Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Stanford: Your Daily Dose of WTF
It took Alex Dalmady 30 minutes to work out that there was something obviously wrong at Stanford International Bank. The SEC, on the other hand, works a bit more slowly:
BusinessWeek previously reported that the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and the Florida Office of Financial Regulation all are investigating the high-yielding CDs sold by Stanford's offshore bank, as well as the investment strategy behind them. FINRA and Florida regulators began investigating Stanford Financial and its banks within the past several months. But people familiar with the probes say the SEC investigation goes back at least three years and possibly longer.
It's all well and good being meticulous. But the amount invested in SIB CDs has increased by billions of dollars over the course of the period the SEC has been investigating the bank. Anybody who bought a Stanford CD within the past three years has every reason to be furious at the SEC.
But it gets even better: a certain Lawrence J. De Maria filed a lawsuit in 2006 specifically alleging that Stanford "was operating a Ponzi scheme or pyramid scheme". De Maria got bought off with an out-of-court settlement in December 2007; law enforcement more generally didn't seem to care in the slightest, either before or after the case was settled.
Could the SEC -- not to mention the FBI -- really have been this incompetent for years? Actually, don't answer that. There's no need.






