http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20151218005315/en/Manning-Napier-Announces-Agreement-Acquire-Majority-Interest
Thoughts?

Hi @Old_Joe
Part of the recently passed "budget" from the house and likely to be passed by the senate too, is to allow oil exports, as well as expansion/extension of credits for solar/wind/etc.
http://www.vox.com/2015/12/17/10442030/oil-export-ban-solar-wind
The end game? Saudi's, Russia and others.
This link is crude production by major countries from 2004-2014 and is linked for 2014. Click on a year to change the graphics.
http://money.cnn.com/interactive/news/economy/worlds-biggest-oil-producers/
Mr. Putin recently noted that production will not be reduced, if I recall properly. Looking at the list of major producers, I don't see any that are willing to reduce production; as they need the cash flow, eh?
The continuing end game outcome for crude production will remain to revolve around technology, IMHO; versus actual demand for crude based products. Will these demands or changes with a major impact arrive before you and I leave this 3rd rock from the sun?
I doubt this will happen. But, changes are happening at a very fast rate.
You and I, with backgrounds in technology fully understand the impacts in this area. A 4 year old somewhere today, playing with a smart phone or an Ipad will discover and bring forth ideas the Googles and Facebooks have not yet thought about, eh?
But, cash flow is the name of the game at this point in time. I don't see the major producer countries having many choices right now.
I sure as heck want to get directly into the energy area; but perhaps it will not be an oil play, but another form of energy production, many of which are already in play.
I may have run around the block with this; and not really said much.......or nothing new.
Opps........... to add: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-17/what-just-happened-to-solar-and-wind-is-a-really-big-deal
And "some" energy etf's list in broad sectors.........you may uncheck the boxes at the left edge to sort the list of your choice.
Regards,
Catch

Just as an add-on regarding technology. Of course fracking has been a huge game changer. The "sky is falling" (looming oil shortage) prophets of the 70s and 80s appear to have missed that innovation.
Now, think about driverless delivery vehicles. They'll drive more efficiently saving fuel. And the weight of the driver is gone. Average guy or gal weighs-in at what? 100-200 lbs? Magnify that number times thousands and you're talking about a lot of tonnage not being transported daily. Toss-out the vehicle's energy consuming air conditioner too. Won't need it.

Great question by OJ. Just too many unknowns. To answer it requires answers to at least some of these basic questions:
1. Are commodities (including energy) a leading indicator of something bad coming down the road that will eventually infect all major risk assets including stocks?
2. How will the geopolitics among global producers finally play out? (This one seems to be the thrust of OJ's question.) Umm ... what would the proposed "carpet bombing" of certain areas in producing nations do to world oil supply? We're already blowing up tankers in the region without much effect on global oil prices.
3. How serious are the industrialized nations about curbing CO2 emissions?
4. How rapidly will alternative energy sources come on-stream? One example is the hydrogen fuel cell. In theory, cars could run on water.
5. How many more warm winters will the U.S. (and much of the industrialized world) experience over the coming decade?
Just a few questions few of us can get our heads around today. Yet 25 years from now the answer to OJ's question will seem perfectly obvious and we'll wonder how we missed it.

I think The Fed is raising rates because then when recession hits (there is always a hindsight opinion and recession when announced really started much earlier), they can lower the rate again.
I am very skeptical about the competency of the people who make these decisions. I do believe they know something we don't. We are about at the boom end of the boom-bust cycle. I could make the claim we have 70% chance of recession and not 30%, but I'm not Gundlach so I don't get any press.
Next buying opportunity is 2017. Assuming WW III does not start by then. Meanwhile, stocks, bonds, gold, oil, everything is going to languish. Imagine its not me writing this. Imagine its someone on CNBC. You would instantly believe me.

Haters gonna indict.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-12-17/martin-shkreli-accused-of-being-surprisingly-good-at-fraud
Matt Levine had a lot of fun putting this together (it's obvious), and he wrote it so that you can too.

Yes, just under 48 months. They had 29 good months, but have been drawing down the past 19 months. And the AUM has followed accordingly.

If I remember correctly, Mr Redleaf asked to be benchmarked against the best endowment performance, like Yale. Suspect by that measure, it's not done that well the past 1-2 years. Still, believe the TacOps fund is pretty young. Maybe just 4 years old.

A better headline might be: Whitebox Getting Out of Mutual Fund Business.
I don't think they run more than three funds. I guess some strategies are more suited for a hedge fund format and vice versa. My impression was they had a great record as hedge fund managers. Not every manager is suited for running a fund that requires daily liquidity. I also see these kinds of closures as a contrarian indicator. Their style is probably just about to come back in favor. The same thing happened in 1999 at the peak of the dotcom bubble. All these value managers lost their jobs, notably Robert Sanborn at Oakmark, right before they were about to be proven right on the fundamentals. But with fund investing it's not enough to be right on the fundamentals. You have to be right on the timing too or effectively you're wrong.

