7.2 Billion Dollar Market Manipulation "Irrational"

Link

This is bizarre, I just can't figure it out.

He didn't do it to make money.

So who DID make money off this? Who put him up to it? The article makes a point of saying he acted alone, but that smells of nonsense to me.

Anyone else have any ideas on this story?

the situation is weird, seems like a cloud flys over a oil well and they jack up the price. Surely someone made some huge cash with the rise, fall and rise again market. Surely they can control this action with large sell offs and large repurchases. It would be neat to see who made the $$$ from this.

The story doesn't add up for me either.

Personally I think he's a scapegoat for real losses incurred by this bank. (Societe Generale in $4bn bail-out)

Most large banks are in some kind of trouble at the moment and I think this may just be a way of covering up their mess.

I mean:

...undetected for more than a year by its own multilayered security systems.

I call BS on this statement.

If I got an extra $20 bill when making a $100 dollar withdrawal at an ATM the bank would track it down.

Same story from BBC: news.bbc.co.uk...

I agree this story does not add up. How could they not know this was happening.

Just found this on Yahoo, they say is was in the 10's of billions now.

Billions Lost



[edit on 25-1-2008 by whoreallyknows] Found the name edited to add link

[edit on 25-1-2008 by whoreallyknows]

Originally posted by whoreallyknows
...why have they not named the person who did it.

Try clicking some of the links.

Pictures and everything.
.

reply to post by Gools


yup I found a link with the name and photo and new figures

Got two words for this story.

Nick Lesson.

Sound familiar anyone?

MonKey

I sense a difference between this case and the case of Lesson.

I might be wrong, but something feels different here.

(Edit: This guy fits the definition of a patsy, check these out)
Link

He was never seen with a partner or friends, never spotted at the market or bringing food home, didn't chat to neighbours, and didn't take holidays.

He was said to have been given counselling by doctors from the bank, where officials painted a portrait of a troubled man with a fragile mental state. A rumour circulated in the financial district that he may have felt suicidal. SocGen said he had acted alone in his own imaginary world.

His father's death was perhaps the only explanation for what the bank said was "family problems". But people in the shops, garage and blacksmith's workshop felt he was being made to carry the can for someone else.

Somebody wanted this guy to take the fall, and provide them with a convenient excuse for disappearing billions.

This is one of those stories that speaks to real conspiracy. There are no reptilians, or mind control chips, so people don't get very interested. This story has a very low entertainment value, and so gets only a fraction of the attention garnered by the more flashy conspiracy theories.

For sure, this leaves me scratching my head. Something is under the surface here, I just wish I knew what it was...

[edit on 25-1-2008 by WyrdeOne]

Supposedly, this young man not only had the skills required to override sophisticated risk control systems, but he also had access to several other employees' passwords

An interesting aside: It's being speculated that this 7.1BB unwind...may have sparked the global sell-off. As a result, the US Fed was prematurely fooled into using-up .75 of it's ammo to shore-up stock prices (which isn't their mandate by the way).

If this is true, we may not see another cut when the Fed announces next week. On the other hand, if we get another -.50 like the market is anticipating, then the emergency cut may be more related to the monoline/derivatives crises. Or, maybe it was a little of both...with deception, and intrigue assuming epic proportions...who the hell knows?

Apparently CNBC's Rick Santelli believed Tuesday's emergency cut was a reaction to demanding marketeers when he said: "The Pavlovian training is now complete."

I haven't read or heard too many details but I thought I heard he was trying to make money but did it at the wrong time apparently. He thought the market was going to go up in a bull market but it turned into a bear and has been heading down. I heard he was doubling up. I was thinking about gamblers can sometimes keep doubling up until they get all their money back and then some. However this guy I thought did it at the wrong time of year. Then I wondered if anyone else did this already and made money but the banks said nothing or didn't catch anyone because no money was missing.

Just my thoughts after I heard he was doubling up (I thought trying to make money) when the market was going down. I read it works for the roulette wheel eventually but you have to have boatloads of money to make it work and no betting limits.

I should add this is my opinion. I'm not sure what the guy was thinking.
Maybe he just made bad investments and was trying to recoup the losses but had lots of bad luck and timing. I didn't read anything in that article in the link about him doubling up. Earlier I didn't hear anything about this going on for a year. Maybe the losses only started in January and that's when the trouble started. I think we're missing information.


[edit on 26-1-2008 by orionthehunter]

the bbc shows a laughable picture of his 'supposed' flat number (which looks like someone just wrote the guys name down on a bit of paper and stuck it on the first place they found that had a 10 on it - see here

there are some pretty funny anagrams you can make from the guys name also - look here

so the police wait till today to search his flat and are only there for two hours . nobody knows where the guy is. no-one knows much about him at all. why didn't they just keep it quiet and arrest him when he showed up for work? does anyone think he's ever going to be found?

just a thought the news report sited on the link said that the bank had to raise money buy selling shares to .....wait for it.....Chase and morgan stanly,maybe this was a set up all along to get control of yet anthor bank buy the illum's????

let's see,
he was groomed for the position of a futures trader and had a free hand
in making 'authorized' transactions for the bank for a year or more ~

but then he decided to do some extra-cirricular trading on the side with
bank funds which he kept hidden from detection by the multi-layered failsafes the bank has for its 'treasury'....


