Tuor - Un caso simbolo dell’attuale crisi

Sharnin 2

Forumer storico
Un caso simbolo dell’attuale crisi
Alfonso Tuor

La truffa del secolo, come è stata definita, può essere considerata il simbolo della crisi finanziaria che sta mettendo a soqquadro l’economia mondiale. Pure la piazza finanziaria svizzera sarà colpita dall’uragano determinato da questa frode, poiché alcune banche elvetiche avrebbero inserito nei fondi di fondi hedge proposti ai clienti anche gli Hedge Funds di Bernard Madoff. L’ex presidente del Nasdaq si è consegnato alle autorità giovedì scorso ammettendo di aver perpetrato una truffa, il cui ammontare dovrebbe aggirarsi attorno ai 50 miliardi di dollari. Il finanziere di Wall Street aveva ideato una colossale Catena di Sant Antonio centrata sugli Hedge Funds. Sfruttando la mancanza di controlli e di trasparenza di questi strumenti della nuova ingegneria finanziaria, assicurava grandi rendimenti ai primi investitori che pagava con i soldi versati dai nuovi investitori. I suoi fondi erano diventati leggendari per la stabilità della loro redditività, che si aggirava sempre attorno al 10% annuo. La Catena di Sant Antonio, che gli inglesi chiamano «schema Ponzi», si è inceppata all’inizio di questo mese, poiché la crisi finanziaria ha fatto saltare il gioco. Le richieste di riscatto degli investitori hanno infatti raggiunto i 7 miliardi di dollari e Bernard Madoff, sapendo che era impossibile raccogliere un tale ammontare di nuovi investimenti e che quindi era impossibile restituire i soldi, ha gettato la spugna e si è consegnato all’Fbi, ammettendo che tutta la sua costruzione finanziaria non era altro che «una grande bugia».
Questa truffa del secolo merita alcune considerazioni. In primo luogo, la segretezza degli Hedge Funds, invocata per evitare che altri imitino particolari strategie di investimento, e la carenza di regolamentazioni e di controlli offrivano il terreno ideale per una frode di questa portata. Questa truffa mette in discussione la qualità del lavoro dei gestori dei fondi di fondi hedge, che riscuotono le commissioni dai clienti per il loro lavoro di controllo dell’attività, di verifica delle strategie di investimento e per la selezione degli Hedge Funds. Nella loro ricerca di gestori dotati di particolare «talento» non si sono insospettiti per la stabilità dei rendimenti dei fondi di Bernard Madoff, che era «non credibile».
Questa truffa, ed è il secondo punto, mette in discussione l’intera industria degli Hedge Funds che negli anni del denaro facile e dell’euforia finanziaria è cresciuta a dismisura, arrivando a gestire (secondo alcune stime) 1.900 miliardi di dollari. Questa cifra, già di per sé enorme, deve essere moltiplicata più volte, poiché la loro strategia di investimento si basa sull’uso della leva. Questi strumenti di investimento e le grandi banche, che nella gestione dei fondi propri ne hanno imitato le gesta, ricorrono infatti al credito per moltiplicare le loro scommesse. In questo modo moltiplicano i guadagni quando gli investimenti si rivelano azzeccati, ma anche le perdite quando si rivelano sbagliati. Questi strumenti finanziari, la cui utilità per l’economia reale è come minimo molto discutibile, sono oggi in crisi, stretti, da una parte, dalle banche che sono diventate più restrittive nell’apertura delle linee di credito, e dall’altra, dalle richieste di rimborso degli investitori. La conseguenza è che oggi molti investitori si trovano «intrappolati», poiché la maggioranza degli Hedge Funds ha fatto scattare la clausola che impedisce i riscatti.
Questa truffa, ed è il terzo punto, rischia di avere pesanti conseguenze sistemiche. Infatti, coloro che sono stati rimborsati dai fondi di Bernard Madoff negli anni scorsi dovranno restituire questi capitali, poiché la legge americana prevede il recupero dei fondi erogati da un’istituzione finanziaria dopo il suo «fallimento tecnico» per non danneggiare gli altri investitori. Le perdite non si limiteranno quindi solo a coloro che hanno ancora soldi investiti in questi fondi, ma riguarderanno anche coloro che oggi pensano di averla scampata bella. Questa richiesta di restituzione e il probabile aumento di pressanti richieste di riscatto da parte degli investitori fanno prevedere che nei prossimi giorni vi sarà un’ondata di vendite di titoli finanziari ancora liquidi. Per questi motivi la truffa del secolo non solo metterà ancor più sotto pressione l’industria degli Hedge Funds, ma anche i mercati finanziari.

