Day: July 2, 2011

Enduring Ponzi

Enduring Ponzi

Why did Madoff’s Ponzi scheme last so long?

  • He didn’t take that much from it.? If the gross exposure was $60 billion, he took only 1/2% of it — $300 million.
  • The growth rate was high enough to attract investors but slow enough to not exhaust cash rapidly.
  • The SEC was clueless, with little expertise in quantitative investing, and little basic auditing knowledge where one traces every transaction back to the source, which would have revealed Madoff in an instant.? There were no assets in the accounts.
  • He had a reputable business that produced significant profits, and was viewed by many as an industry leader.? Many Europeans, among others, thought he was front-running, and Madoff implicitly encouraged that idea while explicitly denying it.? The idea of “front-running” was a honey pot to distract regulators from the idea that a Ponzi scheme was going on.
  • The marketing club.? You are the lucky one who is invited to partake of the gravy train.? Don’t question, just enjoy, and refer friends, maybe we will consider them.
  • Feeder funds that were looking for looking for a high-ish return and a low standard deviation found Madoff irresistible.
  • “Pus luck.”? There were many times where the scheme almost died, but new cash flows bailed them out.? The term, “pus luck” was unique to my block where I grew up in Brookfield, Wisconsin, and described a situation of undeserved luck.? A brother of my friend, and a friend of my brother always seemed to get the lucky break at unusual moments.? We called it “pus luck,” perhaps in an effort to denigrate his skill in unlikely situations.
  • Madoff did not encourage a marketing frenzy.? He tried to keep it low-key.? That kept it below the radar, and allowed it to be marketed to a wide number of people who would not fall for a hard sale.

And so it was for Madoff, skating through unlikely situations where others would have easily died, until it got too big, as all Ponzis do.

We know when it ended, but have no idea on when it started, ’60s, ’70s, ’80s, ’90s…? We really don’t know.?? Madoff has revealed a lot, but he has never given a date earlier than 1992.? His associate, DiPascali, suggested it may have started in the late ’80s.? There is some evidence that it may have gone all the way back to the ’60s.

I find DiPascali’s words to be more reasonable than Madoff’s.? The late ’80s were more desperate than the early ’90s.? If you could survive ’87 and ’89, you could likely survive ’92.

Recoveries?

When the Ponzi was revealed, few thought there would be any significant recoveries. But now, net losers from the Madoff Ponzi may get back over 50% of their money.? Why?

  • The Picower family gave in, and released their profits from the Madoff scheme.
  • Many large financial companies played small roles in the scheme, and they will all probably pay something to make the lawsuits go away.
  • Some net losers were involved in money laundering and are unlikely to pop their heads above water to make a claim on their ill-gotten funds.? More for the rest.

In one sense, the slowness of the Madoff Ponzi allowed for a less wasteful class of investors to be bilked.? Including Madoff, these were not the sorts of people that were big spenders as a fraction of their income.? Many investors were buy and hold with Bernie, and indeed, he encouraged that.

So the endgame may not be as bad as expected.? Many will get a large portion of their net investment back.? There will still be regrets, but they will be much reduced.? Good for them.

Book Review: The Wizard of Lies

Book Review: The Wizard of Lies

This is the best book that I have read on the Madoff scandal so far.? Why is it great?

  • It is well written.
  • There are few if any factual errors in the text.
  • She talked with a wide number of people to try to get the full story.
  • It’s neutral.? it doesn’t takes positions on a wide number of unanswered questions, and treats what Madoff says with skepticism.
  • It takes you through the previously unwritten history of the scam, where the only real doubt is when the scam started — did it start in the early ’90s, late ’80s, or in the ’60s?? We still don’t know.

Now, I have reviewed the books by Markopolous, and the Madoff “victims.” Each tries to make themselves look good.? The author of this book has no dog in the fight, and nothing to prove.

According to this book, Markopolous discredited himself via crude behavior, fear of retaliation, and inability for the SEC to understand simple quantitative investing concepts.? The “victims” did not exercise common prudence.? The biggest red flag over any investment business is no independent custodian, and that was glaring with Madoff.

Yes, they were victims, but they were people who should have known better.? To call oneself a victim here is to call oneself stupid.

There will be another article after this one to explain why the Madoff Ponzi lasted so long, and why the recoveries ended up so much higher than anticipated.

Book Structure

The book starts with the blow-up, and then reverts to telling the life story of Madoff, progressing to the eventual demise, but with many blow-ups averted in the interim.? After that, one-third of the book deals with the aftermath, with the suicides, estrangement, and aggressive lawyers that recover far more than was originally expected.

It’s quite a tale.? I learned a bunch here, and recommend the book to you.

Quibbles

None.

Who would benefit from this book:

If you want to understand how Madoff did it, this is the book to read.? If you want to get a feel for how to avoid con men, this book will also be useful.? Give it to your overly credulous brother-in-law.

If you want to, you can buy it here: The Wizard of Lies: Bernie Madoff and the Death of Trust.

Full disclosure: The publisher asked me if I wanted it.

If you enter Amazon through my site, and you buy anything, I get a small commission.? This is my main source of blog revenue.? I prefer this to a ?tip jar? because I want you to get something you want, rather than merely giving me a tip.? Book reviews take time, particularly with the reading, which most book reviewers don?t do in full, and I typically do. (When I don?t, I mention that I scanned the book.? Also, I never use the data that the PR flacks send out.)

Most people buying at Amazon do not enter via a referring website.? Thus Amazon builds an extra 1-3% into the prices to all buyers to compensate for the commissions given to the minority that come through referring sites.? Whether you buy at Amazon directly or enter via my site, your prices don?t change.

Quibbles

The main difficulty is this: just because A follows a similar power law to B, does not mean that A & B have something in common.? There are often spurious correlations.

Who would benefit from this book:

Most serious investors and academics could benefit from the book.? It will challenge your preconceptions.? That doesn?t mean that everything Mandelbrot writes is correct, but most of his criticisms of MPT are correct.? The question becomes what to replace MPT with?

If you want to, you can buy it here:?The Misbehavior of Markets: A Fractal View of Financial Turbulence.

Full disclosure: I bought the book with my own money.

If you enter Amazon through my site, and you buy anything, I get a small commission.? This is my main source of blog revenue.? I prefer this to a ?tip jar? because I want you to get something you want, rather than merely giving me a tip.? Book reviews take time, particularly with the reading, which most book reviewers don?t do in full, and I typically do. (When I don?t, I mention that I scanned the book.? Also, I never use the data that the PR flacks send out.)

Most people buying at Amazon do not enter via a referring website.? Thus Amazon builds an extra 1-3% into the prices to all buyers to compensate for the commissions given to the minority that come through referring sites.? Whether you buy at Amazon directly or enter via my site, your prices don?t change.

Theme: Overlay by Kaira