Podcast appearances and mentions of Bernard L Madoff

This Day in Legal History: Bernie Madoff ArrestedOn December 11, 2008, financier Bernard L. Madoff was arrested by federal authorities for orchestrating one of the largest Ponzi schemes in U.S. history. Madoff, a respected figure on Wall Street and former chairman of NASDAQ, had promised consistent high returns to investors. However, he used money from new investors to pay returns to earlier ones, rather than generating legitimate profits. The scheme unraveled during the 2008 financial crisis when panicked investors sought to withdraw funds, revealing Madoff's inability to cover billions of dollars.Madoff's fraud affected a vast range of victims, including wealthy individuals, charities, and pension funds, some of which were completely wiped out. Prosecutors estimated the losses to be approximately $65 billion, though this figure included fictitious profits shown on client statements. The actual cash losses were around $17.5 billion, much of which was later recovered by a court-appointed trustee.Madoff pleaded guilty in 2009 to 11 federal felonies, including securities fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering. He received a 150-year prison sentence, reflecting the enormous harm caused by his crimes. The case also spurred regulatory reforms, as it revealed significant oversight failures by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which had missed numerous red flags during prior investigations.The scandal had lasting implications for the financial world, highlighting vulnerabilities in investment practices and the need for stringent oversight. Many victims continued seeking justice and compensation long after Madoff's imprisonment, while the case remains a cautionary tale about trust and greed in finance.A U.S. bankruptcy judge halted The Onion's planned purchase of Alex Jones' Infowars website, ruling that the bankruptcy auction did not maximize potential bids. Judge Christopher Lopez acknowledged errors in the auction process, including the trustee's premature call for final offers, which likely left money on the table. Neither The Onion's winning bid nor the runner-up bid from a company tied to Jones' businesses adequately addressed Jones' significant debts. Jones, who declared bankruptcy in 2022, owes over $1.3 billion to families of Sandy Hook shooting victims after courts ruled he defamed them by falsely claiming the tragedy was staged. The Onion's bid was bolstered by Sandy Hook families waiving part of their repayment to increase creditor payouts, raising its total valuation to $7 million. However, Jones argued The Onion's bid relied on inflated calculations compared to the $3.5 million cash offer from First American United Companies.The judge ordered a renewed auction process and called for resolving creditor disputes beforehand. While Jones celebrated the decision, The Onion expressed disappointment but reiterated its interest in turning Infowars into a parody site with less harmful content. Sandy Hook families' attorneys criticized the delays but remained committed to holding Jones accountable.The Onion's purchase of Alex Jones' Infowars stopped by US judge | ReutersThe Onion's Bid for Alex Jones' Infowars Rejected by Judge (1)President Joe Biden announced his intent to veto the JUDGES Act, a bipartisan bill proposing 66 new federal trial court judgeships