MFG Fair Value, page-96

Seems like a puff piece with little value (but thanks for sharing). And that Shaun Ler interview... not sure how I feel about any opinion from Morningstar.

And yes Kenneth, while we're looking long-term, Magellan has now underperformed every single performance horizon except since inception (see below). The problem is... most of Magellan's money didn't come at inception did it?

What's baffling me here is what exactly people are trying to achieve by investing in Magellan.

Are you guys betting on a global equity fund manager (MFG) or the global equities asset class? These are two completely different things - and I'm not sure where the wiring has gone wrong in some people's minds here, but it seems to me people are betting on a magical turnaround of MFG because they think Hamish's global equity funds will have some stellar turnaround next year and all of the performance issues will correct themselves and that SJP will suddenly beg Hamish to take their $18 billion back. This is FLAWED and DANGEROUS logic.

If you're going to conflate the two things, you're going to be sorely disappointed. From my 20+ years of investing, I don't think I've ever heard of a fund manager who regained their Midas touch and turned all their performance woes around to the extent that their numbers were much higher than the index. Even if that did happen, there are no guarantees that the flows will come back to Magellan. Insto mandates tend to have a huge stick factor - they are VERY hard to win and can be lost within just 2-3 years if performance doesn't hold up. And sadly the brand has been bruised badly by the media.

If you want to bet on global equities... by all means invest in Magellan or a simple ETF and you'll do very well simply by being in the asset class.

But betting on MFG as some magical proxy bet on global equities linked to performance/operational/client relationship issues? Crazy.