"Not a squeak?" Do a basic Google search. It was widely reported in the financial press at the time, especially by Bloomberg.
And as far as billionaires go, I don't even think Simons gets enough press to really make a distinction on whether or not it's overly positive. Someone else mentioned Gates, which is I think apt. He has cultivated a savior mythos in the press in which he eradicates diseases using his fortune.
Even if you include everything the Simons Foundation does for disease and health research, it's just a drop in the bucket compared to how much positive spin lots of other billionaires get. Off the top of my head, I think even David E. Shaw gets more spotlight than Simons through DESRES and his whole "spurned academic turned superstar" schtick.
Are you kidding? Saint Simons is a GENIUS. That's why Medallion fund made 60%+ CAGR for 30 years. Of course, that figure simply captures the return from all of the best cherrypicked strategies. If that figure were real, Simons would own California. And his name is synonymous with AUTISM RESEARCH.
All I've ever heard about Shaw is that he runs a modestly successful hedge fund.
And as far as billionaires go, I don't even think Simons gets enough press to really make a distinction on whether or not it's overly positive. Someone else mentioned Gates, which is I think apt. He has cultivated a savior mythos in the press in which he eradicates diseases using his fortune.
Even if you include everything the Simons Foundation does for disease and health research, it's just a drop in the bucket compared to how much positive spin lots of other billionaires get. Off the top of my head, I think even David E. Shaw gets more spotlight than Simons through DESRES and his whole "spurned academic turned superstar" schtick.