IBJOpinion

SKARBECK: Regulators and 'experts' failed to stop scammers

Ken Skarbeck
December 25, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Ken SkarbeckThere are many things that are difficult to understand. For example, why do the big pharmaceutical companies spend billions on advertising that warn us—in graphic detail—of the potential for repulsive side effects of using the very product they are selling?

How come politicians grant generous retirement benefits to public employees and then fail to set aside the required money in pension funds to pay for them?

Why do otherwise sane people put their money into a fund-of-funds that charges oversized fees, which in turn just hands the money off to another hedge fund that charges another layer of massive fees?

Why did certain Wall Street executives walk away with hundreds of millions of dollars as the economy was laid to shambles, and yet every day we send petty thieves to jail? A fair number of people in this country have been financially ruined in the wake of their transgressions, but the eggnog flows freely in the Hamptons.

Why is the tax rate levied on the billions of dollars earned by private equity and venture capitalists only 15 percent, when the rest of America pays tax on their income as high as 35 percent?

Do corporate boards really have the best interests of shareholders in mind? Particularly when it comes to setting executive compensation? Are their policies influenced by the generous compensation and benefits they in turn receive?

Most people find it incomprehensible that there are hundreds of con men around the country who wake up every morning with the objective of looting people who have placed their trust in them. Where were the rating agencies, accountants, lawyers and investment consultants who were paid handsomely to provide the due diligence and unbiased checks and balances that are supposed to ferret out these scams? Are they incompetent, complacent, willingly looking away, drinking the Kool-Aid, intimidated, or some combination of the above?

How does the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ignore Bernie Madoff for 30 years, particularly when they were alerted to his crimes multiple times? Why did the Ohio Division of Securities routinely allow the issuance of non-insured investment certificates backed by personal loans with no equity behind them? We need more regulators with the backbone of the Cuomos, Spitzers and Volckers.

This is not to say that investors deserve a free pass. For example, should you invest in a 9-percent non-insured certificate paying more than twice the risk-free rate and not ask why? People need to understand the concept of no free lunch—if the touted returns look too good to be true, the danger signs should flash.

And that perhaps is the central lesson: We just can’t blindly rely on proclaimed experts and regulators when making decisions on financial affairs. It is incumbent on all of us to educate ourselves and use a strong dose of common sense.

Finally, one last thing I know I will never understand: Why we must remain pin-drop silent while a golfer swings at a stationary ball sitting on the ground, but we can scream at a batter trying to hit a 90 mph fastball?•

__________

Skarbeck is managing partner of Indianapolis-based Aldebaran Capital LLC, a money-management firm. His column appears every other week. Views expressed are his own. He can be reached at 818-7827 or ken@aldebarancapital.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Wake up
    The answers to your Fund of Funds question is very simple. FOF's provide diversification to individual funds that have very high minimum investments. They provide due diligence to individual funds that is expensive and hard to evaluate. There is many benefits to investing in a FOF which is a great vehicle, but a FOF is still an investment so do your homework or put your money under the mattress if you are too stupid.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. So the Mayor adds another non value added layer to having a vehicle towed? Whereby the City Government RECIEVES AN ILLEGAL KICKBACK FROM A LGOISTICS COMPANY THAT SUBS THE WORK TO LOCAL TOW COMPANIES? What is the service the City performs for receiving the "tribute"? This is RICO!!!!! What a corrupt and unnecessary layer. What a dirtbag Mayor and his cronies.

  2. Owner occupied housing. Clear enough?

  3. So people think I am paranoid. It's from experience in dealing with puds requested by developers who make major donations themselves to representatives, have nice fund raisers for those running for office and hide through pac's. then there are the public relation firms. You will note some pr comments below. You there Clyde Lee? My opinion. Commercial along 421, great. Multifamily housing, terrible idea that will change the town. Senior condos or zero lot line homes west, great. I suggest keeping all entries to commercial areas at 421. All entries to owner occupied on sycamore. Will keep the traffic on sycamore down some. Two other things. You can't trust what will be there in 10 years. Steve builds quality stuff, but areas change over time. Look at the changes at the wall mart center at 86th and 421 over the last 10 years. Look at the apartments and neighborhoods behind St Vincent's. Raintree properties WILL decrease in value if commercial and multifamily goes in near. It has already been happening around the bridges area. The houses that have been sold recently are way below market. Several deals not closed due to the Illinois construction and the whole unsurety of the bridges. It's pretty simple, Zionsville will approve the whole thing because the city council has been groomed over a LONG period of time for this. I might even suggest some are in their position as a result of this.

  4. Esta, do you have a dog in this fight? You seem to really want to knock anyone against this project. No, I didn't move to Indiana for the architecture. I moved here for that red barn in the field. The horses and fields of corn. A place that is NOT overdeveloped. There are plenty of nearby places in Indianapolis that could be REDEVELOPED instead.

  5. RKW - OK, we get it, you're paranoid. The question is, are you paranoid enough? Greg - Yes, Pittman(s) is (are) at it again. They are developers, they build things. It's what they do. So when you go to work tomorrow, Greg, you're at it again too. Cliff - Really? You moved to Indiana for its progressive architecture? That's like moving to England for the cuisine. Zionsvillain - The house you moved to was once a field or woods. I'm willing to bet folks were upset when that ground was plowed under and a house was built. But I guess now that you are in, everything should stop? "My house was OK, but the next one is sprawl." SE Guy - Please don't paint us with such a wide brush. Most reasonable Zionsville residents welcome planned, measured development.

ADVERTISEMENT