Sahm Adrangi is the founder and the CEO of Capital Management LLC. Kerrisdale. He launched the firm in 1999 with the main focus on event-driven special situations and long-term investment. With his dedication and hard work, he has seen the company, which started with less than 1$ to grow and amass a capital of over 150$ million.
Sahm Adrangi has focused mainly on researching and selling ideas to the general public. Through social media and third-party investment related sites, Sahm Adrangi has been able to see his research ideas reach as many people as possible. He has his firms view on stocks and also done research to remedy the misconceptions in the stock market such as overhyped shots and undervalued longs.
Sahm’s name became known all over the States between 2010 and 2011 when he exposed fraud in some Chinese companies operating in the US. Those companies include Chinese Marine Food Group, China-Biotics, and ChinaCast Education Corp. He achieved this through deep audited research then prompted SEC to take action against those firms.
Under his leadership in Kerrisdale Adrangi, the firm has shifted its research from general industries to specific sectors of his expertise such as mining, telecommunication, and biotechnology. In the biotechnology sector, Kerrisdale has done and published research on the development stage of many companies including Bavarian Nordic, Zafgen, Unilife, Pulse Biosciences and Sage Therapeutics. In the mining sector, Sahm Adrangi has led his company in research, which called into question the market valuation and mining prospects of resource companies such as Northern Dynasty Mineral and Majestic Silver. Sahm Adrangi has also done a lot of research on telecommunication companies such as Globalstar, Dish Network and ViaSat Inc. where he has shared skeptical views.
Sahm Adrangi had specialized in economics from the University of Yale. His professional career kicked off in Deutsche Bank where he worked as an analyst in the banks Leveraged finance group. His success has seen him work as the analyst in different companies such as Chanin Capital Partners and Longacre Fund Management LLC. He finally left to start his own company.
The world of human resources is getting more complicated each year. Ways of motivating employees that had been thought to work for years are being struck down by research. Types of bonuses that were once thought to be the best way to increase the bottom line are now being shown to actually reduce it. One of the biggest arguments that still remains is the performance-based pay programs that give employees and executives bonuses depending on how the company performs.
This debate is centered around one fundamental question. “Will giving employees bonuses based on company performance encourage them to help increase the company’s income, or will it only encourage them to cut corners and sacrifice the long-term goals of the company for short-term gains?” More and more people are starting to agree with the latter portion of that statement. While research has shown that companies with performance-based bonuses have higher overall performance, it does not take into account that the higher performance in one year might be affecting the performance of the firm in years to come. Some argue that executives are more inclined to put off large capital expenditures that are needed by the company because it will reduce the amount of income the company receives, thus affecting their bonus. Executives might also be inclined to give false impressions of sales and even make fictitious sales in order to grow the income statement. Learn more: https://www.crunchbase.com/person/jeremy-goldstein#/entity
For all of the companies going through this debate, Jeremy Goldstein and his firm Jeremy L. Goldstein & Associates is there to help. Goldstein has worked for several years in compensation and corporate law, and he has seen all different kinds of pay plans and bonuses. He has worked with several executive compensation committees to help find the line between paying employees for their hard work and giving employees money after they have sacrificed the long-term goals of the company. He knows there is a middle ground.
For the debate on performance-based pay, Jeremy Goldstein has found a solution that all parties are happy about. He has suggested that employees should be paid well if the company is doing well, but that all of the executives and decision-makers need to be held accountable for their actions. Namely, compensation committees should put provisions in their compensation agreements to make sure that large projects and expenditures are not sacrificed, and that all decisions made by the executives are ones that are for the good of the company, not just their pocketbooks.