Former Madoff customers argue it wasn't a Ponzi

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by dealmaker, Aug 6, 2018.

  1. dealmaker


    Former Madoff customers argue it wasn't a Ponzi
    Scores of Bernard Madoff's former customers are pushing for access to a massive database of trading records and other documents seized from the con man's now-defunct securities firm to advance a fringe theory about the epic fraud: It wasn't a Ponzi scheme. (Investment News)
    murray t turtle likes this.
  2. Pekelo


    If Madoff had made 5 billions for me, I wouldn't say it was a ponzi either, but I might end up upside down floating in my swimming pool. Oh wait...
    jys78 likes this.
  3. destriero


    The only clients stating that it was legit are those that cashed-out before it imploded and are fighting disgorgement of fraudulent payouts.
  4. smallfil


    Those who were given profits by Madoff earlier got the most monies! There were no actual trading records! Those trading records were bogus and Bernie Madoff did not even trade those monies as he claimed! Instead, his company was manufacturing trading records and statements out of thin air!
    CSEtrader and murray t turtle like this.
  5. CSEtrader


    As UBS Bahamas and Credit Suisse Bahamas apparently did with us they never sent out our trade orders and after 5 years for the first and 9 years for the second they did not produce even one sells and time report. Let"s see.
  6. destriero


    No broker provides time and sales as a normal course of business. They provide trade confirmations and statements.
  7. He sold 10 calls on MSFT and then converted by covering with 8 APPL calls but trade was tough because Apple not totally compatible with Windows XP at the time. Screwed up the trade but the records ended up in Wordperfect.
    jys78, Overnight and destriero like this.
  8. destriero


    lol looks like Madoff worked with Surfer.
    ElCubano likes this.
  9. Overnight


    That right there is funny. It is also proof that El Ocho is a total geek. :)
  10. destriero


    So you traded with two Swiss banks that refused to send you confs and statements for 14 years? You’re stating that those banks internalized your orders for 14 years?

    You are certifiable. How do you know that @CSEtrader is lying...? She's typing. So two bulge-bracket banks are internalizing orders for fourteen years! Internalizing just one account would result in the failure of the bank through regulatory and/or litigation, yet you found TWO banks that internalized all of your orders. How do you know? Because they didn't provide confs. No trade confirmations or statements for 14 years.

    How long would you trade with a firm that you suspect was internalizing your tickets? A day, three?

    HTF did you get this far?
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2018
    #10     Aug 6, 2018