ANALYSTS: FIRM SENT CLIENTS 'DATED' INFO astute "investors" never noticed (snicker)

Madoff's firm sent clients performance statement riddled with inaccuracies and other suspicious signs that should have raised red flags.......a Nov. 30 performance report suggests Madoff's outfit purchased Apple at $100.78 on Nov. 12. However, even accounting for a usual 3-day settlement period, the stock never traded at $100 a share.....trading range was between $90.01 and $92.43..... Others note Madoff used outmoded bookkeeping method to record performance data, and that his presentation, lacks details...... "These look like statements from the mid '90s..." said attorney Ross Intelisano, who's been retained by Madoff clients..... The lack of transparency is surprising since Madoff was considered a friend to regulators and a huge supporter of full disclosure. One forensic accountant said Madoff's client statements appear to have been printed using an outdated "impact printer," which haven't been in widespread use since the advent of laser printers. They even pre-date the dot-matrix printers used in the 1990s. "It's just odd for a guy managing $17 billion to being using this sort of technology," the accountant noted. ....... one of the more striking red flags to jump out were the deficiencies in Madoff's overall strategy. "You're trying to get above-market returns by buying the bluest of the blue chips, and the truth is the largest of the large-cap stocks move proportionately the least because they have all their information factored into them," Ellis said. "It's just not a strategy that generates above-market returns."

.....an investment of this nature would have required a Prospectus to be filed with the SEC, so at some point somebody was probably asked for an Unqualified Opinion. Possibly even once per year (not sure of your US laws) the Auditor might have been asked to give an Opinion on the fairness and accuracy of the numbers......

SEC CHAIR COX TO PROBE ROLE OF BERNIE'S NIECE, HUSBAND

An embarrassed SEC Chairman, Christopher Cox, said he is probing whether SEC staff allowed swindler Madoff to walk away from numerous fraud complaints filed with the SEC.... among the issues under investigation in a sweeping internal probe of the bungled case is that a Madoff family member was married to a onetime SEC official.

"The Commission has learned that credible and specific allegations regarding Mr. Madoff's financial wrongdoing, going back to at least 1999, were repeatedly brought to the attention of SEC staff, but were never recommended to the Commission for action," Cox said last night.

"I am gravely concerned by the apparent multiple failures over at least a decade to thoroughly investigate these allegations or at any point to seek formal authority to pursue them. Moreover, a consequence of the failure to seek a formal order of investigation is that subpoena power was not used to obtain information, but rather information voluntarily produced by Mr. Madoff and his firm," Cox said......

Shana Madoff Swanson, Madoff's niece has been married to Eric Swanson, assistant director of the SEC's Office of Compliance, Inspections and Examinations' market-oversight unit, since 2006. Eric Swanson, according to the SEC, had overseen two inspections of Madoff's firm in 1999 and 2004. He left the agency in 2006.

Shana Swanson is compliance attorney at Madoff's firm. Her father is Peter Swanson (Bernie's brother) who joined the firm in 1970 and is chief compliance officer at Madoff’s firm.

Bernie founded his investment firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, in 1960. Peter, his brother, joined the firm 10 years later; his nephew, niece and two sons also worked with him.

SOURCE http://www.nypost.com/seven/12172008/ business/madoff_family_ties_144527.htm

==================================

POINTS TO PONDER You are working under the assumption that this “investment” plan was following established rules, regs, and laws. In fact, this swindler did not give a fig about any of that. He had a hidden agenda----and all of his activities went to advancing that agenda---all of it operated to fit the agenda. Rules, regs, and laws were nuisances and played absolutely no part in his scheme.

> No filings, no prospectus, no SEC oversight whatsoever on this operation which was separate from the registered Broker/Dealer.

WOW. I’m stuned!

> As to “auditor”, Madoff used a solo practitioner, from upstate NY I believe.

Solo practitioners can be excellent. Maybe not this time ay...

> Seriously. As such (along with the red flags above), there is much merit to the argument that many investors figured they had an ‘inside’ track and only needed to look the other way....

Could be. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds. How tragic for the unwitting investors (if any)!

> No filings, no prospectus, no SEC oversight whatsoever on this operation which was separate from the registered Broker/Dealer. As to “auditor”, Madoff used a solo practitioner, from upstate NY I believe. Seriously. As such (along with the red flags above), there is much merit to the argument that many investors figured they had an ‘inside’ track and only needed to look the other way....

WOW. So it would appear. The “Solo Auditor” isn’t necessarily such a bad thing: boutique auditors can be excellent because they often have the time and possibly niche skills to get things right. But maybe not in this case...

What a sad case this is! Verily, there will be weepng and gnashing of teeth ere this be thru.

Let the investigations begin and the convictions be entered. People clearly need to go to gaol, as an example to encourage the others.

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.