Bernie Madoff question

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
gsabc
Posts: 6496
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:03 am
Location: Federal Bureaucracy City
Contact:

Bernie Madoff question

#1 Post by gsabc » Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:00 am

I've been curious about this since a Boston-area investor first claimed his losses from Madoff's scam to be one amount, then later said that was what Madoff claimed he had in his account and his (the investor's) actual investment lost was a lower but still substantial amount. I haven't been able to find the information anywhere, though.

My question: The loss total that has been reported has varied from $50B to $65B. Is that amount the total of what Madoff claimed was in the accounts or is it the actual amount that investors gave him? I'm sure the latter is still a large number, given the wealth and number of his investors.

Not that it matters much, other than to my idle curiosity. A crook is a crook. He just brought grand theft to a higher level. Is there such a category as magnificent theft?
I just ordered chicken and an egg from Amazon. I'll let you know.

User avatar
Rexer25
It's all his fault. That'll be $10.
Posts: 2899
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:57 am
Location: Just this side of nowhere

Re: Bernie Madoff question

#2 Post by Rexer25 » Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:11 am

gsabc wrote:I've been curious about this since a Boston-area investor first claimed his losses from Madoff's scam to be one amount, then later said that was what Madoff claimed he had in his account and his (the investor's) actual investment lost was a lower but still substantial amount. I haven't been able to find the information anywhere, though.

My question: The loss total that has been reported has varied from $50B to $65B. Is that amount the total of what Madoff claimed was in the accounts or is it the actual amount that investors gave him? I'm sure the latter is still a large number, given the wealth and number of his investors.

Not that it matters much, other than to my idle curiosity. A crook is a crook. He just brought grand theft to a higher level. Is there such a category as magnificent theft?
On Nightline last night, the higher number was gleaned from Made-Off's investor statements. The amount invested was lower, only $14B. A mere trifle in these days of trillion dollar bail-outs.
Enough already. It's my fault! Get over it!

That'll be $10, please.

User avatar
bazodee
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:23 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Bernie Madoff question

#3 Post by bazodee » Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:12 am

This is what forensic accountants to. They will need to recreate a paper trail and despite Madoff's guilty plea, he is not cooperating with investigators.

The trickiest issue that will arise is what to do with people who exited early from the scheme, receiving a check they thought represented their initial investments plus a substantial rate of return. In fact, they received the cash deposited by later investors, since there were no returns.

Do those who were left holding the bag have a claim against the assets of these folks, who through no fault of their own (?), cashed out early. After all, this is where most of the money is ...

User avatar
wintergreen48
Posts: 2481
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:42 pm
Location: Resting comfortably in my comfy chair

Re: Bernie Madoff question

#4 Post by wintergreen48 » Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:54 am

bazodee wrote:This is what forensic accountants to. They will need to recreate a paper trail and despite Madoff's guilty plea, he is not cooperating with investigators.

The trickiest issue that will arise is what to do with people who exited early from the scheme, receiving a check they thought represented their initial investments plus a substantial rate of return. In fact, they received the cash deposited by later investors, since there were no returns.

Do those who were left holding the bag have a claim against the assets of these folks, who through no fault of their own (?), cashed out early. After all, this is where most of the money is ...

This is indeed a real problem-- that people who already cashed out might have to kick something back in, because otherwise they could be said to have 'benefited' from the fraud. An even worse problem-- suppose you were someone who partially cashed out (say, your took out a portion of your invested principal, or, you somehow managed to collect 'dividends' over the years but let your original base investment amount sit with him): whatever remains of the original investment that you left with him is pretty likely to be a loss, but you might have to kick in some or all of the partial distributions or 'dividends' that you collected over the years. And to make it even more complicated, how about if you cashed out, then opened up a new 'investment' with him, and maybe even cashed THAT out and then invested again?-- as I am sure must have happened with someone.

Oh what a tangled web...
Innocent, naive and whimsical. And somewhat footloose and fancy-free.

Post Reply