3 ms·
> I wasn't aware there were many "mini-Madoffs"; I heard about one or two, maybe three. Could you point us at a source to back that assertion up? Off the top o
by spamizbad 17y ago
> I wasn't aware there were many "mini-Madoffs"; I heard about one or two, maybe three. Could you point us at a source to back that assertion up?
Off the top of my head: Wextrust.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/business/12wextrust.html http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/business/12wextrust.html
I actually did some contract work for them in 2007, shortly before they were busted. I was never paid beyond my retainer. I found out why it was so hard to collect when the story broke in Crains Chicago. Normally I'd fight to get paid but they're now in receivership and I don't feel like taking scraps from charities and individuals who were wronged for so much more than I was.
edit: I understand that's just an anecdote, not real data. Basically media coverage is rare if the scheme is less than $200 million. There are some larger ones that never get attention because very wealthy people get taken and don't want to be made fools of for investing into these companies. I've got friends who work in the real estate business who've told me about several in the Chicago area that have been taken down or are under investigation. It was shockingly widespread, and I'd estimate there's easily thousands active worldwide.
Here's an incomplete list of ones that made the press in 2009: http://madofffraud.boomja.com/Ponzi-Schemes-Reported-in-2009-22206.html http://madofffraud.boomja.com/Ponzi-Schemes-Reported-in-2009...
- hga 17y agoThing is, < 200 million US$ frauds aren't systemic risks. Yeah, we need to police them, but they don't threaten the system. Madoff's only did because he was such a "pillar of the community" (of Wall Street).