RSS Feed
Twitter
Facebook
Email
HomeAn Open Letter to the Board of FINRA Regarding Auction-Rate Securities
Posted by Larry Doyle on July 27th, 2009 3:17 PM |
To: The Board of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA);
FINRA Investment Committee;
FINRA Audit Committee
From: Larry Doyle, Sense on Cents
Re: Auction-Rate Securities
I am a longstanding Wall Street veteran, a private investor, an avid supporter of free and fair markets, and a financial blogger at my site, Sense on Cents.
I launched my website/blog earlier this year specifically to help people more fully understand the economy and the markets during these challenging times.
In my opinion, the greatest challenge facing our markets and our country at this time is the question of confidence and integrity in the system. Little surprise why the topic of financial regulatory reform is receiving so much attention.
Against that backdrop, I am heartened by recent increased legal action taken primarily by selected attorneys general in pursuing entities involved in the fraudulent marketing and distribution of Auction-Rate Securities. We could debate at length why and how the ARS market failed, but there is no doubt these securities, sold as cash surrogates, were distributed in a fraudulent fashion. Thousands of investors and approximately $165 billion in ARS remain frozen.
I view the ARS market as having three legs — issuers, investors, and distributors (both primary Wall Street banks/brokers and downstream entities). Who was situated at the epicenter of this debacle charged with protecting investors? The SEC and FINRA.
FINRA specifically occupied a position not only as a regulator but also as an ARS investor. Whether FINRA representatives want to believe it or not, any semblance of rational and prudent thought would determine that FINRA was conflicted as a result.
Having written extensively on this topic and engaged FINRA spokesperson Herb Perone on this issue, I call upon you, the members of FINRA’s Board, Investment Committee, and Audit Committee, to release all pertinent details involved with FINRA’s liquidation of their ARS position in 2007.
Why is this necessary? Very simply, in order to regain total confidence in the markets it is of paramount importance that there be complete transparency and integrity on behalf of the regulators. To that end, for the benefit of all issuers, investors, and distributors of ARS, I believe it is incumbent on you to release the following information regarding FINRA’s liquidation of ARS:
1. Date of sale
2. To whom or through whom did the liquidation occur?
3. At what price did FINRA sell their ARS?
4. Why did FINRA decide to liquidate the entire $647 million ARS at that time?
5. Did FINRA possess material non-public information at the time of liquidation and act upon it?
6. Given that FINRA is charged with protecting investors, and given its position in the financial industry, how and why did they not post an investor warning about the freezing and subsequent failure of the ARS market prior to its complete failure in early 2008? How many investors and how many dollars could have been protected in the process?
I issue this letter publicly hoping that others may also be able to utilize the information contained herein and generate the release of this information.
In the spirit of full disclosure, I have never owned an Auction-Rate Security. I write merely as a private individual interested in helping the thousands of investors looking for a timely return of their capital.
I thank you.
Respectfully,
Larry Doyle
http://www.senseoncents.com/about/
Wall Street’s Greatest Fraud
Posted by Larry Doyle on July 20th, 2009 9:07 AM |
Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme has to be the greatest fraud of all time, right? Allen Stanford is likely a distant second, correct?
Well, actually, no. Madoff has certainly reserved a special place in financial ‘hell’ for his fraud, but make no mistake, the single greatest fraud ever perpetrated on investors is the collective Wall Street enterprise that marketed and distributed Auction-Rate Securities. The ARS market at its peak was a $330 BILLION market. Of that initial size, those on Wall Street tracking developments within the ARS market project that $165 BILLION held by thousands of retail and institutional investors remain frozen.
The Wall Street Journal highlights the next in what could be a long running series of ARS investigations in writing this morning, Cuomo Says Schwab Faces Fraud Suit:
In an official notice sent to Charles Schwab & Co. Friday, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo warned that his office plans to sue the largest online brokerage firm for civil fraud over its marketing and sales of auction-rate securities to clients. Emails and testimony cited in the letter show Schwab’s brokers had little idea of what they were selling and later failed to tell clients that the market was collapsing.
