try (including the government of that country and its agen- recent fiscal year, the Fund’s portfolio turnover rate was 40% cies, instrumentalities and political subdivisions, quasi- of the average value of its portfolio. governmental entities of that country, supra-national institutions issuing debt deemed to be of that country, and Principal Investment Strategy companies located in that country), and up to 25% of the Under normal circumstances, the Matthews Asia Total Return Fund’s total net assets may be invested in the securities issued Bond Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by inves- by any
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What Happened to the Quants in August 2007?∗
    What Happened To The Quants In August 2007?∗ Amir E. Khandaniy and Andrew W. Loz First Draft: September 20, 2007 Latest Revision: September 20, 2007 Abstract During the week of August 6, 2007, a number of high-profile and highly successful quan- titative long/short equity hedge funds experienced unprecedented losses. Based on empir- ical results from TASS hedge-fund data as well as the simulated performance of a specific long/short equity strategy, we hypothesize that the losses were initiated by the rapid un- winding of one or more sizable quantitative equity market-neutral portfolios. Given the speed and price impact with which this occurred, it was likely the result of a sudden liqui- dation by a multi-strategy fund or proprietary-trading desk, possibly due to margin calls or a risk reduction. These initial losses then put pressure on a broader set of long/short and long-only equity portfolios, causing further losses on August 9th by triggering stop-loss and de-leveraging policies. A significant rebound of these strategies occurred on August 10th, which is also consistent with the sudden liquidation hypothesis. This hypothesis suggests that the quantitative nature of the losing strategies was incidental, and the main driver of the losses in August 2007 was the firesale liquidation of similar portfolios that happened to be quantitatively constructed. The fact that the source of dislocation in long/short equity portfolios seems to lie elsewhere|apparently in a completely unrelated set of markets and instruments|suggests that systemic risk in the hedge-fund industry may have increased in recent years.
    [Show full text]
  • Crises and Hedge Fund Risk∗
    Crises and Hedge Fund Risk∗ Monica Billio†, Mila Getmansky‡, and Loriana Pelizzon§ This Draft: September 7, 2009 Abstract We study the effects of financial crises on hedge fund risk and show that liquidity, credit, equity market, and volatility are common risk factors during crises for various hedge fund strategies. We also apply a novel methodology to identify the presence of a common latent (idiosyncratic) risk factor exposure across all hedge fund strategies. If the latent risk factor is omitted in risk modeling, the resulting effect of financial crises on hedge fund risk is greatly underestimated. The common latent factor exposure across the whole hedge fund industry was present during the Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM) crisis of 1998 and the 2008 Global financial crisis. Other crises including the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007 affected the whole hedge fund industry only through classical systematic risk factors. Keywords: Hedge Funds; Risk Management; Liquidity; Financial Crises; JEL Classification: G12, G29, C51 ∗We thank Tobias Adrian, Vikas Agarwal, Lieven Baele, Nicolas Bollen, Ben Branch, Stephen Brown, Darwin Choi, Darrell Duffie, Bruno Gerard, David Hsieh, Luca Fanelli, William Fung, Patrick Gagliar- dini, Will Goetzmann, Robin Greenwood, Philipp Hartmann, Ravi Jagannathan, Nikunj Kapadia, Hossein Kazemi, Martin Lettau, Bing Liang, Andrew Lo, Narayan Naik, Colm O’Cinneide, Geert Rouwenhorst, Stephen Schaefer, Tom Schneeweis, Matthew Spiegel, Heather Tookes, Marno Verbeek, Pietro Veronesi, and seminar participants at the NBER
    [Show full text]
  • The Blow-Up Artist: Reporting & Essays: the New
    Annals of Finance: The Blow-Up Artist: Reporting & Essays: The New ... http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/10/15/071015fa_fact_cassid... ANNALS OF FINANCE THE BLOW-UP ARTIST Can Victor Niederhoffer survive another market crisis? by John Cassidy OCTOBER 15, 2007 n a wall Niederhoffer’s approach is eclectic. His funds, a friend says, appeal “to people like him: self-made people who have a maverick streak.” O opposite Victor Niederhoffer’s desk is a large painting of the Essex, a Nantucket whaling ship that sank in the South Pacific in 1820, after being attacked by a giant sperm whale, and that later served as the inspiration for “Moby-Dick.” The Essex’s captain, George Pollard, Jr., survived, and persuaded his financial backers to give him another ship, but he sailed it for little more than a year before it foundered on a coral reef. Pollard was ruined, and he ended his days as a night watchman. The painting, which Niederhoffer, a sixty-three-year-old hedge-fund manager, acquired after losing all his clients’ money—and a good deal of his own—in the Thai stock market crash of 1997, serves as an admonition against the incaution to which he, a notorious risktaker, is prone, and as a reminder of the precariousness of his success. Niederhoffer has been a professional investor for nearly three decades, during which he has made and lost several fortunes—typically by relying on methods that other traders consider reckless or unorthodox or both. In the nineteen-seventies, he wrote one of the first software programs to identify profitable trades.