I have to disagree a little bit. It is because I was able to take my head out of my ass with Hussman, I was able to spot something broken at Whitebox.
I'm the first one the say "you have to get the timing right". When vs Why. Applies to us buying funds AND applies to mutual fund managers buying stocks. The "fundamentals" and "technicals" might say anything. They are responsible for managing investors money.
The problem is not necessarily with the Thesis. I will not say Hussman is wrong. The problem is with the IMPLEMENTATION of the strategy. Hussman says he is never net short. Well he sucks at hedging since his performance is that of an inverse S&P 500 fund. Same with Whitebox. All you had to do is read the annual reports and commentaries. You expect fund to behave a certain way based on how it is invested vs the market is doing. It made absolutely no sense how the portfolio was acting. Either manager is BSing or he is an academic.

"You have to be right on the timing too or effectively you're wrong"
Like Jeff Vinik. But I don't mind my managers being a little early - it's when they're late to the party that there's a problem.
AP story, July 19, 1996, by Bruce Meyerson: "Undertaken about a half year later, Jeffrey Vinik's now infamous shift from stocks to bonds might have seemed genius rather than misguided. But the same could be said not only of Vinik - the long-acclaimed, but quickly defamed form Fidelity's Magellan Fund manager - but any number of strategists ..."

A better headline might be: Whitebox Getting Out of Mutual Fund Business.
I don't think they run more than three funds. I guess some strategies are more suited for a hedge fund format and vice versa. My impression was they had a great record as hedge fund managers. Not every manager is suited for running a fund that requires daily liquidity. I also see these kinds of closures as a contrarian indicator. Their style is probably just about to come back in favor. The same thing happened in 1999 at the peak of the dotcom bubble. All these value managers lost their jobs, notably Robert Sanborn at Oakmark, right before they were about to be proven right on the fundamentals. But with fund investing it's not enough to be right on the fundamentals. You have to be right on the timing too or effectively you're wrong.

@Chinfirst
As to a "sub-sector" relative to energy, my first thoughts would/or will take me towards the large cap providers as with FSENX. My second thought would be a possible follow through with FSESX, as this fund is directed more towards the servicing sector provided to the producers. I'm not saying there is a clear investing path for traditional energy, but that I would expect that perhaps a recovery in the large cap company areas would be followed by a positive move from the service providers.
I am less concerned with where the global exposure might be..........as not unlike McDonald's, one is getting both domestic and international exposure to earnings from such a company; and likely the same for many large producers.
This internal Fidelity page is set to "composition" of FSENX. As you scroll down the page you will see that most of this fund is domestic, but we know that earnings from these companies also come from non-U.S. based operations. NOTE: you may use many functions on this Fido page without having an account/login. Example: at the search box to the top right of the page, one may insert a ticker and obtain the same "composition" info, if Fido has that particular fund info for use. You may also click onto any of the other tabs on either side of the highlighted composition tab for other information.
I happen to like the visual layout of this type of page for a quick and dirty look at a fund, etf or stock ticker.
Obviously, a more complete view would be from the fund vendor.
I have not taken any time yet to try a breakdown between domestic and international energy companies.
Only my view/opinion at this time. I have looked and almost hopped into this area over the past 6 months. @hank noted above about "what bottom"......but there will be a bottom price in energy and perhaps a sustained move upward being reflected in positive pricing. Tis a tough call; no doubt. And, of course; we are mostly discussing traditional crude oil stuff here; but natural gas is another wild card for pricing and impact against crude uses. NG is also watched here for a pricing entry point as an investment area.
We still live in strange investing times...........
Various sectors (including energy) are going to continue to have erratic recovery periods, IMHO and there may not be much from the past to offer a guidepost.
Hope to have been of some help for the brain cells.
Regards,
Catch

PressMup - his lawyer has that covered. He just raised his fee from $1200/hr to $60,000/hr.

Reuters is getting all over it. Looks like the indictment will be the first of many.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-crime-shkreli-idUSKBN0U01IM20151217
His parents were born and raised in Albania. Say no more. Fraud, embezzlement, black marketeering, etc. are the country's chief industries and have been for a long long time. It's part of any Albanian child's catechism.

Let's not create Stereotypes. Such A-holes are not restricted by cast, creed, race, longitude, latitude, planet. They are simply one of the legit contradiction to Darwin's theory of evolution.

@Chinfirst
This list is from M* for the energy sector for mutual funds. There are duplicates of funds on this list, due to various classes of the same fund.
Click on the "YTD" or other columns to sort returns by best or worst.
Agree with @Mark, FENY is what we have also been watching (have an acct with Fidelity). This etf contains many of the big players, has an ER of .12 and a decent yield.
https://screener.fidelity.com/ftgw/etf/goto/snapshot/snapshot.jhtml?symbols=FENY
Regards,
Catch

Reuters is getting all over it. Looks like the indictment will be the first of many.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-crime-shkreli-idUSKBN0U01IM20151217
His parents were born and raised in Albania. Say no more. Fraud, embezzlement, black marketeering, etc. are the country's chief industries and have been for a long long time. It's part of any Albanian child's catechism.