I am heartened to see AG Cuomo launch this action against Schwab but I wonder why he does not simultaneously take the same action against EVERY bank, broker, and investment management firm involved in the marketing and distribution of ARS.
Regular readers of Sense on Cents know that I believe the ARS trail leads back to the Wall Street self-regulatory organization, FINRA. For the benefit of our newer readers, allow me to reconnect the dots once again. (more…)
FINRA 2008 Annual Report: A Special Type of Hubris
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 29th, 2009 3:14 PM |
At first blush, I viewed the text of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA’s) 2008 Annual Report as nothing more than standard corporate fare. With the benefit of a few days to ponder FINRA’s delivery, I am actually amazed, although never surprised, by the gall of this regulatory organization. In fact, I can only describe FINRA as displaying a special type of hubris in addressing the fraud encompassing Auction-Rate Securities.
I personally believe it is very important for a financial self-regulatory organization, such as FINRA, to be totally transparent in every regard. Why? Very simply, transparency promotes confidence and FINRA’s position as a financial regulator should begin and end with that goal.
Against that backdrop, FINRA should not directly manage any of their own funds. To do so is an open invitation for conflicts of interest. FINRA’s own investment portfolio, managed by an Investment Committee, generated a negative 26% return in 2008. In April 2009, the FINRA portfolio shifted to a lower volatility approach but in 2008 it continued to have exposure to hedge funds, fund of funds, and private equity. As much as I believe this is a very big deal, it pales in comparison to the major issue I, and others, have with FINRA: their involvement with Auction-Rate Securities. Let’s dive into this part of the report and comment as appropriate.
FINRA sets the table:
Throughout the financial crisis, FINRA has worked closely with other regulators, particularly the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Reserve, to examine firm activities for compliance with FINRA rules and federal securities laws, investigate wrongdoing and, when rules were broken, enforcing those rules.
As well they should. However, Finra obviously did not work too closely with the SEC to detect the fraud ongoing with Bernie Madoff. In fact, Finra’s only reference to the Madoff situation is one sentence highlighting the fact that the current financial regulatory structure does not overlap the efforts overseeing broker-dealers with those of investment advisors.
FINRA continues to make their case in stating:
The instability in the markets, and at a number of financial institutions, heightened investor fears. FINRA helped to allay those fears, and foster confidence, by working to ensure the protection of customer assets at troubled institutions.
How can they make this statement with a straight face knowing that thousands of investors and tens of billions of dollars remain frozen in Auction-Rate Securities? A number of Wall Street institutions continue to collect fees from these securities. Hubris? You think?
FINRA continues:
Vigorous enforcement of rules and regulations is a cornerstone of FINRA’s work to protect investors. In 2008, FINRA focused its efforts in several areas of investor harm—including excessive commissions, unsuitable mutual fund share class recommendations and sales, penny stock sales and auction rate securities recommendations and sales.
The hubris grows.
Let’s move forward. FINRA boldly and specifically addresses the Auction-Rate Securities market. I would have thought FINRA may have ducked this topic given the fact that they had sold $647 million ARS in 2007. The fact that they have willingly ‘opened this can of worms’ leaves them subject to fair and open questions. FINRA puts forth: (more…)
Madoff Sentencing Only the Beginning
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 29th, 2009 12:16 PM |
Bernie Madoff
Today Bernie Madoff learns his sentence. With this sentence, just now released as the maximum 150 years, Bernie Madoff learns how he will ‘exist’ for the balance of his ‘life.’ Today does not represent the end of the pursuit of justice in this massive fraud, but truly the beginning.
Victims of crime typically look for justice in two forms: restitution and justice “for all” parties involved.
The victims of the Madoff Ponzi scheme will be lucky to receive a small percentage of the monies invested in this fraud. The money is obviously extremely important to all the victims, but there is much more to justice than that.