to alleviate case backlogs. Despite the Democratic-led Senate passing the bill in August, the Republican-controlled House delayed action until after the election, won by Republican President-elect Donald Trump. The White House criticized the timing, suggesting partisan motives, and noted Republicans' prior resistance to filling judicial vacancies under Biden.The legislation aims to stagger new appointments over a decade to distribute appointments across three presidential administrations, addressing concerns about partisanship in judicial nominations. Republican Senator Todd Young, the bill's sponsor, and several judges emphasized the urgent need for additional resources, citing increased case filings and delays since 1990.House Democrats, however, withdrew support, accusing Republicans of reneging on promises to pass the bill earlier. Representative Jerrold Nadler argued that granting Trump immediate judicial appointments could bolster his executive power. Biden's veto would require a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override, an unlikely scenario. Judges advocating for the bill expressed disappointment, emphasizing its nonpartisan intent and necessity to ensure timely justice.Biden vows to veto bill expanding US judiciary after Trump's win | ReutersWoody Allen's former chef, Hermie Fajardo, has filed a lawsuit accusing Allen, his wife Soon-Yi Previn, and their home manager Pamela Steigmeyer of unlawful termination due to his military obligations and complaints about improper wages. Fajardo alleges violations of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Act (USERRA) and New York labor laws, asserting that he was dismissed after raising concerns about taxless paychecks and reduced wages during his Army Reserve training.Fajardo's claims suggest a pattern of retaliation, including hostility from Steigmeyer and a sudden, unexplained termination shortly after a delayed return from mandatory military duty. The lawsuit challenges the defendants' subsequent claims of dissatisfaction with Fajardo's cooking, pointing instead to his complaints and military obligations as the true motivations for his firing.Criticism of Allen is underscored, to say the least, by his history of abusive personal and professional behavior. Allen has faced decades of allegations, including longstanding sexual abuse claims from his adopted daughter Dylan Farrow, which have cast a well-deserved shadow over his career despite his continued denial of wrongdoing. Woody Allen's Ex-Chef Alleges He Was Fired Over Military ServiceA U.S. federal court blocked the proposed $25 billion merger between Kroger and Albertsons, marking a victory for consumers who prioritize competitive grocery pricing. Judge Adrienne Nelson ruled that the deal, which would have united the two largest traditional grocery chains, could harm shoppers by reducing competition and driving up costs. The decision aligns with the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) efforts to counteract inflation and protect consumers.The FTC and state attorneys general argued that the merger would limit choices for consumers and weaken the bargaining power of unionized grocery workers. The court rejected Kroger's claims that the deal would reduce prices and improve services through efficiencies, noting the lack of enforceable guarantees. Concerns about job losses and potential harm to small