Patchie 
Member since Jan 8, 2009


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “The Meaning of Madoff

In addition to the revamp of the SEC, the self-regulation system we have today should likewise be overhauled. The honor system does not work because there is no honor amongst thieves. firms should be required to finance an independent agency chartered to introduce compliance systems for each firm. The cost would be proportional to business. Likewise FINRA would be restricted to no greater than 25% of it's board being represented by firms for which they regulate. Too many opportunities for foxes in hen houses. I believe that state regulators should be more visible in these agencies because state regulators are closes to the investing public which is why THEY see what others seem to miss or avoid. State regulators listen to complainants, Wall Street regulators trust the crooks and criminals because of the wealth they accumulated.

Posted by Dave on 01/11/2009 at 4:28 PM

Re: “The Meaning of Madoff

How those in the know, and those with open eyes view what has happened...."Appointed in 2005, Mr. Cox's tenure has been marked by a failure to increase the size of the enforcement budget and a resulting see-no-evil approach to the shady doings on Wall Street. ''You only have to look at his history on (Capitol) Hill to see that he has been a staunch deregulator and a foe of investor rights,'' James Coffman, former assistant director of enforcement at the SEC, said last week. Arthur Levitt, a former SEC chairman, reported to Congress in October that the agency had undergone a demoralization of the enforcement staff in the last few years." But you and Gadfly are right alias, the investing public should not be so critical about how our financial futures are being protected. After all, we should all be losing our life savings while paying tax dollars to a defunct agency. Looking up the history of Gadfly at the SEC I would say that these two are of higher credibility to speak on this subject but you keep paying attention to the big man with the funny hat.

Posted by Dave on 01/11/2009 at 3:36 PM

Re: “The Meaning of Madoff

alias, is this your way of coming into a debate and offering up a non-confrontational position? "Patchie seems to have a hard on of unknown origin, first for Gad's former employer, and now for Gad himself (for having the audacity to defend that employer), verging on some kind of mania or other clinical condition. I agree with Gad that Patchie has, if not a hidden agenda, at least a hidden motivation for his vitriol. He needs to come clean about that. At least Gad is up front about his motivation" You are a coward and a fool. You seem to think you can come in and be accusatory of me and not get a throttle in return. You are one of those uninformed investors that live in a bubble and deserve everything they get. If you choose to run like Gadfly did so be it. I haven't seen you add much here of substance only accusations.

Posted by Dave on 01/11/2009 at 3:22 PM

Re: “The Meaning of Madoff

alias, lets start with the facts. I came here and commented to the article posted. the bile was initiated by gadfly something you have yet to recognize or admit. you similarly came here and attacked in your first post to me. now you whine and cry. LOL As for the fix it is simple. destroy the SEC as it stands today. Merge the enforcement division with the DOJ (who dislikes the SEC) so that an investigation can carry civil or criminal penalties from a singular body. presently, crooks like mMdoff and hedge Funds have NO FEAR of the SEC which is why the magnitude of these schemes have grown. Second, remove the culture of a captured regulator by forcing that all meetings between the rule making side of the SEC with outside parties is properly documented and made available to the public upon demand. Again, the SEC is captured by Wall Street regulators where critical decisions in rule making are agreements behind the crooks and the cops. the infamous 'grandfather clause' that was later deemed a loophole in fraud was the brainchild of SIFMA as disclosed by a former SEC attorney who participated in these meetings. the public has no knowledge of this because the SEC does not take notes to these meetings so that they can not be made public by FOIA requests. Finally, Congress needs to revamp the SEC by bringing in new people outside the present regulatory system. Mary Shapiro is not the solution because she has held key positions in the regulatory agencies during these latest scandals as well. But now that I have AGAIN offered substance, why not offer up some of your own instead of whining at me for giving you what you started with me.