For justice to truly be served, all of those who aided and abetted this fraud must also be brought to justice and pay the maximum price. To think that Bernie Madoff managed this scheme by himself is beyond naive. The Wall Street Journal highlights as much in writing, For Victims, Downsized Lives and Many Shattered Dreams:
“I hope he has to go to jail forever,” said Sheila Ennis, 63, of Manhattan Beach, Calif. “I hope they get all his assets, and I do feel others were involved. But now it’s a question of how we fix things for ourselves.”
Not unlike losing a loved one, victims of crime also need closure. That closure is only possible when every individual involved in the crime pays!! A financial settlement with Ruth Madoff should not preclude a potential indictment of her or her sons. Others directly and indirectly involved in this fraud also need to be fully investigated. To do otherwise would be a miscarriage of justice. If those investigations were to cross into government offices, then so be it, because justice neglected is justice denied!
Make no mistake, the fact that Madoff received the maximum allowable sentence is also an indictment of the SEC. Why? The fact that the Madoff Ponzi scheme grew as large as it did was simply a function of the culpability of the SEC. All those at the SEC who never pursued the Madoff fraud over the years should feel real personal and professional shame today.
As we move forward, I can only hope that our country and all who love it view the Madoff sentencing not only as the beginning of justice for the Madoff victims, but also the beginning of real transparency for victims of all financial frauds.
As I write this, though, I am reminded of the thousands of investors and tens of billions of dollars still frozen in Auction-Rate Securities. Those investors have neither restitution, nor justice, nor real media or judicial investigations truly working for them.
As a nation, we have a long way to go to regain our moral stature and promote our markets as being free and open for all.
LD
Finra’s 2008 Annual Report
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 27th, 2009 11:21 AM |
June 27, 2009
At long last, Finra has released its 2008 Annual Report.
I will provide a more thorough review of this report within the next 48 hours but I want to quickly provide some commentary on Finra’s assessment of their own involvement with Auction-Rate Securities.
1. They provide NO details on the liquidation of their own $647 million ARS position in Spring 2007. No surprise there but given that the U.S. attorney in Brooklyn and the SEC are investigating executives from Lehman Bros. for potentially front-running the market in liquidating ARS in the same time period, I believe this issue remains unresolved.
2. In my opinion, Finra’s review of their own handling of developments within the ARS market is akin to “the best defense is a good offense.” How so? Finra is touting a successful return of +/-1% of investor capital as a ‘flag waving’ event. WOW!!
Finra has been involved with 9 settlements totaling a return of $1.2billion dollars. Meanwhile thousands of investors with tens of billions of dollars remain frozen. Wall Street professionals involved in the ARS market have shared with me that as much as $170 billion in funds remain frozen. If that number is accurate, Finra’s “success” amounts to a batting average of .7 of 1%. If that is success, then the bar is obviously being held exceptionally low.
Dozens of ARS investors have contacted me to share their frustration in attempting to engage Finra.
3. Finra’s investment returns within their own internal portfolio were -26%. No details provided on which hedge funds or fund of funds.
As indicated previously, I will more thoroughly review the report within the next few days. On first blush I see no material increase in transparency necessary to inspire increased investor confidence.
LD
Finra Talking Tough on Fraud, but ‘Talk Is Cheap’
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 24th, 2009 2:01 PM |
We can’t live in the past. It is not healthy to overly dwell on the past. Life is about the landscape in front of us. That said, unless we address, expose, and expunge the errors and omissions of the past, can we truly achieve the full potential of our future?
Our recent financial past has been filled with pitfalls and frauds. Wall Street’s self-regulator Finra is fully cognizant of investor concerns on this front. Finra recently launched a marketing campaign to address investor concerns. From Finra’s own website, Finra Launches Enhanced Investor Protection and Education Programs:
“Informing and educating investors is an essential component of our investor protection mission,” said FINRA Chairman and CEO Richard G. Ketchum. “The recent market turmoil makes it more important than ever that investors be aware of FINRA and the tools and resources that we provide to help them plan their financial futures, protect their interests and make informed investment decisions.”
