Phenomenal post-mort. I wrote a small Twitter thread today tagging you in which I used the term "echo chamber" in analyzing the contributing factors to violating my own risk tolerances. I hope that didn't come across as derogatory to your work, certainly wasn't the intent of my musings. Probably a poor choice of words, wrong connotation …
Phenomenal post-mort. I wrote a small Twitter thread today tagging you in which I used the term "echo chamber" in analyzing the contributing factors to violating my own risk tolerances. I hope that didn't come across as derogatory to your work, certainly wasn't the intent of my musings. Probably a poor choice of words, wrong connotation vs what my post was meant to convey. I was simply exploring the multitude of concepts on this merger arb that enticed me to oversize relative to my own expertise (or lack therof) etc. vs what I have historically been willing to do.
I recognized your work as high quality, thorough, and earnest. Still do. Made my own choices, was long before I devoured yours and others content, and drew many extremely similar conclusions as you after reading filings myself. I'm certain I would've had virtually identical view of trial odds even if I didn't listen to your and guests coverage.
Pay no heed to the grave dancers. If you get 10 of these in your lifetime, put in the same work, etc. the good side of karma will find you more often than not. Paper champions be damned friend.
Fwiw I am far from convinced you assigned improper odds despite ultimate outcome. We are baffled about similar of judges takeaways.
At any rate, best of luck in future. Strikes me as extremely likely you'll do well in one form or another given willingness to do some intellectually and emotionally challenging introspection after a tough loss. Not a common trait in life.
Phenomenal post-mort. I wrote a small Twitter thread today tagging you in which I used the term "echo chamber" in analyzing the contributing factors to violating my own risk tolerances. I hope that didn't come across as derogatory to your work, certainly wasn't the intent of my musings. Probably a poor choice of words, wrong connotation vs what my post was meant to convey. I was simply exploring the multitude of concepts on this merger arb that enticed me to oversize relative to my own expertise (or lack therof) etc. vs what I have historically been willing to do.
I recognized your work as high quality, thorough, and earnest. Still do. Made my own choices, was long before I devoured yours and others content, and drew many extremely similar conclusions as you after reading filings myself. I'm certain I would've had virtually identical view of trial odds even if I didn't listen to your and guests coverage.
Pay no heed to the grave dancers. If you get 10 of these in your lifetime, put in the same work, etc. the good side of karma will find you more often than not. Paper champions be damned friend.
Fwiw I am far from convinced you assigned improper odds despite ultimate outcome. We are baffled about similar of judges takeaways.
At any rate, best of luck in future. Strikes me as extremely likely you'll do well in one form or another given willingness to do some intellectually and emotionally challenging introspection after a tough loss. Not a common trait in life.