But Now.... when there is a gigantic 'loss' incurred
he gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar?

what about all those ?? millions, multiple millions he traded on the sly
for the previous 200+ days of surreptious trading on the banks money?
where did all that money go?

or was his covert trading always losing money for the bank, and at $8Billion it finally was discovered?!

Mr. Bouton insisted Societe Generale is still financially sound, but the bank said it would need to raise about $8 billion in new capital, partly by selling shares in a rights offer underwritten by JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Morgan Stanley.

Wasn't it Morgan Stanley ..? ..that was rumoured to be in risk of bakrupcy, not so long ago? Something smells fishy here.

As to why they can call him, like said by

...the head of the Bank of France that he was a "genius of fraud"

A Genius! None the less That's the director of the French National Bank saying this. Where's the genious if he didn't make a dime ?????????????


And why did they wait the better part of a week before they told the Feds?? Very smelly-smelly.

If somebody knows about this Morgan Stanley case, had some threads maybe a month ago. The website (?cant rember) promoting the Leo Wanta case had reports of worldleaders like Putin incognito came to Manhatten to sign papers.

Definite some creative book keeping going on here. If someone loses xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx another one most gain xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx !? Right!! Or someone correct me if my apprehension is wrong..

So who could that be who suddenly needed some extra bread. An all too obvious hint lies here:

Conspiracy theorists suggest that SocGen is blaming such big losses on a rogue trader in order to cover up something else. Are there wider problems at SocGen which require a scapegoat? The bank announced a €2bn (£1.48bn) writedown on Thursday from US sub-prime losses, but that is small compared with $18bn (£9.08bn) at Citigroup and $14bn at Merrill Lynch.

I searche d Morgan Stanley and this thread was top
Criminal Collapse of Citibank Morgan Stanley Imminent, page 2

Gotta read up on it.

[edit on 26/1/2008 by khunmoon]

well apparently he is in police custody now (though the report did happen to mention that there wasn't even a warrant out for his arrest or the borders alerted to look for this guy) there just doesn't seem to have been much effort to have caught him at all from the sound of it.

when even the msm is reporting there is something very, very fishy about this story then you definitely want to go hmmmmmmmmmmm

When I read this story the other day, I too thought this didn't add up. I find the bank's reaction and statements most troubling. Think about it.... Where is the expected "this is under investigation and therefore no comment" line?

Odd indeed.

Originally posted by ChiKeyMonKey
Got two words for this story.

Nick Lesson.

The human lesson of Nick Leeson's fraud

...of the nine Barings executives who were found guilty of misconduct by regulators and one or two who escaped. Those who suffered most seemed to me the ones who denied blame. Appeals dragged on for years, marriages collapsed, people became embittered and dispirited. They never quite removed the albatross from around their necks.

Again, I don't buy the line that it's possible to act totally alone for over a year in a highly regulated bank environment and lose a total of over 7 billion dollars with nobody noticing any problems or asking any questions.

If that did in fact happen, then the entire management of that bank was negligent. I suspect you will see lawsuits like the Leeson case. If not, then the "scapegoating" was successful.
.

I find this suspicious as well....and as usual, I have different reasons for my red flags, along with everything that has been presented....

Take a look at the photo...



The expression says it all. There is the furrowed brow as if he is looking at hte camera with disdain, the kind of smirk that doesn't invite a return glance and the titlted head....

...it is not a warm face by any means. I am of course of the opinion that the picture was chosen for that reason, kind of a social cue for the reader to align their opinion with the papers 'non-biased' opinion. I am not an authority on such matters, however, it does strike a chord...

I wonder how old the picture is and where it was taken.

And why the term 'rogue'? Again, we see an implicit phrasing, to go along with WyrdeOne's assertion of Patsy...

To play devils Advocate for a second....A supposedly brilliant financial mind could have directed funds any which way and made connections with third/fourth/tenth party individuals if indeed he was attempting to scam the bank......but I doubt it.

The number alone is staggering. I think that the bank may have funked something up....but more names and a beginning of a paper trail would be favorite....

I had a humorous thought...

What if Bush is trading in the Forex market. He could put all of his money on the Euro or Yen, and make a HUGE profit.

Of course, that's pretty stupid... but I found it funny.


This whole injection of funds into the hands of US citizens is completely moronic.

If I'm in debt, the last thing I would do is take another loan out so I can mail money to random strangers!

This is exactly what he is doing. Almost every penny of that fund is going to be spent on products made in other countries, hence, that money is simply being given to other countries.

Not that I mind as a Canadian being handed money from other countries just before their economy fails... but it's still a pretty moronic decision.