The video, “Tricks of the Trade: Outsmarting Investment Fraud,” is a 60-minute broadcast-quality presentation on preventing investment fraud. Using profiles of victims and perpetrators, the video highlights the persuasion tactics that con artists use to defraud their victims and the basic tools investors need to defend against fraud. A trailer of the video is available at www.saveandinvest.org/tricksofthetrade; the full video will be released in July, but can be pre-ordered. “Tricks of the Trade: Outsmarting Investment Fraud” will also be distributed in public libraries throughout the country and shown at movie premieres in selected states.
Any legitimate initiatives to counteract fraudulent activities should be embraced. I welcome this initiative by Finra and hope it proves overwhelmingly successful. The Wall Street Journal expanded on this Finra initiative in writing, New Finra Ad Campaign Talks Tough On Fraud:
Do you think your broker a total fraudster? Afraid your retirement is in jeopardy?
Then meet Finra.
That still relatively unknown acronym stands for the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the self-funded watchdog for the brokerage industry. And in its new national advertising campaign, Finra is seeking to restore investor confidence by talking tough against the brokers that don’t “play by the rules.”
“If brokers don’t play by the rules, we can fine them, suspend them – even put them out of business,” a male voice says in one ad, which displays black and white images of ordinary Americans against the backdrop of solemn guitar music. “We believe the markets don’t work unless they work for everyone.”
Pretty tough talk!! We need some tough regulators in order to root out fraudulent activity. We also need regulators who will pursue total transparency and integrity at every turn. Will Finra carry this torch? If so, it will have to address its own reputation in the process. The WSJ offers more: (more…)
Who Protects Investors from Regulators?
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 19th, 2009 2:44 PM |
Is there anything worse than being violated by an individual in a position of trust? Crimes perpetrated by regular citizens are one thing, but crimes perpetrated by individuals in a position of public trust, in my opinion, are the most heinous. I am speaking of members of the clergy, teachers, law enforcement, and public servants.
When engaged in private business, individuals typically remain on guard from fraudulent and criminal behavior. That innate defense mechanism is usually relaxed when engaged with a public or quasi-public official. Given that vulnerability, the violation is far more painful due to the emotional damage even if the actual financial costs are minimal.
As I go down this path, let me emphasize the obvious – that is, the presumption of innocence and due process.
1. Today we learn that as part of the case against Allen Stanford, an indictment has also been handed down against Antiguan financial regulator Leroy King. Bloomberg reports that King not only took bribes from Stanford but also showed Stanford information relating to the government’s developing case.
If in fact these allegations are true, King aided and abetted the fraud which is speculated to be of a magnitude of $1-7 billion dollars.
2. In regard to the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme, we have no evidence to indicate criminal intent or activity on behalf of anybody at the SEC. That said, the SEC – by its own admission – failed to perform its duties. For those impacted by the Madoff fraud, the lack of accountability by the SEC is no less damaging than if there were criminal activity. Why is that? The length of time over which Madoff perpetrated the scheme along with the amount of evidence provided by Harry Markopolos was so overwhelming and should have minimized the damage, both financial and emotional.
3. We do have evidence of potential culpability on behalf of FINRA in the Auction-Rate Securities fraud. FINRA was headed by Mary Schapiro, current head of the SEC. This fraud is MANY MULTIPLES the size of the fraud perpetrated by Allen Stanford. Professionals, both inside and outside of the financial industry, have estimated that there are anywhere from $80 billion to $175 billion ARS (of a $330 billion market) still outstanding.
Let’s take the midpoint of those estimates, $125 billion, as a best guess of outstanding ARS positions. These securities do not actively trade, like government bonds, but in speaking with Kevin O’Connor of Second Market, he shared that bonds trade around 75 cents on the dollar. Thus, we are looking at approximately $30 billion in losses on a mark-to-market basis.
FINRA’s potential culpability stems from the fact that they liquidated their own ARS holdings in 2007. I have asked repeatedly and will put forth once again, for the benefit of those thousands of investors and billions of dollars:
-what was the exact trade date of FINRA’s ARS liquidation?
