Hi, guys.
Sorry about the delayed announcement. I'm away at a professional conference doing stuff on behalf of the college and haven't been able to get near a computer.
This morning we announced the opening of the
MFO Premium site (It's the site that a bunch of board members have had access to for the last few months). The note that went out to all of the folks on our mailing list is pasted below. Here's the story: we've been working for a year or so on ways to keep MFO free, open and vibrant. We're mostly getting by each month on $500-600 from Amazon and two or three contributions. That keeps the lights on but not much more. While Accipiter, Charles, Chip and Ed have been incredibly generous in donating their time and expertise, I didn't think that I could sustain MFO for years on hundreds a month. We took two steps to change that. First, we became a non-profit. Second, we designed MFO Premium as both a useful tool and an incentive to encourage folks to contribute. It's mostly Charles's fund screeners and a Works-in-Progress feature where I'm sharing some of the stuff that won't be ready for the cover essay for months (I write slowly).
Our first goal for the site is to cover the cost of the data we've licensed from Lipper; $
1,000 a month, which is really a very good price for such stuff. If we're able to raise that much, we'll begin using the surplus to strengthen MFO's ability to help folks. That might mean actually being able to pay folks for stuff they've written or to pay programmers to help with the next redesign of the monthly essay. It's kind of a mess now: a single scrolling essay that runs to 30-40 pages in Word. We're trying to customize a template that will make it look more like a magazine which, we think, will make it much easier to read and navigate. But getting that right requires fairly high level skills and experience. Eventually finding ways to help small, smart fund managers thrive would also be good for us all.
As I note below, we are taking nothing away from MFO. Nothing's getting moved behind a paywall. Period. We're a non-profit with a mission. I'm mostly trying to find a way to keep pursuing that mission.
As ever,
David
---
We are pleased to announce the launch of
MFO Premium. We're offering it as a gesture of thanks to folks who have supported MFO in the past and an incentive for those who have been promising themselves to support us but haven't quite gotten there. You can gain a year's access for a tax-deductible contribution of at least $
100; if there are firms that would like multiple log-ins, we'd happily talk through a package.
MFO Premium has been in development for more than a year. Its genesis lies in the tools that Charles, Ed and I rely on as we're trying to make sense of a fund's track record. We realized early on that the traditional reporting time frames (YTD,
1-, 3-, 5- and
10-year periods) were meaningless at best and seriously misleading at worst since they capture arbitrary periods unrelated to the rhythms of the market. As a result, we made a screener that allowed us to look at performance in up cycles, down cycles and across full cycles. We also concluded that most services have simple-minded risk measurements; while reporting standard deviation and beta are nice, they represent a small and troubled toolkit since they simplify risk down to short-term volatility. As a result, we made a screener that provides six or eight different lens (from maximum drawdown in each measurement period to recovery times, Ulcer indexes and a simple "risk group" snapshot) through which to judge what you're getting into.
Along the way we added a tool for side-by-side comparisons of individual funds, side-by-side comparisons with ETFs, previews of our works in progress, sample screener runs and a small discussion area you can use if something is goofed up.
We think it has three special characteristics:
1. It's interesting: so far as we can tell, most of this content is not available in the tools available to "normal" folks and it's stuff we've found useful.
2. It's evolving: our current suite of tools is slated to expand as we add more functions that we, personally, have needed or wanted.
3. It's responsive: we're trying to make our tools as useful as possible. If you can show us something that would make the site better and if it's within our capabilities, we'll likely do it.
To be clear: we are taking nothing away from MFO's regular site. Not now, not ever. Nothing's moving behind a paywall. We're a non-profit and, more particularly, a non-profit that has a long-standing, principled dedication to helping people make sense of their options. If anything, the success of MFO Premium will allow us to expand and strengthen the offerings on our free site. Right now we operate on little more than $
1,000/month, which is exactly what our recently-signed data licensing agreement with Lipper is going to cost. We're hopeful that premium memberships - at $
100, tax deductible, a year for individuals - will allow us to cover the cost of the data feed. If we're able to raise more than that, we'd like to be able to offer some compensation for the folks who write for the Observer and expand our efforts to help guide and support independent managers and boutique firms.
In response to a frequently asked question, we've kept track of all of the folks who've already contributed to the Observer this year. You're not getting left behind but it may take a couple weeks for us to catch up with you.
That's about it. We think that the site is useful, the contribution target is modest and the benefits are substantial. We hope you agree and agree to join MFO Premium.
On behalf of Charles, Chip, Ed and all the folks who make MFO work,
