My investment guru on a Trump presidency. Some interesting inside info.
Our advisor is a Wharton grad, Harvard MBA and the smartest man I have ever known. He's in his mid 40s and just a nice guy too.
And a liberal Democrat.
I expressed some concern about the stock market on the outside chance that cheeto got in.
Here's his reply:
“I had some experiences with the Trump Organization, but they are somewhat limited. I studied some of the Harvard case studies about the firm in the late XXs at B-School. Also, while I was briefly in the Manhattan XXXXX industry in 199X, my company was toying with the idea selling to the developer/contractor market, and they asked me to reach out to the Trump Organization to see about selling our XXXXX into their buildings. I wasn’t all that thrilled with the project, because I knew that the Mafia and probably the Teamsters would have to be involved in that decision directly or indirectly (we’d probably have delivered the product to them, not to the Trump Organization directly, even if the Trump Organization was the one selecting the vendor), and I didn’t want to deal with the Mafia personally.
So I iced that project as fast as I possibly could (basically by convincingly showing my company that the quality of the XXXXX they were putting into the Trump buildings were utter garbage, despite them bragging that they were the “best”). I didn’t see how we could compete for the business without gutting our quality, and that saved me from having to pursue the project any further. We had better opportunities elsewhere, fortunately.
In any case, it wasn’t much exposure to the Trump Organization, maybe 3 or 4 meetings with various levels of the company, but I did come away with various impressions. While I’ve never liked the guy himself (from what I’ve known—I never met him personally), I nonetheless came away impressed by certain things:
· He might not be a mob figure himself, but his company felt like it ran like the mob. His staff were INCREDIBLY loyal to him. That was really obvious. And they loved him. He seemed to know all of them personally, and seemed to genuinely care about them, and their families. He really did take care of them. He listened to them, and sought out their advice. He would support them, no matter what they did, so long as they tried to do “right” by the company/”family.” (You can see a clear instance of this in how he has retained his long-time speechwriter who plagiarized Michelle Obama’s speech for Melania).
· On the other hand, any employee who ever burned him, even once, was pretty much fired immediately, no matter what. If Trump manages to win, I can envision Ted Cruz being flambéed somehow, for Cruz’ shenanigans at the GOP convention.
· Trump, and his organization, were very nimble. If they saw a new or better opportunity, they’d move quickly, and without much emotion.
· Everything was a negotiation to him. And successful negotiations required being an excellent bluffer. The problem with good bluffs is that you never know when it’s for real. He’s doing that to the American people right now. He is NOT a crazy man, but nobody (except him) has any idea when he’s blowing smoke. My hunch says that most of his most dangerous positions politically are just bluffs. But don’t get me wrong! Bluffs can still be very dangerous and lead to unintended situations.
What was also clear (mostly from the case studies, and what I’ve read in the Wall Street Journal over the past 20 years) was that bankers were just fine with him. He took risks that generally paid off financially. Some of the banks also took risks, but he was a lot smarter than they were (he got them to finance Atlantic City in a way that was NEVER going to work for some of the banks). That resulted in him making a lot of money from Atlantic City, but some banks (and public shareholders in the early years) took a bath. Those bankruptcies were not personal. From the second he bought/developed those casinos, he had to have known bankruptcies were a possibility, maybe even a probability. But the banks were greedy, and he took advantage of the dumb ones willing to issue junk bonds at low rates with no collateral. The smarter (equity-oriented) ones made out just fine, just like he did. And he’s had no problem financing anything he’s wanted to do in the past 15 years. To him, it’s all business, and it’s a jungle. Everyone for himself.
Most of the shenanigans (Trump U., etc.) tend to be where he has rebranded someone else’s product. They ran it. He marketed it. If he had a bad business partner, it sometimes failed. He definitely made a mistake on Trump U. He didn’t do his due diligence, or maybe he was just greedy. It was a scam, and he lent his name to a scam. Of course, ALL marketing is a scam at some level, but that went to a level beyond where it is “prudent.” Trump needs to take ownership of that mistake, but probably cannot easily do so, because he never admits mistakes, and because to admit it would cost his company a lot of money. It’s cheaper for him to fight it in court.
In any case, I’m not sure what ANY of this means for how the U.S. (or the world, or the markets) would fare under a President Trump. My biggest problem with him is clearly the hate and practice of personal attacks that emanate from his brain. My second biggest problem is that I don’t KNOW what he will actually try to do, especially in foreign policy. I realize he’s doing that on purpose, and that being so non-descriptive enhances his negotiating power if he does become President, but it’s still a huge, huge risk (for us and for the world). On the other hand, while it’s not a risk I personally want to take, I’m not sure it will be a disaster if it actually comes to pass. A good negotiator could do a lot of good (or bad) for our country.
In any case (and maybe it’s the optimist in me), I trust the brilliance of our political system to limit whatever damage any President or election can do. The separation of powers between the executive, judicial and legislative branches is one of the best innovations EVER in political science, even when imperfectly implemented. I’m hopeful that NO president, no matter how bad, can destroy our system or who we are (something I cannot say for parliamentary systems in other countries). And I think the markets will look at any election in that manner, too."
= new reply since forum marked as read
And I'm just guessing that this thread is going 'adversarial'?
OK, it's just fine with me if you don't 'buy it'.
Awright?
We've had him for a couple of years.
He was recommended by a close friend.
He hasn't made us rich beyond our wildest dreams, 
but he has built a portfolio that is pretty stable, throws off some pretty good dividends, and lets us two 70 somethings sleep at night.
The first time I called him, he apologized because he was at one of his boys' soccer game.
His wife runs the billing/nuts-and-bolts end of his investment consulting business.
She's very accomplished and does a lot of the computer research stuff too.
He's a Jew who lost two grandparents in Germany at Buchenwald.
He didn't tell me that.
Oh yeah, yes he's white.
SO. WHAT.
jeez
You can't dismiss me from DU and I'm not leaving.
I've been here 16 years, through thick and thin, and I ain't leaving now.
I've never done this before.
You have the distinction of being the first.
Congratulations.
But I do know there's a way to fix it.
Bye.