    [Show full text]
  • Hedge Funds: Due Diligence, Red Flags and Legal Liabilities
    Hedge Funds: Due Diligence, Red Flags and Legal Liabilities This Website is Sponsored by: Law Offices of LES GREENBERG 10732 Farragut Drive Culver City, California 90230-4105 Tele. & Fax. (310) 838-8105 [email protected] (http://www.LGEsquire.com) BUSINESS/INVESTMENT LITIGATION/ARBITRATION ==== The following excerpts of articles, arranged mostly in chronological order and derived from the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Reuters, Los Angles Times, Barron's, MarketWatch, Bloomberg, InvestmentNews and other sources, deal with due diligence in hedge fund investing. They describe "red flags." They discuss the hazards of trying to recover funds from failed investments. The sponsor of this website provides additional commentary. "[T]he penalties for financial ignorance have never been so stiff." --- The Ascent of Money (2008) by Niall Ferguson "Boom times are always accompanied by fraud. As the Victorian journalist Walter Bagehot put it: 'All people are most credulous when they are most happy; and when money has been made . there is a happy opportunity for ingenious mendacity.' ... Bagehot observed, loose business practices will always prevail during boom times. During such periods, the gatekeepers of the financial system -- whether bankers, professional investors, accountants, rating agencies or regulators -- should be extra vigilant. They are often just the opposite." (WSJ, 4/17/09, "A Fortune Up in Smoke") Our lengthy website contains an Index of Articles. However, similar topics, e.g., "Bayou," "Madoff," "accountant," may be scattered throughout several articles. To locate all such references, use your Adobe Reader/Acrobat "Search" tool (binocular symbol). Index of Articles: 1. "Hedge Funds Can Be Headache for Broker, As CIBC Case Shows" 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Lbex-Docid 3285232 Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc
    FOIA CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED BY LBEX-DOCID 3285232 LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS, INC. Agenda I FOIA CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED BY LBEX-DOCID 3285232 LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS, INC. ,--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~ Agenda Agenda • Key Themes • Risk Governance - Our Control Environment - Risk Philosophy - Committee Structures • Risk Management Overview - Risk Management Function - Risk Management Organization - External Constituents • Risk Analysis and Quantification - Risk Management Integrated Framework Risk Appetite Risk Equity Risk Appetite Usage Risk Limits • Risk Exposure • Areas of Increased Focus - Subprime Exposure - High Yield and Leveraged Loans - Hedge Funds • Conclusion • Appendix - Stress Scenarios 3 FOIA CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED BY LBEX-DOCID 3285232 LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS, INC. Key Themes I FOIA CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED BY LBEX-DOCID 3285232 LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS, INC. Key Themes Key Themes Risk Management is one of the core competencies of the Firm and is an intrinsic component of our control system. As a result of our focus on continuously enhancing our risk capabilities, in the current challenging environment, we feel confident that our risk position is solid. • Risk Management is at the very core of Lehman's business model - Conservative risk philosophy- supported by approximately 30% employee ownership - Effective risk governance -unwavering focus of the Executive Committee - Significant resources dedicated
    [Show full text]
  • Standard & Poor's Update on Risk, Liquidity and Capital Adequacy
    Confidential Presentation to: Standard & Poor’s Update on Risk, Liquidity and Capital Adequacy August 17, 2007 FOIA CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED BY LBEX-DOCID 2031705 LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC. Introduction In October 2005, S&P upgraded Lehman Brothers to A+. Since then, we have continued to grow and broaden our franchise, while maintaining our hallmark expense, risk, and capital discipline. We believe that our size, diversity, and franchise indicate significant credit strength. In 2006 and 2007, we achieved record growth and profitability – Since 2005, our revenues and net income have grown by 44% and 50% respectively, with ROE increasing from 21.6% to 25.8%. The growth has been broad-based, with non-US regions and non-FID segments growing faster than the overall portfolio This performance was achieved despite a more challenging environment than in prior years and without compromising our commitment