The only one still conning Rashid is...Rashid.  He claims he was going to be a long-term holder, but the performance stunk so he bailed out.  A simple performance chase, but he can't admit it to himself.  So instead he finds some reason, after the fact, to justify selling the fund so that he can tell himself that he is not a performance chaser.

I believe the probability is extremely high that if Rashid had instead invested in John Hancock Classic Value, a fund from the same managers that has had similarly poor performance, he would have sold it also.  However, the managers are heavily invested in that fund, so he would have searched for a different reason to support his reason for selling the fund.  YOU CAN ALWAYS FIND AN EXCUSE TO SELL AN UNDERPERFORMING FUND.

For example, a number of posters immediately sold their positions in the First Eagle Funds last year when several key members left the firm.  There is no question that this is an important issue to evaluate, but is it a coincidence that these folks were so quick to sell after the funds' performance in recent years had been relatively unimpressive?  Would they have convinced themselves of reasons to stick with the funds if the performance had been top of category?  You bet.  We see it here all the time.  BRAIX is another good example where people were moving in and out despite no significant changes in personnel or strategy.  The reasons for selling when the fund was down were do to "portfolio changes"; it was never due to BRAIX's performance, of course.

The fact is that the Pzena managers run a number of funds and they are actually heavily invested in their firm's strategies, just not on an equal basis across different funds.  This thread is nothing more than a performance chasing red herring by Rashid.  Do not let this faulty logic enter your thinking, or you will end up with similar results.  If you are going to try to be honest, start with intellectual honesty to yourself.