<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Counterparties</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/10/counterparties-500/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/10/counterparties-500/</link>
	<description>A slice of lime in the soda</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:59:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny_Black</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/01/10/counterparties-500/comment-page-1/#comment-34883</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny_Black</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 09:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=11795#comment-34883</guid>
		<description>Not sure what the WSJ article is trying to say or what you are trying to infer.  That only 80% of the companies Bain invested in didn&#039;t fail?  That it would have made more money if it hadn&#039;t invested in investments that lost money?  That some companies that Bain invested in eventually failed, sometimes long after Bain was involved?

The phraseology suggests some sort of scandal.  Care to expand on what that might be?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not sure what the WSJ article is trying to say or what you are trying to infer.  That only 80% of the companies Bain invested in didn&#8217;t fail?  That it would have made more money if it hadn&#8217;t invested in investments that lost money?  That some companies that Bain invested in eventually failed, sometimes long after Bain was involved?</p>
<p>The phraseology suggests some sort of scandal.  Care to expand on what that might be?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