to the Firm’s creditors – Reflects the power of the Firm's franchise and diversification – Continued on the same strategic path, building customer-oriented and diversified businesses Discipline in risk-taking is a major contributor to our success. It is also one of our core competencies – Effective risk reduction through syndication and securitization of our exposure (we are in the moving business not storage business) – Active hedging of positions using both traditional and innovative products – Reliable liquidity, sufficient to meet all of our funding obligations in all market environments – Comprehensive, multi-tiered risk management, capital management, and liquidity management frameworks 1 FOIA CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED BY LBEX-DOCID 2031705 LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC. Agenda Overview and Key Themes Today, we are going to cover three areas: Risk Management, Liquidity, and Equity Adequacy 1.
    [Show full text]
  • A SPAC-Tacular Distraction: Compelling Opportunities in “Other” Event-Driven Investments | P2
    A SPAC-TACULAR ALTERNATIVES INSIGHTS DISTRACTION Compelling Opportunities in “Other” Event-Driven Investments EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Doug Francis and Sam Klar | March 2021 The combination of record-level SPAC issuance and a flood of non-SPAC M&A has created a supply-demand imbalance A Wild Year in the event-driven asset class. With It’s certainly been an interesting 12 months in the event-driven asset class. From soft SPACs garnering most of the limelight, catalyst event situations upended by the onset of COVID in Q1 2020, to the March 2020 we believe investors are missing an “Arbageddon” widening in merger arbitrage spreads, to countless instances of hedge excellent opportunity to deploy capital into fund repositioning causing atypical volatility in typically boring share class arbitrage. “other” event-driven investments, most It’s been a truly wild ride. prominently merger arbitrage. The combination of Q1 2020 performance challenges for the asset class and slow-to- recover new merger volume last spring and summer led to the perception that there was “nothing to do” in event-driven. The record issuance of SPACs in 2020 and early 2021, accompanied by some high-profile bouts of outperformance in former SPACs like Nikola, amended that narrative slightly. Recent commentary has been willing to stipulate that there was nothing to do in event-driven, apart from SPACs. The Current Opportunity As experienced event-driven investors, we’ve often chafed at the notion that event- driven’s attractiveness waxes and wanes as much as commentators would suggest. Indeed, our team mantra is “there’s almost always something to do,” and our historical results have supported this claim’s veracity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Panic of 2007+
    The Panic of 2007+ Gary Gorton Yale School of Management and NBER* Prepared for the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Jackson Hole Conference, August 2008 This version: August 4, 2008 Abstract How did problems with subprime mortgages result in a systemic crisis, a panic? The ongoing Panic of 2007 is due to a loss of information about the location and size of risks of loss due to default on a number of interlinked securities, special purpose vehicles, and derivatives, all related to subprime mortgages. Subprime mortgages are a financial innovation designed to provide home ownership opportunities to riskier borrowers. Addressing their risk required a particular design feature, linked to house price appreciation. Subprime mortgages were then financed via securitization, which in turn has a unique design reflecting the subprime mortgage design. Subprime securitization tranches were often sold to CDOs, which were, in turn, often purchased by market value off-balance sheet vehicles. Additional subprime risk was created with derivatives. When the housing price bubble burst, this chain of securities, derivatives, and off-balance sheet vehicles could not be penetrated by most investors to determine the location and size of the risks. The introduction of the ABX indices, synthetics related to portfolios of subprime bonds, in 2006 created common knowledge about the effects of these risks by providing centralized prices and a mechanism for shorting. I describe the relevant securities, derivatives, and vehicles and provide some very simple, stylized, examples to show: (1) how asymmetric information between the sell-side and the buy-side was created via complexity; (2) how the chain of interlinked securities was sensitive to house prices; (3) how the risk was spread in an opaque way; and (4) how the ABX indices allowed information to be aggregated and revealed.
