Blogs and Stories
They Knew What They Were Getting Into
Christopher Sadowski/Splash News
Why was the smart set so easily fooled by Bernie Madoff? Some knew it was a ruse all along—and just didn't care.
There are many puzzles in the Bernard Madoff fraud story, but chief among them is this: Why did so many smart people get suckered into losing billions on an implausible con? We have had major hedge funds, money managers, and smart investors around the world caught by Bernie's scheme, with the total now touching something like $25 billion in claimed losses.
The most popular explanation for so much money going into the Madoff funds is that investors, large and small, are gullible and lazy.
And while there is tragedy galore in this story, including the many individual investors and foundations hurt here, the damage done to some of the biggest investors who put money with Bernie—nudge-nudge, wink-wink—is no tragedy. It is rank cynicism.
Smart investors didn't care. They didn't care as long as Madoff kept posting solid numbers with low volatility.
The unexplained story is the large and reputable organizations damaged, like HSBC, RBS, Santander, BNP Paribas, Nomura, and so on. They had to know that Madoff's "split-strike conversion" option strategy was muck, utterly unlikely to produce the kinds of glassy-eyed stable returns seen by investors. It was obvious to anyone with reasonable option-trading competence, as you can see in this quote from a 2001 article in MAR/Hedge:
Skeptics who express a mixture of amazement, fascination and curiosity about the program wonder, first, about the relative complete lack of volatility in the reported monthly returns… In addition, experts ask why no one has been able to duplicate similar returns using the strategy.
Clear enough? Madoff's stable returns were wildly unlikely, and the strategies didn't make sense to anyone with a modicum of sense about option markets—but the money kept rolling in.
Rather than simply assuming that Bernie was so darn smart, or that someone else had done the diligence, some of the big institutions must have clearly recognized that Madoff wasn't actually doing what he said he was doing. They were smart enough to know he couldn't produce these returns from "split-strike conversion," and they probably thought it was hilarious that he kept saying it and that some people even believed it. Hoo-hoo!
So, far from assuming Madoff was clean, in other words, they likely assumed that Madoff was running a different game than he talked publicly. Perhaps by piggy-backing on his securities firm's order flow he was front-running trades, or maybe he was using bid-ask spreads from market-making in some clever way that was, ahem, not entirely above board. But smart investors didn't care. They didn't care as long as Madoff kept posting solid numbers with low volatility.
So what if he wasn't doing what he said he was? They figured that wasn't possible anyway. In their raging cynicism they were happy to go along with the con, so long as it goosed their own returns.
And that is where irony kicks in, of course. Because the wise guys were right. According to the SEC, Bernie Madoff was running a fraud, just as they probably suspected, and not some nutty option strategy that they knew couldn't work anyway.
The trouble is, it wasn't the fraud that wise-guy Madoff investors thought they had invested in (whatever that was, because they were careful not to ask). This particular fraud was a Ponzi scheme, and it took the cynics and wise guys down with it.
Paul Kedrosky is the editor of Infectious Greed, one of the best known business blogs. He's currently a senior fellow at the Kauffman Foundation, where he is focused on entrepreneurship, innovation, and the future of risk capital. He is also a strategist with Ten Asset Management, a southern California institutional money management firm.









If Madoff has been doing this for ten years at a 8% "Profit" then plenty of people made money at first. Where are they now? how many got out before the Bernie bubble burst? Everyone is liable, right? I was "taught" the con game at a young age, The 1st chapter involves finding a "marks" vice or soft spot and then using said weakness as a leverage to improve ones position. Greed, Laziness,Sex, Etc.,etc. The "Seven Deadly Sins" of life work every time. Madoff Conned himself first,got in trouble, then........well, you know the rest.
The problem with starting a pyramid scheme is that once it gets going you can never get out till it collapses, and you're caught, and you're broke, and you're going to prison.
Madoff seems like the poster boy for the current economic mess caused by greed and apparently little oversight.
If so called financial "experts" didn't warn us against the sleaze and current financial mess who the hell can be trusted. I don't want to hear from "experts" Dylan Ratigan, Mort Zuckerman, Jim Cramer, Larry Kudlow, and last but not least Erin Burnett. Now the "experts" are coming out of the woodwork. Where were they to sound the alarm?
Is it true Burnett actually said we should be careful about regulating toxic products and poisoned food from China because it would be bad for business, and that China is our best friend, and if that's true is Erin Burnett a microcosm of Wall Street culture devoid of humanity? A kind of profit before life mentality?
There were actually a nice handful of experts that expressed their sentiments, and the SEC was notified by at least three unrelated consulting firms of their concerns i.e. "Ponzi scheme".. Dude--one of the senior SEC investigators married into Madoffs family along the way!!.. Does that help explain at least part of the problem?Best part is: Bernie has apparently set up and a blog and is doing a tell-all...www.bernard-madoff-scam.blogspot.com(or its one of the victims trying to recover some money via online advertising.)
Interesting observation.
Perhaps they knew more than all of us:
http://www.thebigmoney.com/articles/news/2008/12/16/madoff-madness
Yes
sophia 5 Erin Burnett did indeed say that. I heard it myself and had the same reaction.
Finally, someone lays equal blame at the feet of the bigwhigs and charities that fell for this Ponzi mess. I only feel sorry for the charity recipients that might become the biggest losers of this.
I'm trying to figure out where the money went. You pony up x millions and then what - he would distribute that money to the earlier investors - as though their investment was making money? So the billions he collected were redistributed to the earlier players? Whew. Lock this schmuck up and throw the key away!
Someone, somewhere will kill him.
Trading options, derivatives and futures in the commodities markets is zero sum. Zero-sum describes a situation in which a participant's gain or loss is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the other participant(s). If the total gains of the participants are added up, and the total losses are subtracted, they will sum to zero. Anyone, who believes some one can consistently make money trading options and futures every month is a fool. The rule of investing is caveat emptor (buyer beware) and diversify your investments. All those who lost money with Made-Off didn't understand what was being done and never realized you can't consistently make money in a zero-sum game. All the banks were lazy and only looked at the returns and didn't look at how he got them and how he was able to defy laws of statistics and finance. There is a lot of blame to go around, but it should first start at look at the mirror.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.