-through whom did they liquidate their ARS position?
-what price were they paid for their ARS position?
-did they possess material non-public information about the ARS market failing and act upon it?
The U.S. attorney and SEC are investigating executives from Lehman (Gia Rys, Alex Kirk) for potentially front running the ARS market in 2007. Will we ever find out if FINRA did the same? FINRA is charged with protecting investors. They certainly failed to protect investors in Auction-Rate Securities.
4. Given the fraud involved in the marketing and distribution of ARS, I am blown away by the fact that the SEC, now headed by Ms. Schapiro, blessed the marketing and distribution of the new version of municipal ARS, known as x-Tender, or henceforth called Porky Pig here at Sense on ¢ents. Please see my post earlier today, An Auction-Rate Pig by Any Other Name Is Still a Pig.
Sad but true, as we enter the Brave New World of the Uncle Sam economy, investors need to remain diligent and should not assume that regulators are necessarily protecting them.
LD
An Auction-Rate Pig by Any Other Name is Still a Pig
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 19th, 2009 10:20 AM |
The brazen balls of both Wall Street and Washington know no limits. Hat tip to Kathy for pointing out to me that Wall Street is now running a new version of the Auction-Rate Securities play.
Recall that the Auction-Rate Securities fraud has left thousands of investors and billions of dollars frozen. While that fraud remains outstanding, Wall Street is calling an “audible” but at its core it is the same play. This smells!! Make sure you wear some heavy boots as we take a walk through the sty.
The Wall Street Journal highlights the particulars of this charade, New Security Shifts Risk to Borrower:
It didn’t take long for Wall Street to dress up an old idea and make it seem new again.
Wall Street firms including Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley & Co. have introduced a new security for the damaged municipal-bond market, meant to fill the role once played by securities that lost investor confidence in the peak of the market panic.
Their effort is part of Wall Street’s search for new ways to create business after a crippling nine months of crisis and government intervention. Much like auction-rate, variable-rate, and corporate floating-rate debt, the new tax-free “Windows” or “X-tender” securities offer municipalities the ability to borrow for the long term while paying only short-term interest rates.
This model proved dangerous during the credit crisis. Banks and bond insurers — who offered both express and tacit guarantees to backstop the debt — failed to live up to some of their promises. These securities became untradeable and dropped in value, leaving money-market funds in jeopardy of “breaking the buck.” Borrowers like municipalities, nonprofit institutions and student-lending companies faced penalizing interest rates well over 10% for months.
Like auction-rate securities and other variable-rate debt, the new instruments have an interest rate that resets every week, but this one is based on a short-term municipal debt index. The securities act like short-term debt and are appealing to money market funds that need to be able to sell their investments quickly.
This time, though, the banks removed some of the weak links from auction-rate securities and variable-rate demand bonds. Instead of banks or bond insurers acting as a guarantor or buyer of last resort at the auctions — which they were increasingly forced to do last year — the borrower itself promises to accelerate repayment. The borrower has seven months to repay.
Let’s review some of the driving forces and principles behind this new “Porky Pig” designated as “Windows” or “X-tender” securities:
1. Muncipalities are increasingly unable to finance themselves via the long term debt market. If municipalities can finance themselves, the rates are extremely high. This “pig” offers them a vehicle to sell into the deep, short term money-market arena with a “promise” by the municipality to repay these obligations if auctions fail.
2. The banks and brokers remain on the hook for tens of billions of dollars for not having lived up to the same ‘promise’ in the previous iteration of Auction-Rate Securities. That said, they are more than happy to facilitate this version and collect the fees for doing so.
3. Money market funds are flush with cash from investors who are increasingly risk averse. How will the funds that purchase these “pigs” market the fact that they are taking this degree of risk in the fund? Will brokers and managers fully highlight that fact, or will it be business as usual and keep the investors in the dark?
Wall Street and Washington are, once again, willing to oblige this version of a Ponzi scheme because there is lots of up front money to be made. The WSJ offers as much:
Despite the risks, the Securities and Exchange Commission blessed the instruments, allowing money-market funds to buy the debt.