    [Show full text]
  • LBEX-AM 067167 Agenda I + Overview Chris O'meara
    :' Q.) ': ·QJ ~ ~· ···e.•:'~ •" LBEX-AM 067167 Agenda I + Overview Chris O'Meara +Risk Madelyn Antoncic - Recent Market Stress Exposure to Key Products/Markets - Risk Appetite Usage and Counterparty Credit Exposure· .. t-' Global Stress Tests F j ,• ~~ ~: ~· '.,.' + Liquidity ·Paolo Tonucci ,,.­ ' ,.·~ - Funding Framework ~ I - Funding Update - ·Contingent Liquidity Risk + Capital Management and Balance Sheet Paolo Tonucci - Equity and Balance Sheet Growth - Equity Adequacy rm m Credit Ratings >< )> - Share Repurchases s 0 ......en ....Jo. en LEHMAN BROTHERS 1 co Overview I 2007 has seen a significant amount of risk, financing and capital activity, driven by business growth generally and high levels of activity in specific businesses + Risk appetite usage increased from $2.12 billion at the end of 2006 to $3.27 billion, but remains within the established risk limits. The Firm's credit portfolio remains very high quality, and 97.8% of our counterparty exposure is to investment grade names + Our risk management stress test results for both the Subprime Mortgage and the Leveraged Lending business showed that the losses we actually incurred were consistently within the range predicted by our management models + While the funding markets have become more difficult to access, this has had a limited impact on our liquidity. The liquidity pool has increased to $36 billion at the end of the 3rd quarter from $25.7 billion at the end of the 2nd quarter, and the cash capital surplus has increased to $8.1 billion from $2.5 billion + Common stockholders' equity growth has been significant with full year growth projected to be around $3.6 billion, up 20% vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Hedge Fund Fraud and the Public Good Lydie Pierre-Louis University of San Francisco, [email protected]
    The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center Economics, Law, and International Business School of Management 2009 Hedge Fund Fraud and the Public Good Lydie Pierre-Louis University of San Francisco, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.usfca.edu/elib Part of the Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics Commons, and the International Business Commons Recommended Citation Lydie Pierre-Louis. Hedge Fund Fraud and the Public Good. Fordham Journal of Corporate and Financial Law, Vol. 15, No. 21, 21-95. 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1531364 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Management at USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Economics, Law, and International Business by an authorized administrator of USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES HEDGE FUND FRAUD AND THE PUBLIC GOOD Lydie Nadia Cabrera Pierre-Louis† ABSTRACT............................................................................................... 23 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................ 24 I. ORIGINS OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC GOOD CONCEPT.................... 31 A. Application of Public Good to Early American Corporations ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION * * * CPO and COMMODITY POOL ROUNDTABLE * * * Wednesday, April 6, 2005 9:06 A.M. C