businesses were also central to the opposition.For shoppers, the decision improves the chance that grocery prices remain as low as possible by preserving competition between major chains. With food costs already having risen by 25% in recent years, maintaining market competition is a crucial step toward affordability. This ruling reinforces the importance of competition in the economy, benefiting not only consumers but also workers and small businesses.While Kroger and Albertsons argued that the merger was necessary to compete with giants like Walmart and Amazon, the court doubted whether their proposals to sell stores to maintain competition would succeed. Ultimately, this decision supports those who believe that strong antitrust enforcement is essential for a balanced economy.Kroger's $25-billion deal for grocery rival Albertsons blocked by US courts | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

====================================================SUSCRIBETEhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNpffyr-7_zP1x1lS89ByaQ?sub_confirmation=1=======================================================================DECIDETE HOYDevoción Matutina para Jóvenes 2024Narrado por: Daniel RamosDesde: Connecticut, Estados Unidos===================|| www.drministries.org ||===================12 DE MARZOEVITA SER ENGAÑADO«Porque vendrán falsos mesías y falsos profetas; y harán grandes señales y milagros, para engañar, a ser posible, hasta a los que Dios mismo ha escogido» (Mateo 24: 24). «Si algo es demasiado bueno para ser verdad, sí, es demasiado bueno para ser verdad», fueron las palabras de la pareja de actores kevin Bacon y kyra Sedgwick, luego de perder prácticamente todo su dinero en manos de Bernard L. Madoff. Engañar a los incautos parece ser una práctica común, y ayer hablábamos del mayor engaño de todos, la falsificación de la segunda venida de Cristo. Entonces, ¿cómo podemos evitar que nos engañen? La mejor forma de evitar el engaño es conocer la verdad, en este caso, la verdad sobre la segunda venida de Cristo. ¿Cómo dice la Biblia que vendrá Jesús? Su venida será un acontecimiento público de alcance universal. «¡Cristo viene en las nubes! Todos lo verán, incluso los que lo traspasaron; y todos los pueblos del mundo harán duelo por él» (Apocalipsis 1: 7). «Toda nación, tribu, lengua y pueblo» contemplará su venida. Esta es una característica que Satanás no podrá imitar. Por tanto, si los noticieros informan que Jesús regresó en Norteamérica y no en tu país, ese no es el «Jesús» que esperamos. Su venida pondrá fin a la historia de este mundo. Mientras que Satanás «llegará con mucho poder, y con señales y milagros falsos. Y usará toda clase de maldad para engañar a los que van a la condenación» (2 Tesalonicenses 2: 9-10), Jesús «descenderá del cielo con voz de mando, con voz de arcángel y con trompeta de Dios, y los muertos en Cristo resucitarán» (1 Tesalonicenses 4: 16, RVC). Nota que Jesús no realizará milagros de sanación durante su venida, ¿por qué habría de hacerlo, si los salvados recibirán cuerpos glorificados e inmortales? Pero Satanás tratará de imitar las obras de Jesús a través de diversas curaciones. La segunda venida será un acontecimiento sobrenatural que tomará lugar en las nubes. Si Jesús en verdad regresó, algunos deberían estar ascendiendo a las nubes (1 Tesalonicenses 4:17), mientras otros mueren por el resplandor de su venida (2 Tesalonicenses 2: 8). La Biblia presenta claramente el acontecimiento más importante de la historia. Jesús viene a buscarte. ¿Estás listo para su venida? Si hoy llenas tu mente de su Palabra evitarás ser engañado por el enemigo. 

