not true about the 60% unidentified investors! i bit and went to the nytimes site and surely the article did leave much to the imagination but i must attribute this as being much of the same ilk that permeated the miami herald's sensationalism about santo's "funny ride", although much more demure. in fact, after the fact i recalled reading after either the derby or preakness the complete ownership roll call, and for verification if you wish, search google for funny cide ownership and the washington post has the complete breakdown of ownership. nothing sinister there.