????對沖基金業先驅邁克爾?斯坦哈特一直批評對沖基金經理已淪為資產匯集者。今春斯坦哈特在接受CNBC采訪時稱，如今的基金經理似乎滿足于回報率跑贏大盤即可，真正賺錢則是靠擴大資產規模，依賴管理費生存。他說，如今的對沖基金業務正在淪為一個獎勵機制，鼓勵做大基金，而不是追求制勝的回報率。

????部分觀察人士(或者說持懷疑態度的觀察人士)認為，對沖基金引入種子投資將使得投資者有機會參與斯坦哈特不屑一顧、卻能帶來高額回報的機制，以便從中分得一杯羹。畢竟，只要資金持續流入，收取管理費的模式就能保證哪怕最平庸的基金經理都能掙到錢。誰會拒絕這樣的好事呢？

????所謂種子投資，正如你可能聽到的那樣，即注入早期資本。對沖基金種子的規模大到足以幫助一個基金經理起步；而且一些種子投資者還同時提供推介、風險管理和后臺幫助。如果投資是來自知名公司——如Larch Lane、Reservoir、Protégé、百仕通(Blackstone)或SkyBridge——則無異于一劑早期的成功定心丸。

????獲得種子投資的對沖基金有點像契約奴工。種子投資人提供資金、協助推介，有時可能還會給對沖基金帶來好名聲，作為回報，投資人將獲得對沖基金的股權以及約定時間內的部分基金管理費收入。

????金融危機爆發前，出色的基金經理(至少是業績記錄出色的基金經理)無需種子投資。他們不需要任何幫助，就能輕松籌得大筆資金(當時指的是10億美元左右的啟動資金，而如今1億美元也被視為大額籌資)。在對沖基金的鼎盛時期，引入種子投資的基金經理有時會被視為無能之輩。

????如今，拉奇?萊恩的一份報告稱，即便是最老牌的基金經理都在考慮引入種子投資，因為金融危機已使得投資者不再放心將錢交給另起爐灶的基金經理——即便是聲名卓著的基金經理。把寶押在資歷尚欠的基金經理身上需要冒很大的風險，不管他/她在自營部門或其他對沖基金的表現如何出色。報告還指出，相比過去，種子投資人現在還能爭取更有利的條款。

????總之，大量的基金希望獲得資金。“我可以給你看，有無數基金經理書面業績看來不錯，棒球卡很出色，但一碰到市場就完了，”SkyBridge的創始人安東尼?斯卡拉姆齊稱，“你必須遴選出具有西蒙?考威爾所謂的某種神秘特質（X-factor） 的經理。”

????我問斯卡拉姆齊，如果想要他為我未來的公司(當我發揮我的X特質時，你懂的)提供種子資本，我必須付出什么代價。在確認我的老板（以及斯卡拉姆齊的合作伙伴）也將參與該方案后， 斯卡拉姆齊表示他可以提供約7,500萬美元的資金、融資幫助，并安排我出席SALT （SkyBridge Alternative）會議。作為交換，SkyBridge希望得到Fortune Magazine Capital Partners (FMCP!)管理費收入的25%左右。

????這樣的安排能更好地平衡SkyBridge和我的風險及回報。如果這只Fortune對沖基金的資產管理規模從1億美元飆升至10億美元的話，那將成為對沖基金界類似勵志大篇《冰上輕馳》（Cool Running）的佳話，此外還將給管理團隊和種子投資人帶來豐厚回報。斯卡拉姆齊和我就能喜笑顏開地依靠不斷膨脹的資產收取2%的管理費，從長遠來看，一旦某一年的年度業績不佳的話，這筆不斷增加的現金也可應付不時之需。同時，一旦獲得SkyBridge的種子投資，其知名度可能會吸引更多的有限合伙人，膨脹的資產規模能使所有人都發財，哪怕我無法企及斯坦哈特在過去28年里取得的年均回報率(24%)的卓越業績。

????當然，這不是說種子投資人不是在真心尋找最佳的基金經理。只是說經濟景氣時，只要基金能夠實現資產擴張，種子投資人就能從哪怕是平庸的基金經理身上賺到錢。

????隨著“種子”一詞不斷出現在對沖基金新聞、業內會議以及機構投資者的交談中，可見這股趨勢的意義已經不再僅僅局限于幫助新生基金公司或者彌合對沖基金有限合伙人與羽翼未豐的基金經理之間的分歧。諸如高盛(Goldman Sachs)、摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)這樣的投資銀行、私募股權公司以及更多大型投資平臺都在為種子基金募集資金，希望能夠準確把握市場脈搏，順應驅使基金經理自立門戶的動力——即市場順風順水、雞犬升天，資金重新涌入對沖基金時，基金經理們鎖定現金的能力。