official court audio from oral argument in 22-1107, 22-1110Irving Picard v Sage Associatesre net equity treatment, last statement treatment etc

欢迎收听雪球和喜马拉雅联合出品的财经有深度，雪球，3500 万投资者在线交流，一起探索投资的智慧，听众朋友们大家好，我是主播匪石-34，今天分享的稿件名字叫做投资吃功夫，来自于陈嘉禾。投资这个工作，看起来没什么门槛，只要有张身份证、能开个投资账户，是人都能做。但是，这个看似“谁都能做”的工作，却也最吃功夫。要不然，这个世界上的钱岂不是太好赚了。“吃功夫”这三个字最早出自何处，现在已经不可考证。但是，在武术、也就是中国功夫中，“吃功夫”是练武之人的必须修炼。记得南怀瑾先生曾经说过，一个人练功夫练得多了，走路举止都会变得不一样。而对于那些久历江湖的人，一看别人走路的姿势，就大概会知道对方练的是太极、少林还是八极。（注：八极拳是一种传统武术，以拳法刚猛著称，自古有“文有太极安天下，武有八极定乾坤”之说。相比于少林拳与太极拳，现代人知道八极拳的不多。）这是因为功夫练得多了，本门武术用力的方法，早就已经融入行为举止之中，因此有经验的人，一望即知 对于投资来说，事情也是一样。投资看似简单，实则包罗万象。市场上有成千上万个股票、基金、债券、衍生品可供选择，到底买哪一个、卖哪一个？什么样的投资是有价值的，什么样是坑人的？这个股票好，那么剩下几千个股票里有没有比它更好的？没有十年八年沉浸市场的苦功夫，是很难对这些问题做出回答的。记得有一次，我在看海通证券港股的股票，看到数据软件上标注的股息率大概是8%左右。正好我的客户经理来拜访，问我“你在使用我们数据终端的时候有碰到什么问题吗？”我说你看，你们这个海通证券的股息率应该算错了啊，应该是4%到5%，怎么会是8%呢？他说你怎么知道是4%到5%、不是8%？我说我记得这些公司大概的分红数字和股票价格，如果有一个公司股息率达到8%，我不会不记得的，估计是你们算错了。打开公司年报一看，果然是数据终端计算错误。把分红数据搞对是第一步，而分红数据到底代表什么意义，则是第二步。一般来说，上市公司肯分红往往是好事，意味着上市公司肯拿出真金白银回馈投资者。但是，如果上市公司的业绩乏善可陈，同时又拿出大笔现金分红，而同时恰巧这个上市公司的控股股东又持有大比例的股权，那么这个分红的目的到底是回馈股东、还是回馈占控股地位的大股东，则是需要具体问题具体分析。而如何分析，就是体现投资者功夫的时候了。投资的功夫常常来自于对细节的理解，而对细节的理解来自于日常的积累。当然，人不是机器，像之前那个例子一样，永远记住每个投资的数字是不可能的，我当时也只是恰巧碰到自己熟悉的数字而已。但是，对于一些通用的规则，投资者是必须加以了解的。比如说，我曾经看到不少投资者，把公募基金和私募基金的长期业绩放在一起做比较，说某某公募基金过去5年业绩如何、某某私募基金过去5年业绩如何，因此这两个基金业绩对比如何，所以应该买某个基金。殊不知，公募基金和私募基金的业绩，是不能简单对比的。这种不可对比，主要体现在两个方面。首先，同样的业绩并不一定代表同样的投资回报。在中国市场，公募基金的净值比较简单，反映的是扣完管理费、托管费等一系列费用以后的业绩。而私募基金的净值则比较混乱，有的是体现没有扣费用的净值，有的是体现扣完费用以后的净值。因此，私募基金与公募基金同样的业绩，并不一定意味着基金经理的扣费以前的投资回报（也就是代表投资水平的衡量数据）是完全一样的。其次，对于同样的净值，私募和公募持有者拿到手的钱也不一定一样。公募基金的净值体现的是扣完所有费用以后的净值，讲究的是“所见即所得”，净值增长了多少投资者就会赚到多少。但是，私募基金如果体现的是扣费以前的业绩，那么投资者拿到手的钱，在交完各种费用以后，就会少于这个业绩。因此，从持有者的投资回报角度来说，公募基金和私募基金也是不可以简单做比较的，甚至私募基金与私募基金之间，基于扣费条款的不同，也不能简单比较。对于那些不明就里的投资者，他们也许不明白不同基金之间的数据差别。而对于功夫下得深的投资者，却一眼就能看明白基金中的骗局。在2008年全球金融危机中，最大的一个基金丑闻，就是美国的“麦道夫案”。在2008年以前，作为纳斯达克交易所的前主席，伯纳德·麦道夫（Bernard L. Madoff）管理了多年基金。他的基金一直给投资者带来稳定而不俗的投资回报，因此规模很大，投资者众多。但是，这个基金却是一个彻头彻尾的庞氏骗局：基金并没有真正赚到那么多钱，投资者多年拿到的所谓“投资回报”，只不过是后来投资者投入的本金而已。在2008年全球金融危机中，随着大量投资者赎回基金份额，麦道夫的庞氏骗局终于撑不下去了。基金最终宣告垮台，投资者损失了数百亿美金，而麦道夫也被判入狱150年，并于2021年死在狱中。不过，麦道夫的骗局并非无人识破。早在骗局败露的多年以前，美国一些专业的投资者，就指出“根据麦道夫公开发表的对投资的看法、以及市场每年的变动情况，他不可能年年取得如此稳定而高额的投资回报。”可惜，在投资上肯下功夫仔细分析的人毕竟是少数，也没多少人了解每年的资产价格走势，以及持某一投资风格的基金经理当年应该获得多少投资回报、实际又获得了多少投资回报、这两者之间有没有异常的差额。这正所谓只知其然、不知其所以然，只知道基金经理给自己赚了钱、不知道基金经理是怎么赚的钱。说到看数据，我想起来有一些老分析师，对财务报表数据的详知程度，让我自愧不如。有位财务功夫深的分析师曾经给我表演过一个技能，只看三张财务报表、不看公司名字，根据财务数据的特性，结合商业社会的环境，就能猜出公司是做什么细分行业的。如此了解财务报表的投资者，看来是不太容易被一些不良上市公司的财务伎俩欺骗了。说了这么多，投资中所吃的功夫，究竟来自哪里？这所谓的“功夫”，来自于投资者日常对资本市场、商业社会细致的观察与思考，来自于投资者对资本市场瞬息万变的信息的准确感知。聪明的大脑加上细致的感知结合在一起，就能铸造最有功夫的投资者。投资中的功夫给投资者带来盈利、避免亏损，而历史上观察入微的功夫，则可以让君王们赢得战争、避免杀身之祸。这里，就让我们来看一个春秋战国时期的小故事。说起春秋战国，许多人都不陌生。但是，春秋和战国这两个历史时期，是以“三家分晋”这一历史事件作为划分，则是不少人都不太清楚的了。在春秋末期，中原大国晋国国内，有四大家势力：智、赵、魏、韩。智家势力最大，有一次智家首领智伯，带领韩魏两家伐赵。三家伐赵，赵家自然势力不济。战争打到最后关头，赵家主力所在的晋阳城，被智、韩、魏三家联军团团围住。三家放水淹城，赵家军队誓死抵抗，不肯投降。智伯于是找韩魏两家的首领开会，商讨对策。散会以后，智家的谋臣絺疵正好进会场，在门口和离开的韩魏两家的首领打了个照面。进来以后，絺疵对智伯说，“韩、魏必反矣。”韩魏两家一定和赵家勾结，要里应外合干掉我们智家了。智伯不解，问你怎么知道这个的？絺疵说，今天我们智家势力最大，以自己强大的势力胁迫韩魏两家攻赵，赵家灭亡，韩魏两家必然觉得自己是下一个倒霉的。而我们已经和韩魏两家约好，城破之日三分其地，现在城中弹尽粮绝，眼看就要投降了，而我刚才碰到这两个人，他们脸上无喜色、有忧虑，这不是要反叛，又是要做什么呢？（夫从韩、魏之兵以攻赵，赵亡，难必及韩、魏矣。今约胜赵而三分其地，城不没者三版，人马相食，城降有日，而二子无喜志，有忧色，是非反而何？）絺疵聪明的判断，来自于对政治军事形势的充分了解，以及对细节的敏锐观察。可惜，智伯没有听从絺疵的建议，结果赵魏韩三家联手，突然反攻智家，“遂杀智伯，尽灭智氏之族。”灭了智家以后，赵魏韩三家联手瓜分晋国，这个春秋时代中原力量的核心大国就此覆灭。随着晋国的覆灭，尚存有上古君子之风的春秋时代正式结束，“捐礼让而贵战争，弃仁义而用诈谲”的战国时代正式到来：这也是中国历史上最为战乱频繁的时代之一。其实，无论是投资、还是战争中的谋划，没有人是真正全知全能的，也没有人能说，自己的功夫与生俱来、完美无瑕。正是有了对现有功夫的不满足，有了对更高水平的渴望与向往，一代代优秀的投资者们才能不断努力提高自己的投资水平，练就投资的真功夫。作者：陈嘉禾链接：https://xueqiu.com/1340904670/182708296来源：雪球著作权归作者所有。商业转载请联系作者获得授权，非商业转载请注明出处。风险提示：本文所提到的观点仅代表个人的意见，所涉及标的不作推荐，据此买卖，风险自负。

欢迎收听雪球和喜马拉雅联合出品的财经有深度，雪球，3500 万投资者在线交流，一起探索投资的智慧，听众朋友们大家好，我是主播匪石-34，今天分享的稿件名字叫做投资吃功夫，来自于陈嘉禾。投资这个工作，看起来没什么门槛，只要有张身份证、能开个投资账户，是人都能做。但是，这个看似“谁都能做”的工作，却也最吃功夫。要不然，这个世界上的钱岂不是太好赚了。“吃功夫”这三个字最早出自何处，现在已经不可考证。但是，在武术、也就是中国功夫中，“吃功夫”是练武之人的必须修炼。记得南怀瑾先生曾经说过，一个人练功夫练得多了，走路举止都会变得不一样。而对于那些久历江湖的人，一看别人走路的姿势，就大概会知道对方练的是太极、少林还是八极。（注：八极拳是一种传统武术，以拳法刚猛著称，自古有“文有太极安天下，武有八极定乾坤”之说。相比于少林拳与太极拳，现代人知道八极拳的不多。）这是因为功夫练得多了，本门武术用力的方法，早就已经融入行为举止之中，因此有经验的人，一望即知 对于投资来说，事情也是一样。投资看似简单，实则包罗万象。市场上有成千上万个股票、基金、债券、衍生品可供选择，到底买哪一个、卖哪一个？什么样的投资是有价值的，什么样是坑人的？这个股票好，那么剩下几千个股票里有没有比它更好的？没有十年八年沉浸市场的苦功夫，是很难对这些问题做出回答的。记得有一次，我在看海通证券港股的股票，看到数据软件上标注的股息率大概是8%左右。正好我的客户经理来拜访，问我“你在使用我们数据终端的时候有碰到什么问题吗？”我说你看，你们这个海通证券的股息率应该算错了啊，应该是4%到5%，怎么会是8%呢？他说你怎么知道是4%到5%、不是8%？我说我记得这些公司大概的分红数字和股票价格，如果有一个公司股息率达到8%，我不会不记得的，估计是你们算错了。打开公司年报一看，果然是数据终端计算错误。把分红数据搞对是第一步，而分红数据到底代表什么意义，则是第二步。一般来说，上市公司肯分红往往是好事，意味着上市公司肯拿出真金白银回馈投资者。但是，如果上市公司的业绩乏善可陈，同时又拿出大笔现金分红，而同时恰巧这个上市公司的控股股东又持有大比例的股权，那么这个分红的目的到底是回馈股东、还是回馈占控股地位的大股东，则是需要具体问题具体分析。而如何分析，就是体现投资者功夫的时候了。投资的功夫常常来自于对细节的理解，而对细节的理解来自于日常的积累。当然，人不是机器，像之前那个例子一样，永远记住每个投资的数字是不可能的，我当时也只是恰巧碰到自己熟悉的数字而已。但是，对于一些通用的规则，投资者是必须加以了解的。比如说，我曾经看到不少投资者，把公募基金和私募基金的长期业绩放在一起做比较，说某某公募基金过去5年业绩如何、某某私募基金过去5年业绩如何，因此这两个基金业绩对比如何，所以应该买某个基金。殊不知，公募基金和私募基金的业绩，是不能简单对比的。这种不可对比，主要体现在两个方面。首先，同样的业绩并不一定代表同样的投资回报。在中国市场，公募基金的净值比较简单，反映的是扣完管理费、托管费等一系列费用以后的业绩。而私募基金的净值则比较混乱，有的是体现没有扣费用的净值，有的是体现扣完费用以后的净值。因此，私募基金与公募基金同样的业绩，并不一定意味着基金经理的扣费以前的投资回报（也就是代表投资水平的衡量数据）是完全一样的。其次，对于同样的净值，私募和公募持有者拿到手的钱也不一定一样。公募基金的净值体现的是扣完所有费用以后的净值，讲究的是“所见即所得”，净值增长了多少投资者就会赚到多少。但是，私募基金如果体现的是扣费以前的业绩，那么投资者拿到手的钱，在交完各种费用以后，就会少于这个业绩。因此，从持有者的投资回报角度来说，公募基金和私募基金也是不可以简单做比较的，甚至私募基金与私募基金之间，基于扣费条款的不同，也不能简单比较。对于那些不明就里的投资者，他们也许不明白不同基金之间的数据差别。而对于功夫下得深的投资者，却一眼就能看明白基金中的骗局。在2008年全球金融危机中，最大的一个基金丑闻，就是美国的“麦道夫案”。在2008年以前，作为纳斯达克交易所的前主席，伯纳德·麦道夫（Bernard L. Madoff）管理了多年基金。他的基金一直给投资者带来稳定而不俗的投资回报，因此规模很大，投资者众多。但是，这个基金却是一个彻头彻尾的庞氏骗局：基金并没有真正赚到那么多钱，投资者多年拿到的所谓“投资回报”，只不过是后来投资者投入的本金而已。在2008年全球金融危机中，随着大量投资者赎回基金份额，麦道夫的庞氏骗局终于撑不下去了。基金最终宣告垮台，投资者损失了数百亿美金，而麦道夫也被判入狱150年，并于2021年死在狱中。不过，麦道夫的骗局并非无人识破。早在骗局败露的多年以前，美国一些专业的投资者，就指出“根据麦道夫公开发表的对投资的看法、以及市场每年的变动情况，他不可能年年取得如此稳定而高额的投资回报。”可惜，在投资上肯下功夫仔细分析的人毕竟是少数，也没多少人了解每年的资产价格走势，以及持某一投资风格的基金经理当年应该获得多少投资回报、实际又获得了多少投资回报、这两者之间有没有异常的差额。这正所谓只知其然、不知其所以然，只知道基金经理给自己赚了钱、不知道基金经理是怎么赚的钱。说到看数据，我想起来有一些老分析师，对财务报表数据的详知程度，让我自愧不如。有位财务功夫深的分析师曾经给我表演过一个技能，只看三张财务报表、不看公司名字，根据财务数据的特性，结合商业社会的环境，就能猜出公司是做什么细分行业的。如此了解财务报表的投资者，看来是不太容易被一些不良上市公司的财务伎俩欺骗了。说了这么多，投资中所吃的功夫，究竟来自哪里？这所谓的“功夫”，来自于投资者日常对资本市场、商业社会细致的观察与思考，来自于投资者对资本市场瞬息万变的信息的准确感知。聪明的大脑加上细致的感知结合在一起，就能铸造最有功夫的投资者。投资中的功夫给投资者带来盈利、避免亏损，而历史上观察入微的功夫，则可以让君王们赢得战争、避免杀身之祸。这里，就让我们来看一个春秋战国时期的小故事。说起春秋战国，许多人都不陌生。但是，春秋和战国这两个历史时期，是以“三家分晋”这一历史事件作为划分，则是不少人都不太清楚的了。在春秋末期，中原大国晋国国内，有四大家势力：智、赵、魏、韩。智家势力最大，有一次智家首领智伯，带领韩魏两家伐赵。三家伐赵，赵家自然势力不济。战争打到最后关头，赵家主力所在的晋阳城，被智、韩、魏三家联军团团围住。三家放水淹城，赵家军队誓死抵抗，不肯投降。智伯于是找韩魏两家的首领开会，商讨对策。散会以后，智家的谋臣絺疵正好进会场，在门口和离开的韩魏两家的首领打了个照面。进来以后，絺疵对智伯说，“韩、魏必反矣。”韩魏两家一定和赵家勾结，要里应外合干掉我们智家了。智伯不解，问你怎么知道这个的？絺疵说，今天我们智家势力最大，以自己强大的势力胁迫韩魏两家攻赵，赵家灭亡，韩魏两家必然觉得自己是下一个倒霉的。而我们已经和韩魏两家约好，城破之日三分其地，现在城中弹尽粮绝，眼看就要投降了，而我刚才碰到这两个人，他们脸上无喜色、有忧虑，这不是要反叛，又是要做什么呢？（夫从韩、魏之兵以攻赵，赵亡，难必及韩、魏矣。今约胜赵而三分其地，城不没者三版，人马相食，城降有日，而二子无喜志，有忧色，是非反而何？）絺疵聪明的判断，来自于对政治军事形势的充分了解，以及对细节的敏锐观察。可惜，智伯没有听从絺疵的建议，结果赵魏韩三家联手，突然反攻智家，“遂杀智伯，尽灭智氏之族。”灭了智家以后，赵魏韩三家联手瓜分晋国，这个春秋时代中原力量的核心大国就此覆灭。随着晋国的覆灭，尚存有上古君子之风的春秋时代正式结束，“捐礼让而贵战争，弃仁义而用诈谲”的战国时代正式到来：这也是中国历史上最为战乱频繁的时代之一。其实，无论是投资、还是战争中的谋划，没有人是真正全知全能的，也没有人能说，自己的功夫与生俱来、完美无瑕。正是有了对现有功夫的不满足，有了对更高水平的渴望与向往，一代代优秀的投资者们才能不断努力提高自己的投资水平，练就投资的真功夫。作者：陈嘉禾链接：https://xueqiu.com/1340904670/182708296来源：雪球著作权归作者所有。商业转载请联系作者获得授权，非商业转载请注明出处。风险提示：本文所提到的观点仅代表个人的意见，所涉及标的不作推荐，据此买卖，风险自负。

