Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Finance - Investments
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Finance - Investments Sub-forum: Non-Actuarial Personal Finance/Investing

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-02-2010, 07:46 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for Japanese
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 14,935
Blog Entries: 4
Default Challenge: Madoff loss formula

Today's challenge - come up with a better formula/definition for losses in the Madoff fraud:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/bu...l?ref=business

Quote:
In a decision filed on Monday, Federal Bankruptcy Judge Burton R. Lifland ruled that losses should be defined as the difference between the cash paid into a Madoff account and the amount withdrawn before the fraud collapsed in mid-December 2008.

Judge Lifland rejected emotional arguments by hundreds of defrauded investors seeking to have their claims based on the balances shown on their final account statements, sent out just weeks before Mr. Madoff was arrested. He pleaded guilty last March and is serving a 150-year prison term.
....
If losses were based on the final account statements, Mrs. Fox and almost every Madoff investor would be eligible for up to $500,000 from SIPC — not as insurance, Judge Lifland noted, but as a cash advance against their fair share of any recovered assets.

The total of those account balances — the wealth investors believed they had saved — was nearly $65 billion, by far the largest financial fraud loss in history.

But those statements “were bogus and reflected Madoff’s fantasy world of trading activity,” Judge Lifland wrote in his opinion.

As such, they cannot reflect legitimate “securities positions” on which claims can be based, he said.

Instead, Judge Lifland endorsed the approach of the Madoff trustee, Irving H. Picard. The differences between how much investors put into their accounts and the amount they took out are “the only verifiable amounts” reflected in the Madoff firm’s records, Judge Lifland said of that method.
It seems reasonable to me.

Anybody got a better formula?
__________________

Now offering online seminars, live seminars, and everything else under the sun for actuarial exams.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-05-2010, 06:34 AM
vtek's Avatar
vtek vtek is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Paris
Favorite beer: wine
Posts: 4,170
Default

it's both reasonable and fair. zero would also be reasonable, though
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-16-2010, 08:18 PM
SirVLCIV's Avatar
SirVLCIV SirVLCIV is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 23,856
Default

1) I don't think the government should be reimbursing anyone for fictional losses.
2) I do think Madoff should be liable for the opportunity cost of the money. I don't know how to define that, however.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-16-2010, 08:22 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for Japanese
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 14,935
Blog Entries: 4
Default

So, how much assets - real assets - did Madoff have at the time of conviction?

Seems to me the best one can get is percentage amount claims of Madoff's assets. I've seen a few articles where some Madoff investors who cashed out early are paying off those who got burned, but I'm not sure how kosher that is.
__________________

Now offering online seminars, live seminars, and everything else under the sun for actuarial exams.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
fraud, madoff

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.29700 seconds with 6 queries