We have no skin in the game and don't invest in direct lending anyway, but god forbid we have some objectivity out there.  

The The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times seem to be at the forefront of this mess.  I've noticed their reporters have tagged a mafioso crew of financial influencers that make their business off rage bait and clicks, while inciting lay investors to panic.   

Take today's news from Blue Owl Capital - It's flagship fund OCIC was faced with just under 22% redemption requests.  What was left out from FT reporting was that the 5%/qtr limits were met easily with the fund sitting at just 0.8x debt to leverage and having $11.3B in liquidity (11x coverage of the $988M redemption).  And... at the same time it saw $872M of inflows.  For, wait for it... a whopping net outflow of less than 1% of the fund's NAV.  

Yet, we see "GFC 2.0" "Fund Run" "Systemic Crisis" "Liquidity mismatch" in the news.  These fund structures are purposely built to prevent runs and distressed selling.  Mathematically it would take 5 years for this "RUN" to play out, and that is assuming 0 net inflows.  0. 

What is puzzling to me is where the vast majority of the media narrative has gone. 
- Defaults to bank held borrowers in.... Sept '25. These are the "cockroaches" that Jamie Dimon of J.P. Morgan called out (not to mention Dimon is laughing all the way to the bank as he just launched his own private credit fund to take advantage of the dislocation he helped create). 
- Desperate but unable to find material private credit defaults, the media narrative switched to that of tinfoil.  Blue Owl's par sale to "captive insurers", that the buyers were only purchasing the loans to prop up their own marks.
- "Undercover" reclassification of loan books from services to software to "gotcha" the industry's coverup of overconcentration.
- And amidst the constant barrage of negative headlines investors shockingly (/s) looked to redeem.  Unsatisfied with clear redemption limits to prevent the "runs" that the media is desperate for, it highlights the redemptions that it caused and how that will catalyze our next financial crisis.  

All of this is so annoying because it glosses over the very important FACTS that we should be covering.  
- Defaults are somewhat elevated due to higher interest rates from the '23 hiking cycle 
- Interest rate coverage ratios are moving down in tandem with the above
- And there is legitimate concern over what will happen to software companies  

But the above is just too complicated, not nearly controversial enough, and won't grab headlines.  So let's just scream about how the world is ending, private capital is out to get you, and Congress should get involved in preventing people from understanding what a 5% qrtly redemption means.