Talk:Bridgewater Associates

Fair use rationale for Image:Bridgewater Associates.gif
Image:Bridgewater Associates.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Hedge Fund?
Is this company really a hedge fund? A hedge fund has pretty specific parameters as to who can invest in it and to my knowledge that does not include investment banks, pension funds and other large financial entities. Normally it is high net worth individuals... Stevenmitchell (talk) 05:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedge_fund#US_regulation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.233.2.231 (talk) 21:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

They have a few hedge funds under their umbrella, as well as other assets under management. So calling them solely a hedge fund would be incorrect. The existing description on the main page matches well with what I was told by recruiters and during a phone interview. Sorry for not having a written source, they're very secretive. 171.159.192.10 (talk) 17:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

People always refer to Bridgewater colloquially as a hedge fund though--employees of the firm included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.44.115.66 (talk) 09:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Janderson12 edit undo: "2/25/2009 It has just come out that Bridgewater is under investigation by the SEC."
This edit has been undone by Bridgewater Associates, Inc., located in Westport, CT as we are unaware of any SEC investigation involving our company. It is possible that the investigation referred to relates to a different company with a similar name. Any person wishing to provide additional information may contact us at: Communications_PR "at" bwater.com BWCommunications (talk) 21:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe the edit by Janderson12 was triggered by this item: "Madoff investigation involves Bridgewater man who worked for financier". Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Bold Changes
In light of the Ad tag I am making bold changes to restructure an edit the article for NPOV and to remove peacock fluff.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 17:21, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Parking Sources

 * ref name="CNN"
 * 100 Hedge funds to watch Financial Times, March 19, 2010
 * ref name=2011HedgeFund100>
 * ref name="McKinsey&Company">The Asset Management Industry in 2010, 'McKinsey&Company'', 2006. Accessed March 26, 2010.
 * ref name="FinancialNewsLateralThinking">Schultes, Renée. Bridgewater seeks competitive advantage through lateral thinking, Financial News, Sept 11, 2006. Accessed April 7, 2010.
 * ref name="FT_Stern">Stern, Stefan. Time to toughen up and embrace the joys of conflict, Financial Times, January 15, 2008. Accessed March 22, 2010.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 01:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Unsourced Text Removed
-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 20:13, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * That same year the company received Euromoney Institutional Investor's Best Research award and Money Management Letters Hedge Fund Manager of the Year (Multi-strategy) award.

Need a Section for Regulation
Given the management similarities to Madoff and MF Global (i.e. cultish secretive leader), it would seem anyone wishing to learn about Bridgewater Associates would first want to know what regulatory framework they operate under, yet there is zero mention of this topic in the article, so it is quite deficient imho. No doubt this simple and noncontroversial suggestion for article improvement will be quickly deleted by the TM patrol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.61.138.0 (talk) 18:32, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Problems with verification - fix or lose GA status
I have been alerted to many 'failed verification' tags on this article's information. As the original GA reviewer, I'm very troubled by this and upon looking into some of the tags, I see many have merit. I'm going to give the main contributors 7 days to fix this problem, after which I'll check in again. If the tags have not been addressed, I'll do a reassessment, which could result in loss of GA status on the article. Cheers, AstroCog (talk) 13:37, 5 February 2012 (UTC) ✅-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 00:18, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Recent addition
Recently a new editor has added a new section to the article called Commitment Firm I think it creates some issues including original research and undue weight and may need to be cut back or eliminated. Any thoughts from others.?-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 19:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Bridgewater_Associates, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.179.7 (talk) 03:43, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bridgewater Associates. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111015140153/http://www.leadersmag.com/issues/2011.3_Jul/ROB/LEADERS-Eileen-Murray-Bridgewater-Associates.html to http://www.leadersmag.com/issues/2011.3_Jul/ROB/LEADERS-Eileen-Murray-Bridgewater-Associates.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:00, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Broken infobox
Can someone repair the broken infobox in the article, please? PlanetDeadwing (talk) 01:54, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, done. Markvs88 (talk) 13:57, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Critics
Behavour during 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, Bridgewater Associates bet against european companies. --KLritikbörsenwelte (talk) 22:39, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Der Aktionär.de: Hedgefonds-Legende wettet im großen Stil gegen Europa
 * Institutional Money: Bridgewater geht 14 Milliarden-Leerverkaufposition in Europaaktien ein, March 19, 2020
 * Welt.de: Spekulanten stürzen sich auf deutsche Konzerne

A few new possible refs

 * https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/01/business/how-does-the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-really-make-its-money.html
 * https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/bridgewater-spent-1-million-renovating-a-45-foot-rockstar-bus-to-shuttle-employees-between-the-office-bars-and-casinos-book-says/ar-AA1jBTdO

John Cummings (talk) 17:29, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

AUM Clarification
Hi, I'd like to make a clarification regarding the company's AUM. An IP editor recently updated the AUM in the infobox and added two related sentences to the end of the History section using a Pensions & Investments article and MarketWatch article. The figures $97.2 billion and $72.5 billion noted respectively in the article, however, relate to the hedge fund AUM and not the firmwide AUM. Therefore, I am requesting to change the AUM in the infobox back to $125 billion using the Reuters article which had previously been referenced, and to remove the inaccurate sentences from History ("As of September 25, 2023 Bridgewater's AUM totaled $97.2 billion, with assets sliding 23%. As of January 22, 2024 Bridgewater's AUM totaled $72.5 billion, according to MarketWatch."). I am happy to discuss if anything needs further clarification. Jaren Laurel Strategies (talk) 12:49, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)