Skip to comments.
CITI ALERT: Now It's 'Fraud' (largest fraud ever perpetuated on the investing public)
http://www.nypost.com/business/56130.htm ^
| 4/4/03
| JENNY ANDERSON and ERIC MOSKOWITZ
Posted on 04/04/2003 12:16:00 PM PST by Liz
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:13:12 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Regulators will find that some of Wall Street's biggest firms committed fraud by issuing bogus research, in a development that has plaintiffs lawyers for burned investors salivating.
While regulators won't use the term "fraud" against most firms, some, including Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney and Credit Suisse First Boston, may be tagged with it, sources said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Extended News
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
Lawyer's are salivating. This could be bigger than tobacco. Public investors lost $7 trillion.
Let's see. One-third of that is........anyway, just watch the multi-million dollar houses go up in Boca Raton....for the litigators, not the investors.
1
posted on
04/04/2003 12:16:00 PM PST
by
Liz
To: Liz
Having filled out class action lawsuit paperwork till it would make you sick, back in the 80's, I guarantee the only money anyone sees will ALL be going to SCUM SUCKING LAWYERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2
posted on
04/04/2003 12:18:54 PM PST
by
Mister Baredog
((They wanted to kill 50,000 of us on 9/11, we will never forget!))
To: Mister Baredog
And the saddest part of the whole situation is that it was the lawyers' boy Clinton who made rampant fraud not only possible, but probable.
3
posted on
04/04/2003 12:21:38 PM PST
by
thoughtomator
(I predict continued hysteria at the UN)
To: Liz
Any time now, we'll hear some scumbag lawyer tell us 'It's not about the money, it's the principle of the thing.'
If it's not about the money, then why are the lawyers getting rich off litigation?
To: Liz
"Lawyers who represent public investors can use this as ammunition in cases against these firms."
Translation-Lawyers who represent public invertors are going to get rich rich filthy rich I'm going to be richer than G_d rich rich rich
5
posted on
04/04/2003 12:25:34 PM PST
by
philetus
(Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
To: Liz
I have to admit though, this is a case where the lawbreaking was just so blatant, vile and widespread - how many dotcoms have ended up being legitimate investments, four? - that I almost don't care who ends up getting the money as long as it's TAKEN from these firms and their individual "analysts" who did nothing but spending a couple of hours a week writing up pure lies, maybe a couple more going through the oh-so-agonizing process of having their asses kissed on CNBC, and then sat back and raked in other peoples' cash. May they rot in hell.
And I'm posting as someone who didn't lose a dime. I can only guess at how angry they must be, especially when almost all the "analysts" have escaped charges and walked away multi-millionaires. (It doesn't mean much to be fired, or even barred from the securities industry - if you get to keep the ill-gotten cash.)
6
posted on
04/04/2003 12:46:50 PM PST
by
Timesink
(When was the last time YOU remembered we're on Code Orange?)
To: Mister Baredog; Excuse_My_Bellicosity; philetus
Grab The Litigation Money Game
How long will investors get to hold damage awards until the lawyers grab it?
7
posted on
04/04/2003 12:49:03 PM PST
by
Liz
To: Timesink
.....almost all the "analysts" have escaped charges and walked away multi-millionaires.... There was a saying on Wall St during the Clinton bubble: "Where are all the investors yachts?"
8
posted on
04/04/2003 12:54:12 PM PST
by
Liz
To: All
"At a certain point, investors lost $7 trillion," said Aidikoff. "How much of that was market forces and how much is analyst conflict of interest is hard to see."The NASDAQ would never have gotten anywhere near 5000, and indeed, probably only two or three dotcoms would ever have even received SEC approval to go public - if the "analysts" had told the truth from the very beginning: "They have no, repeat NO, business plan. Therefore the only hope of [company X] ever has is if another, already-successful company purchases it. This has never been enough of a reason to buy into a company in the history of the United States, and we therefore suggest you AVOID this company's stock."
I think a case could easily be made that the entire $7 trillion loss was due entirely to fraud. You could certainly make one that would work well enough for a jury to believe.
9
posted on
04/04/2003 12:56:58 PM PST
by
Timesink
(When was the last time YOU remembered we're on Code Orange?)
To: Liz
"Where are all the investors' yachts?"
Looks as if the lawyers are going to be picking up the brokers' boats. ;^).
To: skinkinthegrass; PGalt; Mudboy Slim; Grampa Dave; Libloather; The Old Hoosier; Flurry
While regulators won't use the term "fraud" against most firms, some, including Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney and Credit Suisse First Boston, may be tagged with it, sources said. Altogether now: Citi is a fraud, Citi is a fraud, Citi is a fraud, a bigtime fraud.
11
posted on
04/04/2003 12:59:50 PM PST
by
Liz
To: Liz
....the funniest thing about this bursted bubble is that big investor companies are still scratching their collective heads and trying to figure out why the little guy doesn't want to know anything anymore about investing in stocks.....
gee, I can't figure this one out....
12
posted on
04/04/2003 1:05:26 PM PST
by
taxed2death
(A few billion here, a few trillion there...we're all friends right?)
To: headsonpikes
The "SS Wall Street" heads out to sea.
13
posted on
04/04/2003 1:07:26 PM PST
by
Liz
To: Liz
While regulators won't use the term "fraud" against most firms, some, including Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney and Credit Suisse First Boston, may be tagged with it, sources said.We earn money the old fashioned way.
We STEAL it.
14
posted on
04/04/2003 1:08:03 PM PST
by
Nick Danger
(More rallys planned! www.freerepublic.net)
To: taxed2death
Better think a bit harder. LOL.
15
posted on
04/04/2003 1:11:51 PM PST
by
Liz
To: Liz
Mr. Lieberman, how about paging Mr. Rubin for that Enron investigation?? Let's get the ball rolling, eh?
To: Liz
Good for the many lawsuits that will be the result. There is so much greed and fraud in brokerages on Wall Street that it won't hurt to send a message. Hopefully, they'll clean up their act.
To: Nick Danger
LOL!!
Whe E.F. Hutton talks, people question.
To: Nick Danger
Picking the money tree.
19
posted on
04/04/2003 1:16:00 PM PST
by
Liz
To: Liz
Dang another crook
20
posted on
04/04/2003 1:19:35 PM PST
by
Conspiracy Guy
(Caring Rational Alert Professional)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson