InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 7197
Next 10
Followers 26
Posts 1553
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/06/2003

Re: Smilin_B post# 5993

Sunday, 05/13/2012 12:42:46 AM

Sunday, May 13, 2012 12:42:46 AM

Post# of 7197
In the normal course of events the debt remains owing and the liquidator might go after the company for it, if it appears there si a chance of getting a recovery bigger than the expense involved in recovering.

You have to understood that these bogus deals had a dual benefit for NIR/AJW etc.

On the one hand where the stock was liquid they could get highly profitable cash-flow to pay any redemptions and their own management fees.

On the other hand, they could use the terms of the loans to value them at inflated levels to scam a bigger management fee out of their own investors (2% of the value of the assets under management per annum, and 20% share of the annual paper profit).

They only needed the first piece to the extent they couldn't Ponzi cash-flow from new investors via the second piece.

This model wasn't unique to CR and he wasn't some super-evil-genius inventing it. All of the penny PIPE players have a similar model, IMO, evolved over many years. As CR says somewhere, he doesn't seem to have been doing anything vastly different from YA Global/Cornell, Laurus/Valens, Dutchess etc etc etc.

The Ponzi element means that they all collapse after a while but in the meantime the fund manager has made a $gadzillion and it can be very very difficult to successfully prosecute. Usually the main ripped-off parties are the fund investors, but on the other hand they usually have signed agreements with the fund manager which allow the manager in effect to run a Ponzi scheme on them.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.