Madoff affaire ook failliet van ´financieel toezicht´?

[Cees Binkhorst]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Hallo,

Het is niet verwonderlijk dat al wordt gezegd dat Harry Markopolos
eigenlijk hoofd zou moeten worden van het toezicht op de Amerikaanse
aandelenhandel (zie de onderstaande link voor zijn verklaring bij de
Senaatscommissie, en een deel van zijn betoog).

Wel verwonderlijk is dat óók de Europese toezichthouders niets hiervan
hebben bemerkt, althans niet aan de bel hebben getrokken.

Voor zover ik heb gezien heeft in Europa alleen de Société Générale intern
gestipuleerd (en de geplande overname van Zurich Capital Markets niet
doorging) dat géén geld belegd mocht worden bij Bernard L. Madoff
Investment Securities. Maar zelfs daarna gaven sommige klanten expliciet
instructie geld naar Madoff over te maken.

Groet / Cees

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/MarkopolosTestimony20090203.pdf

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
The e-mails, marketing materials, conversation records and SEC Submissions
you have as part of my official document submission to Congress are what
four unpaid volunteers accomplished in our spare time to try and stop BM.
We don´t pretend to know what really happened on the mysterious 17th floor
of the Lipstick Building at BM´s corporate offices. Every bit of
information we obtained was in the public domain. We never had any secret
insider documents or smoking gun e-mails. We did what we could to stop BM
from bilking the public. All of us feel very badly that we failed to
achieve a positive result.
There were many things we definitely did not know. We never conceived that
any high net worth professional investor would have 100% of their money
invested in hedge funds. To investment professionals, a proper allocation
to
hedge funds would range between 0% - 25%, and certainly any such
allocation would be spread among several managers, not given in its
entirety to just one manager. And being from the institutional side of the
business, we closely tracked the feeder funds and fund of funds that were
investing in BM, but never realized that charities and individual
investors were investing 100% of their money with BM. We also missed the
obvious, that BM was Jewish, and as a result, he would be preying most
heavily on the Jewish community because Ponzi schemes are first and
foremost an affinity fraud.
We more closely tracked BM´s affinity fraud through Europe which was a
different community of victims from those targeted in the U.S. In Europe
the affinity groups sought by the BM feeder funds were mainly European
royal families, the high born old money families, and the nouveau riche.
In Europe, the victims were mostly blue blood families. BM was truly
masterful in using feeder funds to draw in people close in make-up to the
owners of the feeder funds. In this way he was able to expand his affinity
victims to those beyond that of the Jewish community and gain entry into
other affinity communities as well.
I am sure that we missed many other clues, warning signs and red flags but
assure you that we did the best that we could with the information we
dared collect. Every time we raised our heads to collect information, we
exposed ourselves to discovery and feared the result.

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********