Posted by Dave on 01/11/2009 at 3:18 PM

Re: “The Meaning of Madoff

here is a communication from a hedge Fund Investment manager to Fortune reporter Bethany Mclean. McLean met with that former SEC attorney, who admitted in a NY times op-ed that he initiated many cases based on the requests of Copper River (formerly Rocker partners). Mclean wrote their story and responded later in the month to Cohodes that she was upset the story did not reach it's intent of driving the market in FFH down. The SEC had this information and much more and did nothing with it. If you were an investor in FFH would you be happy with this? From: Marc Cohodes Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2006 3:21:12 PM To: Bethany McLean Subject: ffh FFH is the Canadian Enron and it could even be worse…We are sending you stufff.. I suggest since [Copper River employee and former SEC attorney Richard] Sauer is on the East Coast (for now) that you 2 meet, and soon… there is an “enterprise” here and he can lay it out clear as day.

Posted by Dave on 01/11/2009 at 2:41 PM

Re: “The Meaning of Madoff

Yea alias, that is exactly what I said. Try to think a little outside the box here alias. Poorly qualified and captured regulators ENABLED the fraud. If there is no fear in a risk v. reward society that why not shoot for the reward. While you speak in generalities I speak with substance. Why not debate my claims with something more factual than your typical BS? Do you blame the SEC for sitting on the sidelines witnessing the research fraud, studying it so to speak, while Eliot Spitzer stepped forward and took action after the SEC refused? Do you blame the SEC for throwing out the Putnam employee who came into the Boston Division as a whistleblower only to have him take the same evidence to the Massachusetts state regulator leading to billions in fines attributed to late trading/market timing? Do you blame the SEC for firing one of their own when he attempted to break an insider trading case against Pequot Mapital and John Mack and now we find that the SEC is re-opening the case because evidence surfaced to the public that they denied the SEC attorney the right to obtain? Or do you blame the SEC for getting a script about a ponzi scheme involving a widely recognized wall street executive and failing to recognize it as such because they could not decipher that the books they were looking at were bogus? tell me alias, if this were your local police force and the smoking gun was handed to them in a murder case and they routinely blow the case, would you be so forgiving of that police force? tell me why we should EXPECT that this is the best this federal agency has to offer? Why do you accept below average performance from the expense of your tax dollars? No more rhetoric and generalizations, tell me specifics as to why these major failures by the SEC should be accepted as business as usual.

Posted by Dave on 01/11/2009 at 2:28 PM

Re: “The Meaning of Madoff

alias, thanks for the insight albeit uninformed. As I stated several times and provided the support of my web site that I have been disgusted with the SEC in part due to their unwillingness to deal with what I witnessed as short sale abuses but additive to the research fraud bungle of 2000/2001 and the late trading/market timing bungle of 2003/2004. I have fought with many from FINRA (formerly NASD) but they too are simply a symptom of a failed SEC. The SEC audits FINRA. I ask, did FINRA have enforcement authority over research analysts and, did FINRA have authority over the hedge funds involved in late trading? The answer to both is no. Similarly, while FINRA may have had authority over the Madoff Brokerage unit and market making unit they have no authority over the investment adviser division which so happens to be the only division in the gun sights of federal authorities. Justifying the position of Marty is justifying the negligence of our federal government. Do you justify the recent years of negligence by the Bush administration and if not why not if you are willing to accept the very large and very damaging shortcomings of the SEC. And, as stated previously, some of my insight comes from past and present SEC attorney's who support my position here. Not every past or present SEC attorney holds the same views as Gadfly here. Some actually believe that change is required and even former SEC Officials have stated such. Next.........

Posted by Dave on 01/11/2009 at 10:33 AM

All Comments »

ADVERTISEMENT

Collections

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
ADVERTISEMENT
 
© 1996-2016

Contemporary Media
460 Tennessee Street, 2nd Floor | Memphis, TN 38103
Visit our other sites: Memphis Magazine | Memphis Parent | Inside Memphis Business
Powered by Foundation