15.12.08 01:34:29
 
Per personaggi di questo genere che perpetrando truffe colossali hanno vissuto nel lusso per molti anni e poi provocano conseguenze negative a vasto raggio, nessuna condanna sarebbe troppo pesante. Si dovrebbero stabilire pene così terribili da avere un effetto deterrente su individui del genere; potrebbero essere rispolverate pene in uso nel Medio Evo
 
List of Investors Duped by Madoff Growing

12/15/08 - 06:21 AM EST

NEW YORK -- From a Jewish youth charity in Boston to major banks as far afield as Zurich, the list of investors who say they were duped in one of Wall Street's biggest Ponzi schemes is growing.

Around the world, investors who sunk cash into veteran Wall Street money manager Bernard Madoff's investment pool spent the weekend calculating how much exposure they might have. The 70-year-old Madoff, well respected in the investment community after serving as chairman of the Nasdaq Stock Market, was arrested Thursday in what prosecutors say was a $50 billion scheme to defraud investors.
One thing was clear in the fallout from his arrest: The alleged victims span from the super rich, to pensioners and powerful financial institutions, to local charities. Some investors claim they've been wiped out, while others are still likely to come forward.
"There were a lot of very sophisticated people who were duped, and that happens a great deal when you've had somebody decide to be unscrupulous," said Harvey Pitt, a former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, a regulator in charge of monitoring investment funds like the one Madoff operated. "It isn't just the big investors," he said. "There's a lot of charitable and foundation money involved in this, which is the real tragedy."
....

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10453133/1/list-of-investors-duped-by-madoff-growing.html

Madoff Investors Missed Red Flag

12/15/08 - 02:25 PM EST



Investors may have missed one major red flag that could have tipped them off that something was amiss at Bernard Madoff's now-infamous hedge fund: He acted as his own prime broker.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10453291/1/madoff-investors-missed-red-flag.html
 
Ecco perchè agli investitori non importa di Madoff

Why investors don't care about Madoff
Last Updated: December 18, 2008: 11:55 AM ET

But that hasn't happened. Granted, it's only been a week since Madoff's arrest, and we may find out more details about the alleged Ponzi scheme that could wind up causing more market volatility.
Still, it is encouraging that investors seem to have tuned out the cacophony surrounding Madoff.
"When this story first broke, I was worried that this would be a touchstone for a complete erosion in confidence in the markets. I've been remarkably surprised that the market has responded reasonably well to this revelation," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer with Harris Private Bank in Chicago.
It makes sense, though. Even if big U.S. banks start to emerge as investors whose money Madoff made off with before getting arrested, it's hard to imagine how this scandal could cause much more damage to a market that's already dealt with several crippling blows in the past few months.
"If this happened in August, it would have had more of an impact," said John Norris, an economist and managing director with Oakworth Capital, a private bank based in Birmingham, Ala. "If you were going to sell because of a negative piece of news, you probably already have taken most of your money out of the market."
In addition, there are more pressing concerns to focus on, such as the fate of the bailout for General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) and Chrysler and questions about how much longer this painful recession will last.
"Right now, the economy is front and center. Even jittery investors are looking past the Madoff debacle and focusing on the bigger picture," Ablin said.
Nonetheless, Norris said that while the Madoff mess might not cause more 700-point drops in the Dow, it may hold people back from investing in stocks any time soon.
"My bigger concern is that this keeps a lot of people on the sidelines and less willing to put money back into the markets. This may be another reason to put your money in a Folger's coffee can," he said.
But another market expert said that the Madoff brouhaha is not an indictment of the stock market but another example of lax regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission over the past few years.
"This is not a reason to lose confidence in the markets. This is a reason to lose confidence in the SEC. The notion that markets can self-regulate and don't need cops is a faulty premise," said Barry Ritholtz, CEO and director of equity research at research firm Fusion IQ and author of the soon-to-be-published book "Bailout Nation."
So why has this story gotten so much attention if it's not something that's really likely to affect the daily lives of you and me? Well, that's obvious, now isn't it?
With names like Steven Spielberg, New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg and New York Mets owner Fred Wilpon among the list of possible victims of the alleged scam, the Madoff mess is a compelling general-interest story even for people who don't know the difference between a stock and a bond.
And since many of us now dread looking at our 401(k)s after this bear of a year, this is the equivalent of those cheesy "Celebrities: They're Just like Us!" photos in Us magazine of Hollywood stars doing things like taking out the garbage or going to Starbucks. "Rich People: They Make Stupid Investing Decisions Just like Us!"
Of course, the losses resulting from the Madoff imbroglio are terrible news for the investors who placed their money with him. It's particularly disheartening for the many charities that now face financial hardship because of this.
Still, the scandal is a painful reminder to all that you have to do your homework when making any investment and cannot blindly trust a financial advisor, no matter how smart, savvy or charismatic he or she may seem.
"I feel terrible for people that lost money," Ritholtz said. "But nobody asked to see audited returns, ever?"


