4 ms·

Wasn't Madoff's plan the whole time to pocket investor money for himself, whereas Sam's was to arrogantly (and illegally) gamble it with the thought being he co

Wasn't Madoff's plan the whole time to pocket investor money for himself, whereas Sam's was to arrogantly (and illegally) gamble it with the thought being he could return the principal from Alameda back to FTX in future? Genuine question, I'm not super informed on these.

xotesos 3y ago
[flagged]
- alex_lav 3y ago
  You can't believe how people can think intent matters?
  - Repulsion9513 3y ago
    There's no difference in intent described there. Sam's plan was to pocket investor money for himself (and maybe return some of it, eventually, if his gamble paid off) I'm pretty sure Madoff returned some money before being found out, too.
nickff 3y ago
From what I’ve read, it’s not exactly clear that Madoff had a plan, it seems more like he lied to a few people about being able to make them a lot of money, and that snowballed into him taking a lot of “investments” that he didn’t know what to do with. From what I’ve seen about SBF, it does seem like he has a very high risk tolerance, was betting big to win big, and thinking the reward was worth the risk.
- tim333 3y ago
  Funnily enough if SBF hadn't been found out the investments probably would have recovered enough to cover the deposits and he'd still be a hero.
  - Repulsion9513 3y ago
    Tether, Terra, Circle, crypto lending Heck it's almost like this describes crypto itself
  - Breza 3y ago
    In the short term, sure, but SBF liked to make big risks and it seems inevitable that he would have been on the losing side of a bet that he'd made with money that was supposed to be safer than a treasury bond.
- rmbyrro 3y ago
  Yea, ponzi schemes start by accident. It requires no planning
nostromo 3y ago
No, SBF did directly steal from FTX users. He used an intermediary (Alameda) to do so. The end result is the same: he stole from customers to enrich himself, his family and his friends. I'm sure both SBF and Madoff originally thought they would be able to make enough money to cover up the theft.
- bennyhill 3y ago
  From what I read Madoff didn't seem to, he never actually tried to invest the money and couldn't really have expected his ponzi scheme to become a permanent engine of the economy or anything.. I don't really think that has the moral conclusion people try to imply though. Thinking they could get away with it as a permanent secret gap that no one need ever know about is actually a worse moral character.
rgbrenner 3y ago
Sam paid and loaned to himself $2.2B (and another $1B to top execs) out of the $8B that was lost. That doesn't include the Bahamas real estate; trabuccos yacht; celebrity endorsements; stadium naming; or the private planes to deliver amazon packages to the bahamas. The idea that Sam was just a risky investor is the story Sam wants to tell. But he already told that story in court, and it was rejected.. because the evidence doesn't support it.
baruz 3y ago
Madoff was supposedly on the level for some 25-31 years. He started business as a broker-dealer and money manager in 1960. Madoff claimed that he started just putting fund contributions in a personal account in 1991, but prosecutors think he was at it sometime in the 1980s, maybe since Black Monday in 1987?

xotesos 3y ago

[flagged]

alex_lav 3y ago
You can't believe how people can think intent matters?
- Repulsion9513 3y ago
  There's no difference in intent described there. Sam's plan was to pocket investor money for himself (and maybe return some of it, eventually, if his gamble paid off) I'm pretty sure Madoff returned some money before being found out, too.

nickff 3y ago

From what I’ve read, it’s not exactly clear that Madoff had a plan, it seems more like he lied to a few people about being able to make them a lot of money, and that snowballed into him taking a lot of “investments” that he didn’t know what to do with. From what I’ve seen about SBF, it does seem like he has a very high risk tolerance, was betting big to win big, and thinking the reward was worth the risk.

tim333 3y ago
Funnily enough if SBF hadn't been found out the investments probably would have recovered enough to cover the deposits and he'd still be a hero.
- Repulsion9513 3y ago
  Tether, Terra, Circle, crypto lending Heck it's almost like this describes crypto itself
- Breza 3y ago
  In the short term, sure, but SBF liked to make big risks and it seems inevitable that he would have been on the losing side of a bet that he'd made with money that was supposed to be safer than a treasury bond.
rmbyrro 3y ago
Yea, ponzi schemes start by accident. It requires no planning

nostromo 3y ago

No, SBF did directly steal from FTX users. He used an intermediary (Alameda) to do so. The end result is the same: he stole from customers to enrich himself, his family and his friends. I'm sure both SBF and Madoff originally thought they would be able to make enough money to cover up the theft.

bennyhill 3y ago
From what I read Madoff didn't seem to, he never actually tried to invest the money and couldn't really have expected his ponzi scheme to become a permanent engine of the economy or anything.. I don't really think that has the moral conclusion people try to imply though. Thinking they could get away with it as a permanent secret gap that no one need ever know about is actually a worse moral character.

rgbrenner 3y ago

Sam paid and loaned to himself $2.2B (and another $1B to top execs) out of the $8B that was lost. That doesn't include the Bahamas real estate; trabuccos yacht; celebrity endorsements; stadium naming; or the private planes to deliver amazon packages to the bahamas. The idea that Sam was just a risky investor is the story Sam wants to tell. But he already told that story in court, and it was rejected.. because the evidence doesn't support it.

baruz 3y ago

Madoff was supposedly on the level for some 25-31 years. He started business as a broker-dealer and money manager in 1960. Madoff claimed that he started just putting fund contributions in a personal account in 1991, but prosecutors think he was at it sometime in the 1980s, maybe since Black Monday in 1987?