欢迎收听雪球和喜马拉雅联合出品的财经有深度，雪球，3500 万投资者在线交流，一起探索投资的智慧，听众朋友们大家好，我是主播匪石-34，今天分享的稿件名字叫做投资吃功夫，来自于陈嘉禾。投资这个工作，看起来没什么门槛，只要有张身份证、能开个投资账户，是人都能做。但是，这个看似“谁都能做”的工作，却也最吃功夫。要不然，这个世界上的钱岂不是太好赚了。“吃功夫”这三个字最早出自何处，现在已经不可考证。但是，在武术、也就是中国功夫中，“吃功夫”是练武之人的必须修炼。记得南怀瑾先生曾经说过，一个人练功夫练得多了，走路举止都会变得不一样。而对于那些久历江湖的人，一看别人走路的姿势，就大概会知道对方练的是太极、少林还是八极。（注：八极拳是一种传统武术，以拳法刚猛著称，自古有“文有太极安天下，武有八极定乾坤”之说。相比于少林拳与太极拳，现代人知道八极拳的不多。）这是因为功夫练得多了，本门武术用力的方法，早就已经融入行为举止之中，因此有经验的人，一望即知 对于投资来说，事情也是一样。投资看似简单，实则包罗万象。市场上有成千上万个股票、基金、债券、衍生品可供选择，到底买哪一个、卖哪一个？什么样的投资是有价值的，什么样是坑人的？这个股票好，那么剩下几千个股票里有没有比它更好的？没有十年八年沉浸市场的苦功夫，是很难对这些问题做出回答的。记得有一次，我在看海通证券港股的股票，看到数据软件上标注的股息率大概是8%左右。正好我的客户经理来拜访，问我“你在使用我们数据终端的时候有碰到什么问题吗？”我说你看，你们这个海通证券的股息率应该算错了啊，应该是4%到5%，怎么会是8%呢？他说你怎么知道是4%到5%、不是8%？我说我记得这些公司大概的分红数字和股票价格，如果有一个公司股息率达到8%，我不会不记得的，估计是你们算错了。打开公司年报一看，果然是数据终端计算错误。把分红数据搞对是第一步，而分红数据到底代表什么意义，则是第二步。一般来说，上市公司肯分红往往是好事，意味着上市公司肯拿出真金白银回馈投资者。但是，如果上市公司的业绩乏善可陈，同时又拿出大笔现金分红，而同时恰巧这个上市公司的控股股东又持有大比例的股权，那么这个分红的目的到底是回馈股东、还是回馈占控股地位的大股东，则是需要具体问题具体分析。而如何分析，就是体现投资者功夫的时候了。投资的功夫常常来自于对细节的理解，而对细节的理解来自于日常的积累。当然，人不是机器，像之前那个例子一样，永远记住每个投资的数字是不可能的，我当时也只是恰巧碰到自己熟悉的数字而已。但是，对于一些通用的规则，投资者是必须加以了解的。比如说，我曾经看到不少投资者，把公募基金和私募基金的长期业绩放在一起做比较，说某某公募基金过去5年业绩如何、某某私募基金过去5年业绩如何，因此这两个基金业绩对比如何，所以应该买某个基金。殊不知，公募基金和私募基金的业绩，是不能简单对比的。这种不可对比，主要体现在两个方面。首先，同样的业绩并不一定代表同样的投资回报。在中国市场，公募基金的净值比较简单，反映的是扣完管理费、托管费等一系列费用以后的业绩。而私募基金的净值则比较混乱，有的是体现没有扣费用的净值，有的是体现扣完费用以后的净值。因此，私募基金与公募基金同样的业绩，并不一定意味着基金经理的扣费以前的投资回报（也就是代表投资水平的衡量数据）是完全一样的。其次，对于同样的净值，私募和公募持有者拿到手的钱也不一定一样。公募基金的净值体现的是扣完所有费用以后的净值，讲究的是“所见即所得”，净值增长了多少投资者就会赚到多少。但是，私募基金如果体现的是扣费以前的业绩，那么投资者拿到手的钱，在交完各种费用以后，就会少于这个业绩。因此，从持有者的投资回报角度来说，公募基金和私募基金也是不可以简单做比较的，甚至私募基金与私募基金之间，基于扣费条款的不同，也不能简单比较。对于那些不明就里的投资者，他们也许不明白不同基金之间的数据差别。而对于功夫下得深的投资者，却一眼就能看明白基金中的骗局。在2008年全球金融危机中，最大的一个基金丑闻，就是美国的“麦道夫案”。在2008年以前，作为纳斯达克交易所的前主席，伯纳德·麦道夫（Bernard L. Madoff）管理了多年基金。他的基金一直给投资者带来稳定而不俗的投资回报，因此规模很大，投资者众多。但是，这个基金却是一个彻头彻尾的庞氏骗局：基金并没有真正赚到那么多钱，投资者多年拿到的所谓“投资回报”，只不过是后来投资者投入的本金而已。在2008年全球金融危机中，随着大量投资者赎回基金份额，麦道夫的庞氏骗局终于撑不下去了。基金最终宣告垮台，投资者损失了数百亿美金，而麦道夫也被判入狱150年，并于2021年死在狱中。不过，麦道夫的骗局并非无人识破。早在骗局败露的多年以前，美国一些专业的投资者，就指出“根据麦道夫公开发表的对投资的看法、以及市场每年的变动情况，他不可能年年取得如此稳定而高额的投资回报。”可惜，在投资上肯下功夫仔细分析的人毕竟是少数，也没多少人了解每年的资产价格走势，以及持某一投资风格的基金经理当年应该获得多少投资回报、实际又获得了多少投资回报、这两者之间有没有异常的差额。这正所谓只知其然、不知其所以然，只知道基金经理给自己赚了钱、不知道基金经理是怎么赚的钱。说到看数据，我想起来有一些老分析师，对财务报表数据的详知程度，让我自愧不如。有位财务功夫深的分析师曾经给我表演过一个技能，只看三张财务报表、不看公司名字，根据财务数据的特性，结合商业社会的环境，就能猜出公司是做什么细分行业的。如此了解财务报表的投资者，看来是不太容易被一些不良上市公司的财务伎俩欺骗了。说了这么多，投资中所吃的功夫，究竟来自哪里？这所谓的“功夫”，来自于投资者日常对资本市场、商业社会细致的观察与思考，来自于投资者对资本市场瞬息万变的信息的准确感知。聪明的大脑加上细致的感知结合在一起，就能铸造最有功夫的投资者。投资中的功夫给投资者带来盈利、避免亏损，而历史上观察入微的功夫，则可以让君王们赢得战争、避免杀身之祸。这里，就让我们来看一个春秋战国时期的小故事。说起春秋战国，许多人都不陌生。但是，春秋和战国这两个历史时期，是以“三家分晋”这一历史事件作为划分，则是不少人都不太清楚的了。在春秋末期，中原大国晋国国内，有四大家势力：智、赵、魏、韩。智家势力最大，有一次智家首领智伯，带领韩魏两家伐赵。三家伐赵，赵家自然势力不济。战争打到最后关头，赵家主力所在的晋阳城，被智、韩、魏三家联军团团围住。三家放水淹城，赵家军队誓死抵抗，不肯投降。智伯于是找韩魏两家的首领开会，商讨对策。散会以后，智家的谋臣絺疵正好进会场，在门口和离开的韩魏两家的首领打了个照面。进来以后，絺疵对智伯说，“韩、魏必反矣。”韩魏两家一定和赵家勾结，要里应外合干掉我们智家了。智伯不解，问你怎么知道这个的？絺疵说，今天我们智家势力最大，以自己强大的势力胁迫韩魏两家攻赵，赵家灭亡，韩魏两家必然觉得自己是下一个倒霉的。而我们已经和韩魏两家约好，城破之日三分其地，现在城中弹尽粮绝，眼看就要投降了，而我刚才碰到这两个人，他们脸上无喜色、有忧虑，这不是要反叛，又是要做什么呢？