http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/18/markets/thebuzz/
 
Bernard Madoff and the Jews of Palm Beach

Bernard Madoff is a member in good standing of the Palm Beach Country Club, the exclusive Jewish club on the North End of the island. When I would talk to friends and acquaintances who were members, they often chatted about good old Bernie. The 70-year-old Madoff had been the chairman of the NASDAQ stock exchange. He was a brilliantly successful money manager who may well have handled the assets of a majority of the 300 members as well as that of those of a largely Jewish clientele across the eastern United States and a number of wealthy WASPS.
Bernard and Ruth Madoff bought their home on North Lake Way in 1967, and are among the most long standing members of the club. The Palm Beach Country Club is the ultimate symbol of the Jewish ascendency. Unlike the WASP clubs, to join you have to have made major charitable contributions. You also have to have made your fortune in clean ways. There are no garbage magnates, no slum lords. You have to be a person of character. And there was no one more revered and honored than Bernard Madoff.
Earlier this year I gave a talk at the club about my forthcoming book, Madness Under the Royal Palms. There were people in the room who are in my book and I avoided talking about them or anything that I thought might irritate or offend. I've been doing this sort of thing for years and I can take a few amusing anecdotes and strung them together into something that's not too painful and generally brings smiles if not laughter. But this afternoon there was dead silence. Nobody found anything I said amusing. In retrospect, I realize that these people had come to a bastion of anti-Semitism where Jews could not even enter the Breakers Hotel until 1965, and they had made the island theirs. And here I was to their minds mocking this world they had made their own. They found it profoundly unsettling.

People in Palm Beach sort themselves out into the group in which they belong based largely on how much money they have. Even the poorest of the islanders seem to have everything yet joy proves elusive, even for the country club members, because there is always someone richer or better socially connected. Joy is driving out of your 35,000-square-foot mansion in your Bentley and tooling up to the entrance of Mar-a-Lago for your fifteenth ball of the season, the valet parkers salivating at the chance to take your car and the prospect of a twenty-dollar tip. Joy is having a wife younger and thinner than any of the other wives at your table. Joy is subtly announced during dinner that your hedge fund scored 33 percent last year, while that of the arrogant son of a bitch across the table with the fat wife scored only 17 percent.
Those with the biggest financial gains generally had their money managed by Madoff. It was an honor having him handle your fortune. He didn't take just anybody. He turned down all kinds of people, and that made you want to give the man even more of your money. When he took your fortune, he told you that he would tell you nothing about how he achieved his returns. He was a god. He had the Midas touch.

Yesterday Madoff was arrested and accused of running what probably will prove the greatest Ponzi scheme in the history of the world. He may have dissipated as much as fifty billion dollars into nothing. For the elite Jewish world, it is a curse of almost biblical proportion. ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurence-leamer/bernard-madoff-and-the-sh_b_150624.html
 
Jewish lobby and Israel blamed for economic crisis

Alta Califronia - October 7, 2008 - (ACN) The New York Times published a statement by the director of the ADL of B'nai B'rith, Abraham Foxman, reporting that many Americans are blaming the Jewish lobby and Israel for the current catastrophic financial crisis affecting the USA and the world.

Abraham Foxman's report mentions the now bankrupt Jewish firm Lehman Brothers. CEO Richard Fuld, who is a Jew, was recently punched in the face by an angry American who lost all of his retirement savings when Fuld declared the firm bankrupt. Richard Fuld, however, took home an estimated $450 million dollars in compensation. Foxman also mentions two other Jews that have been criticized by Americans for having had a major part in the crisis. They are the present and former Chairmen of the Federal Reserve Board Ben Bernanke and Allan Greenspan.

The Federal Reserve is a private cartel of banks controlled by international Jewish families say the Americans who are blaming the Jewish lobby and Israel for the financial crisis. The Federal Reserve was given the exclusive right to create and print money by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. These Americans say that the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was the creation of New York "banksters" and approved by crooked congressmen in the pockets of the Jews.
...
Many Americans also criticize the Jewish lobby, whose principal tool is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), for each year ordering the US Congress to approve multi-billion dollar aid packages for Israel. Much of this aid is in the form of military weapons but some is to fund the Orthodox school system, including yeshivas and kollels. Kollels are yeshivas for married rabbis who do not work. American taxpayer monies are used as welfare benefits for these rabbis and their families. Many of these rabbis can be seen every day weaving their heads back and forth in front of the Western Wall in Jerusalem.