Here is the new Marketfield registration filing:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1141819/000089418915006415/mrktfld-tpm_485a.htm

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1523624/000114420415071495/v426142_497.htm
497 1 v426142_497.htm 497
Filed Pursuant to Rule 497(e)
1933 Act Registration No. 333-175116
1940 Act Registration No. 811-22574
WHITEBOX TACTICAL OPPORTUNITIES FUND
WHITEBOX MARKET NEUTRAL EQUITY FUND
WHITEBOX TACTICAL ADVANTAGE FUND
Supplement dated December 17, 2015, to the Prospectuses dated January 16, 2015 (as supplemented March 5, 2015, September 1, 2015 and November 16, 2015)
The Board of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of Whitebox Mutual Funds (the “Trust”) has determined that it is in the best interests of the shareholders of the Whitebox Tactical Opportunities Fund, the Whitebox Market Neutral Equity Fund and the Whitebox Tactical Advantage Fund (collectively, the “Funds”) to liquidate and terminate the Funds.
The liquidation of the Funds is expected to be effective on or about January 19, 2016 or at such other time as may be authorized by the Trustees (the “Liquidation Date”). Termination of the Funds is expected to occur as soon as practicable following liquidation.
Effective at market close on December 17, 2015, the Funds will cease accepting purchase orders from new or existing investors. The Funds anticipate making a distribution of any income and/or capital gains of the Funds in connection with its liquidation. This distribution may be taxable. The tax year for the Fund will end on the Liquidation Date.
Shareholders of the Funds may redeem their shares at any time prior to the Liquidation Date.
If a shareholder has not redeemed his or her shares as of the Liquidation Date, the shareholder’s account will be automatically redeemed and proceeds will be sent to the shareholder at his or her address of record. Liquidation proceeds will be paid in cash for the redeemed shares at their net asset value.
To prepare for the closing and liquidation of the Funds, the Funds’ portfolio managers will likely increase the Funds’ assets held in cash and similar instruments in order to pay for Fund expenses and meet redemption requests. As a result, the Funds are expected to deviate from their stated investment strategies and policies and will no longer be managed to meet their investment objectives.
Redemptions of shares (including liquidating redemptions) are generally taxable. Shareholders should consult their personal tax adviser concerning their particular tax situations.
All expenses of the liquidation of the Funds will be borne by Whitebox Advisors LLC.
A shareholder may obtain additional information by contacting Investor Services at (855) 296-2866 Monday through Friday 9:00am to 8:00pm EST or by contacting his or her plan sponsor, broker-dealer, or financial institution.
* * *
Prospectus Supplement Dated December 17, 2015
Please Read Carefully and Keep for Future Reference

Updated:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000091580215000113/stickerredmontfundiliquidati.htm
497 1 stickerredmontfundiliquidati.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
REDMONT RESOLUTE FUND I
Supplement dated December 17, 2015
to the
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information each dated August 31, 2015
for the Redmont Resolute Fund I,
a series of Financial Investors Trust (the “Trust”)
The below information supersedes the information in the supplement dated December 16, 2015.
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Trust, based upon the recommendation of Highland Associates, Inc. (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser to the Redmont Resolute Fund I (the “Fund”), a series of the Trust, has determined to close and liquidate the Fund. The Board concluded that it would be in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Trust effective as of the close of business on January 29, 2016.
The Board approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) that determines the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated. Pursuant to the Plan and in anticipation of the Fund’s liquidation, the Fund will be closed to new purchases effective as of the close of business on December 16, 2015. However, any distributions declared to shareholders of the Fund after December 16, 2015, and until the close of trading on the New York Stock Exchange on January 29, 2016 will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of the Fund unless a shareholder specifically requests that such distributions be paid in cash. Although the Fund will be closed to new purchases as of December 16, 2015, you may continue to redeem your shares of the Fund after December 16, 2015, as provided in the Prospectus. Please note, however, that the Fund will be liquidating its assets as of the close of business on January 29, 2016.
Pursuant to the Plan, if the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to the
close of business on January 29, 2016, the effective time of the liquidation, your shares will be redeemed,
and you will receive proceeds representing your proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of
January 29, 2016, subject to any required withholdings. As is the case with any redemption of fund shares, these liquidation proceeds will generally be subject to federal and, as applicable, state and local income taxes if the redeemed shares are held in a taxable account and the liquidation proceeds exceed your adjusted basis in the shares redeemed. If the redeemed shares are held in a qualified retirement account such as an IRA, the liquidation proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation under certain conditions. You should consult with your tax adviser for further information regarding the federal, state and/or local income tax consequences of this liquidation that are relevant to your specific situation.
The Fund will bear the expenses incurred by the Fund in carrying out the Plan.
Please retain this supplement with your Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information.