    1 U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION * * * CPO AND COMMODITY POOL ROUNDTABLE * * * Wednesday, April 6, 2005 9:06 a.m. Commodity Futures Trading Commission First Floor Hearing Room 1155 Twenty-First Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. MILLER REPORTNG COMPANY, INC 735 EIGHTH STREET, S.E. WASHINGTON, DC 20003 (202) 546-6666 2 C O N T E N T S AGENDA ITEM PAGE Welcome 4 Acting Chairman Sharon Brown-Hruska 4 Commissioner Walter Lukken 9 Commissioner Fred Hatfield 11 Commissioner Michael Dunn 13 Panel I: CPOs and Commodity Pool Industry Overview 15 Moderator: Patrick J. McCarty, General Counsel, CFTC 15 Jack G. Gaine, President, Managed Funds Association 19 Adam Cooper, Senior Managing Director and General Counsel, Citadel 24 George Crapple, Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Millburn Ridgefield 33 Myron Scholes, Oak Hill Platinum Partners/ CME Board of Directors 40 Questions and Answers 49 Panel II: Regulation of CPOs and Commodity Pools 60 Moderator: Daniel J. Roth, President, National Futures Association John Torell, CFO & Managing Director, Tudor Investment Corporation Armando Belly, General Counsel, Soros Fund Management LLC James P. O'Hara, Director of Operational Due Diligence, Lighthouse Partners Cynthia M. Fornelli, Securities Regulation & Conflict Management, Bank of America Mark Silber, Vice President, Renaissance Technologies Questions and Answers 96 3 C O N T E N T S (CONTINUED) AGENDA ITEM PAGE Panel III: Futures Market Oversight/ Surveillance/Risks Moderator: Marianne K. Smythe, Partner, Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr 106 John Fenton, Division of Market Oversight, CFTC 109 Michael Haigh, Office of the Chief Economist, CFTC 116 Robert Levin, Senior Vice President, NYMEX 126 Ron Geffner, Partner, Sadis & Goldberg LLP 136 Charles Fishkin, Director, Risk Assessment Office, SEC 147 Panel IV: Valuation and Other Issues 159 Moderator: Leon M.
    [Show full text]
  • Educational Endowments and the Financial Crisis: Social Costs and Systemic Risks in the Shadow Banking System a Study of Six New England Schools
    EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENTS AND THE FINANCIAL CRISIS: SOCIAL COSTS AND SYSTEMIC RISKS IN THE SHADOW BANKING SYSTEM A STUDY OF SIX NEW ENGLAND SCHOOLS CENTER FOR SOCIAL PHILANTHROPY TELLUS INSTITUTE 11 Arlington Street Boston, Massachusetts 02116 617.266.5400 $ $ 2 Educational Endowments and the Financial Crisis Project Team Additional Thanks Principal Investigator and Lead Author This paper bene!ted from data, information, Joshua Humphreys, Ph.D. and advice provided by numerous Senior Associate, Tellus Institute, and organizations and individuals, including Dan Lecturer, Harvard University Apfel and Cheyenna Weber, Responsible Endowments Coalition; Appleseed, Inc.; Jim Bildner, Center for Applied Philanthropy; Researchers Richard S. Bookbinder, TerraVerde Capital Christi Electris, Associate, Tellus Institute Management LLC; Boston Redevelopment Yewande Fapohunda, Analyst, Tellus Institute, Authority; Commonfund Institute; Harvard and MPP Candidate, Harvard Kennedy Student Labor Action Movement (SLAM); School Peter Hasegawa; Matthew Keenan, ProxyDemocracy; MIT Student-Worker Justin Filosa, Assistant, Tellus Institute Alliance; Mark Orlowski, Sustainable James Goldstein, Senior Fellow, Tellus Endowments Institute; William Page, Essex Institute Investment Management Company LLC; Rich Rosen, Tellus Institute; Eric Schildge, Katie Grace, Analyst, Tellus Institute, and Dartmouth Students Stand with Staff; Janet Staff Associate, Initiative for Responsible Shenk, Panta Rhea Foundation; and Heidi Investment, Harvard Kennedy School Welsh, Sustainable Investments Institute. Acknowledgments Institutional af!liations are listed for purposes of identi!cation and do not Senior Advisers constitute an endorsement or sponsorship John K. Stutz, Ph.D., Senior Fellow and Vice of the report or its !ndings. Research for President, Tellus Institute this study was supported with funding Allen White, Ph.D., Senior Fellow and Vice from the Center for Social Philanthropy President, Tellus Institute at Tellus Institute and Service Employees International Union (SEIU), CTW, CLC.
    [Show full text]