...

http://www.aztlan.net/jewish_lobby_economic_crisis.htm


http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Madoff.htm

http://www.ariannaeditrice.it/articolo.php?id_articolo=23114
 
27 DICEMBRE 2008
Ormai aveva probabilmente capito di avere i giorni contati. Ma prima di cedere, e di auto-denunciare la truffa da 50 miliardi di dollari, alcuni gestori di hedge fund riferiscono che Bernard Madoff ha fatto di tutto per portare avanti la sua colossale frode. Fino all'ultimo. Con l'aiuto indiretto (non si sa se consapevole o inconsapevole) degli innumerevoli fondi legati alla sua gestione. «Il Sole-24 Ore» ha la prova documentale di questo estremo tentativo di sopravvivenza. Ha infatti trovato un prospetto in cui viene offerto, dalla società americana Tremont Partners, uno dei fondi legati a Madoff: il «Rye Select Broad Market». Il prospetto d'offerta è datato primo dicembre 2008: si tratta di soli 10 giorni prima dell'10 dicembre, data in cui lo stesso Madoff ha auto-denunciato la sua truffa. I casi sono due: o si tratta di uno sfortunatissimo tempismo, oppure – come testimoniano vari gestori – si tratta di un estremo tentativo indiretto di raccogliere soldi. Di sopravvivere. Di restare in piedi con un'ultima offerta last minute.

Il prospetto in possesso del «Sole-24 Ore» (si tratta di un Confidential private placement memorandum) offre il «Rye Select Broad market XL Fund», che a sua volta investe con una leva di tre volte in un altro fondo (il «Rye Select Broad Market Fund»). Bene inteso: da nessuna parte, nelle 50 pagine del documento, si trova scritto che questi due prodotti sono legati alla gestione di Madoff. Ma tutti gli addetti ai lavori sanno che è così. Chiamando la società Tremont, che nel prospetto è definita General Partner, si trovano solo centraliniste e segreterie telefoniche: «Sono tutti in riunione, la faremo richiamare» dicono sempre. Nessuno richiama. Ma in fondo non serve: basta andare su Google e parlare con gli addetti ai lavori per trovare mille conferme. E a pagina 3 del prospetto arriva l'ennesima: «L'obiettivo del fondo – si legge – è di investire la maggioranza degli attivi con un gestore che sviluppa la strategia di split strike conversion». Ebbene: la strategia "split strike conversion" è quella di Madoff. Il gestore è ovviamente lui. Rye, insomma, sembra essere un suo feeder fund: un prodotto offerto da altri ma gestito da lui.
Il prospetto propone questo affare: investire in questo fondo con una leva di tre volte. Chi accetta mette i suoi soldi in un primo prodotto, creato nel 2006 e domiciliato nel Delawere: il «Rye Select XL», dove «XL» non sta per extra-large ma per extra-leverage. Questo fondo, a sua volta, effettua un'operazione di swap con una banca controparte. E quest'ultima alla fine investe tre volte tanto in un secondo fondo, il «Rye Select Broad Market». Quest'ultimo è proprio quello gestito secondo la strategia di Madoff. Morale: per ogni dollaro messo nel primo fondo, «XL», in realtà ne vengono investiti tre nel secondo: perché due dollari li mette la banca controparte. Questo è l'effetto leva: l'investitore può beneficiare di guadagni moltiplicati per tre volte, ma in caso negativo anche le perdite vengono moltiplicate. Non solo: in caso – come quello di Madoff di improvviso crack, per ogni dollaro che l'investitore perde la banca controparte ne perde due. Il problema è che nel prospetto non si dice qual è la banca. In passato, si sa, il fondo Rye aveva avuto come controparte dei suoi swap anche Lehman Brothers. Ovvio che a dicembre fosse un'altra istituzione...
Ma questo non è l'unico fondo offerto con una leva (cioè con un moltiplicatore dei guadagni e delle perdite) legato a Madoff. «Il Sole-24 Ore» è in possesso del documento che prova un'altra «occasione» del genere: un'investimento con una leva di 3,25 volte nel fondo Fairfield, cioè il primo e più grande feeder fund di Madoff. In questo caso nel documento non c'è la data, ma è evidente che l'offerta è stata fatta non prima di agosto perché nel prospetto vengono decantate le performance del fondo fino al luglio 2008. Questa non è un'offerta last minute, quindi, ma è comunque molto recente. Chi investe, in questo caso, mette i suoi soldi in un primo fondo (il Wickford Fund) proposto dalla società californiana Prospect Capital Llc. Il meccanismo poi è sempre lo stesso: questo fondo effettua uno swap con Hsbc (in questo caso la banca è citata) e quest'ultima mette 3,25 volte tanto nel fondo Fairfield gestito da Madoff. Morale: investi uno, perdi 3,25. La magia di Madoff, che avendo in gestione attivi per 17 miliardi alla fine ne ha persi 50, forse è tutta qui.
(di M. Longo)

