Yeah. She was greedy as heck and sowed her own seeds. She wasn't complaining about the returns. I don't feel bad for her one bit.
Oh you're kidding me. Greed for a great return with "little risk" is what the wanted. They found it thinking they could have the best of both worlds. Now they find out the hard way (and rightly so) that they aren't as slick as they thought they were
SIPC is there to protect all investors covered by it. All these other investors are hurt when it is asked to cover claims it isn't supposed to. On the other hand, if there is a legitimate claim they better cover it or it will be shown to be useless protection. What I am not clear on is whether Madoff's fund qualifies as an entity that deserves SIPC help. With a fund there is an explicit acknowledgment that returns aren't guaranteed and that you can lose all your funds. That isn't quite the same with a brokerage account the money in which one does not expect to be put at risk unless directed. I have zero legal expertise in this matter but my gut reaction is that they should be covered up to 500k if they had an account with the brokerage and they lost stuff due to its collapse that they otherwise wouldn't have at another brokerage. If they lost money because of the collapse of the fund, however, it should be tough luck not a penny back.
I believe that the majority, if not all, accounts were brokerage accounts. The media keeps referring to him as a hedge fund mgr b/c of all the feeder funds that allocated $ to him.
If MADF, the Broker-Dealer failed it would be covered by SIPC, the Ponzi cash was not "invested" in Bernard Madoff Investment Securities, the Broker Dealer. Bernie held the cash in a Hedge Fund, or at least pretended to. I am far from an expert, but was under the impression that SIPC covered Brokerage Firm failures, NOT Hedge Fund losses???
anyone who put more than 20% of their assets with madoff deserves no sympathy. I lost plenty of money in the real estate - why don't i get a bail out?
or just about any other race, creed, color, persuasion, temperment, complexion, eduction level, political connected or not level too.... what are we as taxpayers bailing out, their right to have, hold and use exclusive country clubs with all their unwritten rules, of who is not allowed beyond the valet line?
Excuse me, but if you choose to play the game, you earn the results. She should have pulled her money out when serious suspicion of Madoff arose 3 years ago. She did not. Alas, she got what was coming to her and everyone else who followed her thinking.
I do not see how that can be. From what I understand he controlled both a brokerage and a fund. That's why he was paying steady 10% returns to investors. Brokerages don't do that. If for example a client had a brokerage account with Madoff worth 100000 and 60000 was placed in the fund while 20000 was placed in cash and 20000 was placed in stocks I would expect that client to deserve being covered for 40000. That's what I think is fair. I have no idea though what is really allowed.