????Hedge fund pioneer Michael Steinhardt has criticized hedge fund managers for becoming nothing more than asset gatherers. Steinhardt told CNBC this spring that managers today seem happy to perform just well enough to stay ahead of the market, and make their real money by growing assets and living off of the management fees. He says the business is turning into a compensation scheme, which has encouraged big funds rather than killer performance.

????Hedge fund seeding is a business that some observers (well, cynical observers) think gives investors a chance to partake in the compensation scheme that Steinhardt disdains, but that has made people a lot of money. Afterall, the management fee structure allowed even mediocre managers to profit so long as money rolled into their firms. Who wouldn't want in on that?

????A seed investment, as you may have gleaned, is an injection of early stage capital. A hedge fund seed is large enough to help a manager get off the ground; and some seeders also kick in marketing, risk management, and back office help. If the investment is from a prestigious firm – i.e. Larch Lane, Reservoir, Protege, Blackstone (BX), or SkyBridge – the seed can act like an early imprimatur of success.

????The seeded enter into a relationship that operates like indentured servitude lite. In exchange for money, marketing, and (sometimes) prestige, seeders get some combination of an equity stake in the business and a cut of the fee income generated by the fund for an agreed upon period of time.

????Before the financial crisis, the most talented managers (or at least those with the best track records) didn't need to be seeded. They were easily able to raise big money (about $1 billion for a launch vs. the $100 million that is now considered a great raise) without any help. At the height of the hedge fund boom, managers who relied on seeding platforms were sometimes thought of as the sort of guys who couldn't succeed on their own.

????Now a Larch Lane report says that even the most pedigreed managers are considering seeders, since the financial crisis has made investors wary of putting money with managers -- even established ones -- just striking out on their own. It's high risk to put a bet on an emerging manager, regardless of what kind of track record he or she created while at a prop trading desk or at another hedge fund. The report adds that seeders are also in a position to negotiate even better terms for themselves than before.

????In short, there's a glut of funds who want money. "I can show you countless managers who looked good on paper, whose baseball card so to speak looked great, who blew themselves to pieces the minue they had contact with the market," says SkyBridge founder Anthony Scaramucci. "You have to find managers who have what Simon Cowell calls the X-factor."

????I ask Scaramucci what I'd have to give up if he seeded my future firm (you know, when I unleash my X-factor). After reassurance that my boss (and Scaramucci's Wall Street 2 partner in cameo crime) would be a part of the package, Scaramucci says he would probably provide about $75 million, fund raising help, and a spot in his SALT conference line up. In exchange, SkyBridge would want about 25% of the fee revenue generated by Fortune Magazine Capital Partners (FMCP!).

????This is how the arrangement more closely aligns SkyBridge's risks and rewards with mine. If the Fortune hedge fund rockets from $100 million in assets under management to $1 billion, it would not only be the Cool Runnings of hedge fund stories, it would be a huge pay day for the management team and the seeder. Scaramucci and I could happily collect the 2% fee charged on the burgeoning assets, and use the growing pile of cash as some nice rainy day money should I not actually perform all that well on a long term, annualized basis. Since SkyBridge is a well known seeder, that stamp of approval would hopefully beget more limited partners and create the bloated asset base that will make everyone rich even if I don't knock it out of the park a la Steinhardt's famed 24% average annual returns over 28 years.

????This is not to say, of course, that seeders aren't genuine in their desire to find the very best managers. It is only to note that seeders can still make money on mediocre managers if those funds manage to gather assets during a boom.

????So as the word 'seed' keeps popping up in hedge fund news, at industry conferences, and in conversations with institutional investors, know the trend is doing more than helping nascent firms or filling in the gap between hedge fund LPs and fledgling managers. Banks like Goldman Sachs (GS) and Morgan Stanley (MS), private equity firms, and more big investment platforms are raising money for seeding funds to be on the right side of what motivates hedge fund managers to hang a shingle – the ability to lock in some cash as a rising tide lifts all boats and money roars back to the asset class.