（夫从韩、魏之兵以攻赵，赵亡，难必及韩、魏矣。今约胜赵而三分其地，城不没者三版，人马相食，城降有日，而二子无喜志，有忧色，是非反而何？）絺疵聪明的判断，来自于对政治军事形势的充分了解，以及对细节的敏锐观察。可惜，智伯没有听从絺疵的建议，结果赵魏韩三家联手，突然反攻智家，“遂杀智伯，尽灭智氏之族。”灭了智家以后，赵魏韩三家联手瓜分晋国，这个春秋时代中原力量的核心大国就此覆灭。随着晋国的覆灭，尚存有上古君子之风的春秋时代正式结束，“捐礼让而贵战争，弃仁义而用诈谲”的战国时代正式到来：这也是中国历史上最为战乱频繁的时代之一。其实，无论是投资、还是战争中的谋划，没有人是真正全知全能的，也没有人能说，自己的功夫与生俱来、完美无瑕。正是有了对现有功夫的不满足，有了对更高水平的渴望与向往，一代代优秀的投资者们才能不断努力提高自己的投资水平，练就投资的真功夫。作者：陈嘉禾链接：https://xueqiu.com/1340904670/182708296来源：雪球著作权归作者所有。商业转载请联系作者获得授权，非商业转载请注明出处。风险提示：本文所提到的观点仅代表个人的意见，所涉及标的不作推荐，据此买卖，风险自负。

欢迎收听雪球和喜马拉雅联合出品的财经有深度，雪球，3500 万投资者在线交流，一起探索投资的智慧，听众朋友们大家好，我是主播匪石-34，今天分享的稿件名字叫做投资吃功夫，来自于陈嘉禾。投资这个工作，看起来没什么门槛，只要有张身份证、能开个投资账户，是人都能做。但是，这个看似“谁都能做”的工作，却也最吃功夫。要不然，这个世界上的钱岂不是太好赚了。“吃功夫”这三个字最早出自何处，现在已经不可考证。但是，在武术、也就是中国功夫中，“吃功夫”是练武之人的必须修炼。记得南怀瑾先生曾经说过，一个人练功夫练得多了，走路举止都会变得不一样。而对于那些久历江湖的人，一看别人走路的姿势，就大概会知道对方练的是太极、少林还是八极。（注：八极拳是一种传统武术，以拳法刚猛著称，自古有“文有太极安天下，武有八极定乾坤”之说。相比于少林拳与太极拳，现代人知道八极拳的不多。）这是因为功夫练得多了，本门武术用力的方法，早就已经融入行为举止之中，因此有经验的人，一望即知 对于投资来说，事情也是一样。投资看似简单，实则包罗万象。市场上有成千上万个股票、基金、债券、衍生品可供选择，到底买哪一个、卖哪一个？什么样的投资是有价值的，什么样是坑人的？这个股票好，那么剩下几千个股票里有没有比它更好的？没有十年八年沉浸市场的苦功夫，是很难对这些问题做出回答的。记得有一次，我在看海通证券港股的股票，看到数据软件上标注的股息率大概是8%左右。正好我的客户经理来拜访，问我“你在使用我们数据终端的时候有碰到什么问题吗？”我说你看，你们这个海通证券的股息率应该算错了啊，应该是4%到5%，怎么会是8%呢？他说你怎么知道是4%到5%、不是8%？我说我记得这些公司大概的分红数字和股票价格，如果有一个公司股息率达到8%，我不会不记得的，估计是你们算错了。打开公司年报一看，果然是数据终端计算错误。把分红数据搞对是第一步，而分红数据到底代表什么意义，则是第二步。一般来说，上市公司肯分红往往是好事，意味着上市公司肯拿出真金白银回馈投资者。但是，如果上市公司的业绩乏善可陈，同时又拿出大笔现金分红，而同时恰巧这个上市公司的控股股东又持有大比例的股权，那么这个分红的目的到底是回馈股东、还是回馈占控股地位的大股东，则是需要具体问题具体分析。而如何分析，就是体现投资者功夫的时候了。投资的功夫常常来自于对细节的理解，而对细节的理解来自于日常的积累。当然，人不是机器，像之前那个例子一样，永远记住每个投资的数字是不可能的，我当时也只是恰巧碰到自己熟悉的数字而已。但是，对于一些通用的规则，投资者是必须加以了解的。比如说，我曾经看到不少投资者，把公募基金和私募基金的长期业绩放在一起做比较，说某某公募基金过去5年业绩如何、某某私募基金过去5年业绩如何，因此这两个基金业绩对比如何，所以应该买某个基金。殊不知，公募基金和私募基金的业绩，是不能简单对比的。这种不可对比，主要体现在两个方面。首先，同样的业绩并不一定代表同样的投资回报。在中国市场，公募基金的净值比较简单，反映的是扣完管理费、托管费等一系列费用以后的业绩。而私募基金的净值则比较混乱，有的是体现没有扣费用的净值，有的是体现扣完费用以后的净值。因此，私募基金与公募基金同样的业绩，并不一定意味着基金经理的扣费以前的投资回报（也就是代表投资水平的衡量数据）是完全一样的。其次，对于同样的净值，私募和公募持有者拿到手的钱也不一定一样。公募基金的净值体现的是扣完所有费用以后的净值，讲究的是“所见即所得”，净值增长了多少投资者就会赚到多少。但是，私募基金如果体现的是扣费以前的业绩，那么投资者拿到手的钱，在交完各种费用以后，就会少于这个业绩。因此，从持有者的投资回报角度来说，公募基金和私募基金也是不可以简单做比较的，甚至私募基金与私募基金之间，基于扣费条款的不同，也不能简单比较。对于那些不明就里的投资者，他们也许不明白不同基金之间的数据差别。而对于功夫下得深的投资者，却一眼就能看明白基金中的骗局。在2008年全球金融危机中，最大的一个基金丑闻，就是美国的“麦道夫案”。在2008年以前，作为纳斯达克交易所的前主席，伯纳德·麦道夫（Bernard L. Madoff）管理了多年基金。他的基金一直给投资者带来稳定而不俗的投资回报，因此规模很大，投资者众多。但是，这个基金却是一个彻头彻尾的庞氏骗局：基金并没有真正赚到那么多钱，投资者多年拿到的所谓“投资回报”，只不过是后来投资者投入的本金而已。在2008年全球金融危机中，随着大量投资者赎回基金份额，麦道夫的庞氏骗局终于撑不下去了。基金最终宣告垮台，投资者损失了数百亿美金，而麦道夫也被判入狱150年，并于2021年死在狱中。不过，麦道夫的骗局并非无人识破。早在骗局败露的多年以前，美国一些专业的投资者，就指出“根据麦道夫公开发表的对投资的看法、以及市场每年的变动情况，他不可能年年取得如此稳定而高额的投资回报。”可惜，在投资上肯下功夫仔细分析的人毕竟是少数，也没多少人了解每年的资产价格走势，以及持某一投资风格的基金经理当年应该获得多少投资回报、实际又获得了多少投资回报、这两者之间有没有异常的差额。这正所谓只知其然、不知其所以然，只知道基金经理给自己赚了钱、不知道基金经理是怎么赚的钱。说到看数据，我想起来有一些老分析师，对财务报表数据的详知程度，让我自愧不如。有位财务功夫深的分析师曾经给我表演过一个技能，只看三张财务报表、不看公司名字，根据财务数据的特性，结合商业社会的环境，就能猜出公司是做什么细分行业的。如此了解财务报表的投资者，看来是不太容易被一些不良上市公司的财务伎俩欺骗了。说了这么多，投资中所吃的功夫，究竟来自哪里？这所谓的“功夫”，来自于投资者日常对资本市场、商业社会细致的观察与思考，来自于投资者对资本市场瞬息万变的信息的准确感知。聪明的大脑加上细致的感知结合在一起，就能铸造最有功夫的投资者。投资中的功夫给投资者带来盈利、避免亏损，而历史上观察入微的功夫，则可以让君王们赢得战争、避免杀身之祸。这里，就让我们来看一个春秋战国时期的小故事。说起春秋战国，许多人都不陌生。但是，春秋和战国这两个历史时期，是以“三家分晋”这一历史事件作为划分，则是不少人都不太清楚的了。在春秋末期，中原大国晋国国内，有四大家势力：智、赵、魏、韩。智家势力最大，有一次智家首领智伯，带领韩魏两家伐赵。三家伐赵，赵家自然势力不济。战争打到最后关头，赵家主力所在的晋阳城，被智、韩、魏三家联军团团围住。三家放水淹城，赵家军队誓死抵抗，不肯投降。智伯于是找韩魏两家的首领开会，商讨对策。散会以后，智家的谋臣絺疵正好进会场，在门口和离开的韩魏两家的首领打了个照面。进来以后，絺疵对智伯说，“韩、魏必反矣。”韩魏两家一定和赵家勾结，要里应外合干掉我们智家了。智伯不解，问你怎么知道这个的？絺疵说，今天我们智家势力最大，以自己强大的势力胁迫韩魏两家攻赵，赵家灭亡，韩魏两家必然觉得自己是下一个倒霉的。