MF Global is not the first Corzine trading scandal

If you follow investment and financial news, you are no doubt aware of the bankruptcy of MF Global, a powerful futures brokerage.   Before its bankruptcy, MF Global was helmed by former Senator and New Jersey governor Jon Corzine, a very wealthy and influential Democrat power player.  Before he ran for the Senate in 2000, Corzine was the chief executive of Goldman Sachs; Corzine helped take the company public during the 1990′s and was rewarded with nearly $400 million in Goldman Sachs stock for his efforts.

According to insiders, in the months preceding its collapse, MF global loaded its asset portfolios with high risk European bonds.  In a panic to stay cash solvent, MF Global managers apparently raided the cash accounts of investors (which were touted as “safe” by the firm) to the tune of somewhere between $600 million and $1 billion.  Investigators are still poring over MF Global’s books, but at this point it looks as though at least some of that money could have been used to cover trading losses, which would mean that the funds are gone for good.  Although Corzine has denied any wrongdoing and reportedly refused a $12.1 million severance package, he has retained the services of noted criminal defense attorney Andrew Levander.  There are also lingering questions about the role that Goldman Sachs will play in the liquidation of MF Global’s remaining assets.

Unsurprisingly, this is not the first time Corzine has been involved in a trading scandal.

During the 1990′s several unscrupulous brokerage houses (some with ties to organized crime) made a great deal of money by a method known as “chopping.”  “Chop” is a slang term for the price spread between what a brokerage pays for a stock, and what an investor pays the firm for the stock.  “Chop house” brokerages bought large numbers of penny stocks (either from foreign companies, or in the form of warrants for domestic stocks that could not be legally sold for two years) and then sold them to unsuspecting buyers, usually via high-pressure telephone cold calling, at markups of 200% – 300% or more.  Shady disclosure and accounting practices kept buyers from discovering the details of their investments, and kept details of the sales hidden from regulators.

According to Wall Street insiders, big brokerage houses, including Goldman Sachs, engaged in similar practices during the heyday of the Dot Com stock market bubble:

Nicholas Maier, who was syndicate manager of the Wall Street firm Cramer & Co. from 1996 to 1998, told SEC investigators in the spring that Goldman Sachs routinely forced him to buy stocks at inflated prices if he wanted to purchase shares of an initial public offering (IPO).

“Goldman, from what I witnessed, they were the worst perpetrator,” Mr. Maier said. “They totally fueled the [market] bubble. And it’s specifically that kind of behavior that has caused the market crash. They built these stocks upon an illegal foundation manipulated up, and ultimately, it really was the small person who ended up buying in.”

For example, Mr. Maier told the SEC that Goldman Sachs would offer him shares of a new company’s IPO at the initial, low price of $20 per share only if he agreed to purchase “aftermarket” shares of the same company at $100 each. In turn, he would sell the shares of the higher-priced stock to small investors.

“None of these aftermarket orders had anything to do with what I honestly valued a company to be worth,” Mr. Maier said.

… A class-action lawsuit filed in April 2001 accused Goldman Sachs and others of engaging in “laddering” on the initial sale of stock of NetZero, driving up the company’s share price to artificially high levels.
In another class-action suit, shareholders of Buy.com have accused the firm and its underwriters, including Goldman Sachs, of engaging in a laddering scheme in its IPO in February 2000, after Mr. Corzine left Goldman. And investors of defunct online grocer Webvan.com have filed a similar suit in federal court concerning that firm’s initial public offering in November 1999.

Another class-action suit filed last year (2001) says that underwriters, including Goldman Sachs, manipulated several IPOs since 1997, including at least six when Mr. Corzine was still at the helm of Goldman.

Naturally, Corzine denied any knowledge of “laddering” IPO share prices during his tenure at Goldman Sachs.  But the stench of corruption and dirty money keeps following him around.

And it smells an awful lot like “Goldman Sachs.”

_________________________________

ADDED: The Washington Examiner’s David Freddoso reminds us that The Nation endorsed Jon Corzine for Secretary of the Treasury in 2008.  And The Nation fancies itself an intellectual’s magazine.  Heh.

I Find Her Shallow Faith Disturbing
The Fix Is In
  • Anonymous

    That’s what Goldman Sachs does – it creates bubbles.  Internet stocks, housing, oil, corn, maybe gold and silver now. 

    Matt Taibbi said it best “Goldman Sachs is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.”

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405#ixzz1eS5uQBg7

    Corzine is just another GS pig. MF Global now shows you can’t trust your brokerage accounts.

    And yes, Obama is joined at the hip with these a-holes.

    But let’s not have any regulation of the “free” market.  Free for them, fraud for us, that is.

    Now, let’s have some commenters say “But, but, it’s the government’s fault!! CRAFannieFreddieBarneySEC, blah blah.”

    • http://www.facebook.com/michael.laprarie Michael Laprarie

      Chico, the problem isn’t “too much” or “too little” regulation.  The problem is that the regulators/regulations are too deeply tied into the Too Big To Fail firms (and their principal managers) to be effective.  Lobbyists from TBTF banking industry giants essentially wrote the Dodd-Frank bill, deliberately giving themselves a regulatory advantage over smaller banks and investment firms.  And they generously gave themselves access to Federal bailouts when the next market FUBAR occurs – yet another protection that smaller competitors will not have.  Cronyism runs so deeply between the Federal government and TBTF financial firms that I doubt regulation would ever be effective enough to stop the next big market meltdown.  

      • Anonymous

        I agree with everything you said, but let’s have the regulators prosecute for fraud when it’s right in front of them.

    • Anonymous

      Now, let’s have some commenters say “But, but, it’s the government’s fault!! CRAFannieFreddieBarneySEC, blah blah.”
      Blah blah blah,like when you tell us how great OWS is?

    • retired.military

      Is what Goldman sachs does illegal? Nope.  But since they arent breaking laws than you have a problem with them.  But hey someone breaks the laws (IE OWS) than you think it is just fine and dandy.
      Liberal logic at its best.

      • Anonymous

        Goldman Sachs did a lot of things that were illegal frauds, but the feds are too tied up with them or too scared to prosecute.

    • http://108.80.56.115/theEnd/ fuzzywzhe

      Regulation isn’t the problem. These practices are ILLEGAL.

      Enforcement is the problem.  If you do this or I did this, we’d be in jail, but CORZINE did it.  You don’t understand, it’s not that he didn’t break the law, but because of who Corzine is, he won’t be prosecuted for breaking the law.

      • Anonymous

        I agree 100%.

  • http://www.learcapital.com/exactprice haljett

    It’s not the first, it won’t be the last. Particularly when it is apparent that lawmakers themselves are involved.

  • http://wizbangblog.com Shawn

    Nice post, Mike.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE