Comments on: Why did the SEC fail to spot the Madoff case?

By: Drazen

Drazen — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:29:00 +0000

I sympathize with all of you guys.Just few remarks.
SEC or any other regulation will not/would not/can not save your money from fraudsters.Only you can. Dont trust blindly to any adviser, diversify your investments, invest in ETFs, dont trust in high return funds.What comes up must come down sooner or later.
Educate yourself, there are huge collection if good books in the USA. Best wishes to you all from Croatia

By: Colin

Colin — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:40:28 +0000

Prof Williams seems to equate size with quality: “Who is the accountant for the investment adviser and what is their reputation and size”.
Can he cite any research correlating size of accounting firm and reduction in risk of loss?
According to the anecdotal evidence at my disposal, more has been lost in undetected frauds committed by clients of the Big Five - oops, post-Enron, make that four - than to clients of their smaller competitors.

By: RICH

RICH — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:06:43 +0000

50 billion and he never executed one trade. The SEC was paid to look the other way through political contributions. Madoff was a big dollar donor. 50 billion is a drop in the bucket compared to the real organised crime (AIG Merrill Countrywide etc) that has crippled the world economies. I agree with others this is a smoke screen for the real theft which is in the multi trillions. Repackaging worthless subprime paper into vehicles that were sold to inocent investors eclipses this scheme by a landslide and no one is going to jail or even being investigated. Credit default swap Translation ponzi scheme. Risk managment? What managment? These are the same firms we are giving bonuses/bailouts to. The SEC is corrupot dont fool yourselves into thinking otherwise if it looks like a duck quacks like a duck its a corrupt duck. An 8 year old could have figured out Madoff was a theif. Now we are hearing he acted alone come on people people wake up. Brokers were supplying extensive documentation detailing the ponzi scheme and the SEC ignored them. Repeatedly. Does this sound like regulation to you? I believe the last estimate on the sub prime debackle was 4 trillion dollars this make 50 billion look like a bad joke. Dont get me wrong Madoff should be in jail for the rest of his life but the real crime isnt even being looked at because as I said earlier the SEC is corrupt and all of wall street was involved.

By: Equity Index Life Insurance Products - Page 2

Equity Index Life Insurance Products - Page 2 — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:00:30 +0000

[...] permalink Originally Posted by erikbj Madoff ran a non-registered product which is not the SEC’s responsiblity to supervise. however in the next year you will see non-registered products (aka Hedge Funds) come under the watch of the SEC. The problem is that 99% of teh people at teh SEC are not smart enough to know waht they are looking for. Not exactly true. SEC has jurisdiction over investment advisory firms. See this article from Reuters: January 6th, 2009 Why did the SEC fail to spot the Madoff case? [...]

By: jason

jason — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:29:28 +0000

Mr SRk,
I didn’t complain just stated a fact that I believe. Mr. Madoff is being used as a patsy. I think the derivatives scam is the beast they want to cover up as soon as they can. If they can focus the public attention on one thing they can get away with another. I absolutely believe that honest enforcement of the rules we already have will be sufficient. More regulation and consolidation is not the answer. Here in the land of the free we should be alot less friendly to federal government centralization of our financial laws. A very consistent statement Mr. SRK. We need to obey the laws we have not to create more.

By: SRK

SRK — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:28:00 +0000

Mr. Jason above, complains about the mess, and then makes remarks to the effect that more effective oversight is not warranted in the land of the free.
He is being inconsistant. “Land of the free”, does not mean “We trust you not to be a thief”. Madoff a patsy?
I’ll use that excuse in the future.

By: Beezer

Beezer — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:00:40 +0000

I agree with the column, but I think the SEC’s biggest failing came with the failure to properly regulate trading itself in the markets. The unbelievable leverage being applied, both short and long, had to have set off some warning bells.

The markets have become one big casino, where insiders are the house, and everyone outside became unwitting gamblers–that would be pension funds, 401ks, mutual funds and just about everyone else who’s seen their life savings halved.

Even today, the SEC hasn’t re-instituted common sense trading rules that worked for decades.

By: KAS

KAS — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:55:54 +0000

I am not so surprised when I hear about these “scandals” anymore. I don’t blame any one political party more than the other. I can’t even really blame the regulatory agencies that were otherwise stripped of their authority by those “in power.” (Who are invested in making money too ex. see corporate/banking/insurance lobbyist) How long are we going to pretend that the US hasn’t been on a crash course? We can’t just let corporations and lending institutions go unregulated and trust they are looking out for whats the best practice, they are looking out for maximum profit. And when they fail we (taxpayers) bail them out- which by the way is the antithesis of a free market economy!! And average American consumers are fine just so long as they can keep buying stuff they don’t really need because it makes them feel as though they’re keeping up with that family on the TV. But when they fail they can go hungry and homeless. As a citizen of the United Corporations of America, the “oh my! oh no!” just rings so hollow. I am not so surprised anymore.

By: jason

jason — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:38:43 +0000

I’ll bet my bottom dollar the SEC was well aware of Mr. Madoff. He seems like small fish compared to the derivatives scandal that is being covered up. Madoff seems like the patsy in this. Now the fed’s are going to claim need for more control and regulation and the public is buying it. Sounds just like what we need here in the land of the free.

By: Chris Hamilton

Chris Hamilton — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:48:42 +0000

All broker transactions that I do in my IRA and individual accounts have an SEC fee. If all investors read the statements from their broker or mutual fund the SEC fee’s indicate how much trading is going on.

It would be a self check if there were no fee’s paid to the SEC but the mutual fund said they traded successfully to beat the market the SEC payment would show immediately the facts don’t match the hype.

In addition it would allow the SEC to quickly register a complaint % based on paid fees for brokers. IE = Broker A has 5 complains / million SEC fee paid, vs Broker B with 12 complaints / million SEC fees paid.

No new regulation but applying statistics and common sense to existing regulation.

From what I gather a MadeUP fund will show a fraudulent amount of SEC payments and that can put a spotlight on fraud before it gets to the billions.