http://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/Sole...f9-11dd-981f-b4541c54b79e&DocRulesView=Libero
 
The End of the Financial World as We Know It



By M. Lewis and D. EINHORN
Published: January 3, 2009
AMERICANS enter the New Year in a strange new role: financial lunatics. We’ve been viewed by the wider world with mistrust and suspicion on other matters, but on the subject of money even our harshest critics have been inclined to believe that we knew what we were doing. They watched our investment bankers and emulated them: for a long time now half the planet’s college graduates seemed to want nothing more out of life than a job on Wall Street.
This is one reason the collapse of our financial system has inspired not merely a national but a global crisis of confidence. Good God, the world seems to be saying, if they don’t know what they are doing with money, who does?
Incredibly, intelligent people the world over remain willing to lend us money and even listen to our advice; they appear not to have realized the full extent of our madness. We have at least a brief chance to cure ourselves. But first we need to ask: of what?

To that end consider the strange story of Harry Markopolos. Mr. Markopolos is the former investment officer with Rampart Investment Management in Boston who, for nine years, tried to explain to the Securities and Exchange Commission that Bernard L. Madoff couldn’t be anything other than a fraud. Mr. Madoff’s investment performance, given his stated strategy, was not merely improbable but mathematically impossible. And so, Mr. Markopolos reasoned, Bernard Madoff must be doing something other than what he said he was doing.
In his devastatingly persuasive 17-page letter to the S.E.C., Mr. Markopolos saw two possible scenarios. In the “Unlikely” scenario: Mr. Madoff, who acted as a broker as well as an investor, was “front-running” his brokerage customers. A customer might submit an order to Madoff Securities to buy shares in I.B.M. at a certain price, for example, and Madoff Securities instantly would buy I.B.M. shares for its own portfolio ahead of the customer order. If I.B.M.’s shares rose, Mr. Madoff kept them; if they fell he fobbed them off onto the poor customer.
In the “Highly Likely” scenario, wrote Mr. Markopolos, “Madoff Securities is the world’s largest Ponzi Scheme.” Which, as we now know, it was.
Harry Markopolos sent his report to the S.E.C. on Nov. 7, 2005 — more than three years before Mr. Madoff was finally exposed — but he had been trying to explain the fraud to them since 1999. He had no direct financial interest in exposing Mr. Madoff — he wasn’t an unhappy investor or a disgruntled employee. There was no way to short shares in Madoff Securities, and so Mr. Markopolos could not have made money directly from Mr. Madoff’s failure. To judge from his letter, Harry Markopolos anticipated mainly downsides for himself: he declined to put his name on it for fear of what might happen to him and his family if anyone found out he had written it. And yet the S.E.C.’s cursory investigation of Mr. Madoff pronounced him free of fraud.

What’s interesting about the Madoff scandal, in retrospect, is how little interest anyone inside the financial system had in exposing it. It wasn’t just Harry Markopolos who smelled a rat. As Mr. Markopolos explained in his letter, Goldman Sachs was refusing to do business with Mr. Madoff; many others doubted Mr. Madoff’s profits or assumed he was front-running his customers and steered clear of him. Between the lines, Mr. Markopolos hinted that even some of Mr. Madoff’s investors may have suspected that they were the beneficiaries of a scam. After all, it wasn’t all that hard to see that the profits were too good to be true. Some of Mr. Madoff’s investors may have reasoned that the worst that could happen to them, if the authorities put a stop to the front-running, was that a good thing would come to an end.

The Madoff scandal echoes a deeper absence inside our financial system, which has been undermined not merely by bad behavior but by the lack of checks and balances to discourage it. “Greed” doesn’t cut it as a satisfying explanation for the current financial crisis. Greed was necessary but insufficient; in any case, we are as likely to eliminate greed from our national character as we are lust and envy. The fixable problem isn’t the greed of the few but the misaligned interests of the many.

.....

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/opinion/04lewiseinhorn.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Alto