Banks are also taking advantage of pent-up demand from municipalities that need money. Outstanding issuance of variable-rate debt has shrunk by approximately $100 billion in 2008 — a 20% drop, according to Municipal Market Advisors. The banks are now estimating as much as $10 billion in such “Windows” deals could hit the market over the next six months. So far, at least two municipalities have sold the debt and another deal is close to completion.
Sense on ¢ents strongly encourages investors to take the following approach:
1. Stay as far away from this product as possible. I am willing to bet this product will not be sold directly, but will strictly be ‘buried’ inside money market funds. Be careful!!
2. Ask your brokers or advisers if they are aware of this product; bring this to their attention!
3. If a broker or adviser is pitching a money market fund to you, make sure the fund does not have exposure to this garbage.
Oink, oink!!
LD
A Real Regulatory Review: Sense on Cents Interview with Bill Singer
Posted by Larry Doyle on June 15th, 2009 1:35 PM |
I feel so strongly about my interview last evening with Bill Singer, the preeminent veteran Wall Street regulatory lawyer and market reform advocate, that I am providing a transcript of highlights. My transcription is not totally word for word, so at the end of this post I will provide a BlogTalkRadio audio player so that you can playback the complete interview.
As time allows, I sincerely hope you read the entirety of this transcript and will listen to the complete interview. In my opinion, the issues addressed are that important. You will not be disappointed.
Given Bill’s extensive experience and relationships, he is uniquely positioned to comment on these timely and cutting edge issues. And now, on to the transcript . . .
Sense on Cents: Bill, we have just gone through a tsunami of epic proportions. Our financial industry brought our nation to its knees. We now get the sense that the regulatory oversight of our financial industry may not truly change. What are your feelings about that?
Bill Singer: I think you are right on point. My greatest fear is at the end of the day, we all go back to square one. It’s like asking for a mulligan in golf. People’s lives have been shattered and businesses destroyed. If you listen to the ‘garbage’ coming out of Washington, it’s as if the solutions are the same old things. We’ll set up panels, write papers, but what will really change? I don’t know what planet these people are living on, but last I looked, we haven’t gotten out of this crisis. We owe the next generation a much better regulatory system and a much fairer market. You just get this overwhelming sense that the ‘fix is in.’
Wall Street is wiping their brow and sweat and saying “whew, that was a close one.” It’s as if Wall street is telling Washington, “You’re still with us, aren’t you? We’re still paying for your campaigns.” I’m just afraid that nothing will really change other than some cosmetic changes.
Sense on Cents: I hope some real statesmen step up to address these issues. Since I’ve been writing, I believe we always get into the sufficiency of regulations. Which regulations need to be improved and which should be wiped away. I strongly believe, first and foremost, any industry has to have transparency and integrity in its process. As you just mentioned, it seems as if the ‘fix is in.’
Bill Singer: Larry, I’ve been reading your columns for quite some time now. This is not the time for anybody to be blowing smoke up anybody’s “you know what.” We have a career cast of politicians and regulators who by and large have never really worked for a living and who don’t really have a sense of what the ‘everyday Joe’ goes through. What we need right now is new ideas, new blood. You can’t break into the system. If you have been one of the individuals who has been warning about the major issues for years, you’d think that you would be invited in to ask to contribute ideas to fix them. That never happens. Those folks who regulate us are a very closed society. We have a system in our country that feeds cronyism and there is no way out of it.
I have reached out repeatedly over the years to regulatory bodies and as a 30 year veteran, and a former regulator, if I can’t even get an interview (and I’m not saying I would even want the job; they probably couldn’t afford me), that tells me how corrupt the system is.
When the public reads about Harry Markopolos and Gary Aguirre who have tried to expose issues and they aren’t embraced, that speaks volumes. Regulation has been “in bed” with Wall Street for very long. We need a vibrant and intelligent regulatory system to protect the public against fraud and the industry against its own folly. (more…)