而我们已经和韩魏两家约好，城破之日三分其地，现在城中弹尽粮绝，眼看就要投降了，而我刚才碰到这两个人，他们脸上无喜色、有忧虑，这不是要反叛，又是要做什么呢？（夫从韩、魏之兵以攻赵，赵亡，难必及韩、魏矣。今约胜赵而三分其地，城不没者三版，人马相食，城降有日，而二子无喜志，有忧色，是非反而何？）絺疵聪明的判断，来自于对政治军事形势的充分了解，以及对细节的敏锐观察。可惜，智伯没有听从絺疵的建议，结果赵魏韩三家联手，突然反攻智家，“遂杀智伯，尽灭智氏之族。”灭了智家以后，赵魏韩三家联手瓜分晋国，这个春秋时代中原力量的核心大国就此覆灭。随着晋国的覆灭，尚存有上古君子之风的春秋时代正式结束，“捐礼让而贵战争，弃仁义而用诈谲”的战国时代正式到来：这也是中国历史上最为战乱频繁的时代之一。其实，无论是投资、还是战争中的谋划，没有人是真正全知全能的，也没有人能说，自己的功夫与生俱来、完美无瑕。正是有了对现有功夫的不满足，有了对更高水平的渴望与向往，一代代优秀的投资者们才能不断努力提高自己的投资水平，练就投资的真功夫。作者：陈嘉禾链接：https://xueqiu.com/1340904670/182708296来源：雪球著作权归作者所有。商业转载请联系作者获得授权，非商业转载请注明出处。风险提示：本文所提到的观点仅代表个人的意见，所涉及标的不作推荐，据此买卖，风险自负。

Des dizaines de milliards de dollars se sont évaporés ! Écoutez dans cet épisode l'histoire de la plus grande escroquerie financière de ces dernières décennies : le scandale Bernard L. Madoff. N'hésitez pas à partager ensuite ce podcast à votre entourage s'il vous a plu et à vous abonner (sans oublier d'activer les notifications). À la semaine prochaine ! Un podcast du Studio Biloba, présenté par Gabriel Macé.

In this episode, we'll find out how a Ponzi scheme is carried out in real life by going over the story of Bernard L Madoff, the man behind the biggest Ponzi scheme in history which affected thousands of investors. I hope you enjoy this episode

(0.5 General California MCLE)  In late 2008, Bernard L. Madoff admitted to orchestrating the longest and largest Ponzi scheme in U.S. history, a crime spanning decades and defrauding investors of over $20 billion. David Sheehan, Chief Counsel to the trustee for the Madoff victims, discusses the fraud of the century. Since December 2008, David has served as Chief Counsel to the Securities Investor Protection Act (SIPA) Trustee for the global liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (BLMIS), one of the largest financial frauds in U.S. history. As Chief Counsel, David oversees the unprecedented BLMIS liquidation on a global basis, managing more than 200 lawyers across the country as well as international legal teams, to investigate, unravel and reconstruct the Madoff fraud for the benefit of BLMIS customers with allowed claims. Under his leadership, more than 1,000 lawsuits were filed in December 2010, involving approximately 4,000 defendants worldwide and seeking tens of billions of dollars in asset recovery.

(0.5 General California MCLE)  In late 2008, Bernard L. Madoff admitted to orchestrating the longest and largest Ponzi scheme in U.S. history, a crime spanning decades and defrauding investors of over $20 billion. David Sheehan, Chief Counsel to the trustee for the Madoff victims, discusses the fraud of the century. Since December 2008, David has served as Chief Counsel to the Securities Investor Protection Act (SIPA) Trustee for the global liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (BLMIS), one of the largest financial frauds in U.S. history. As Chief Counsel, David oversees the unprecedented BLMIS liquidation on a global basis, managing more than 200 lawyers across the country as well as international legal teams, to investigate, unravel and reconstruct the Madoff fraud for the benefit of BLMIS customers with allowed claims. Under his leadership, more than 1,000 lawsuits were filed in December 2010, involving approximately 4,000 defendants worldwide and seeking tens of billions of dollars in asset recovery.

Episode summary: A short summary of Clause a smart contract creation platform, as well as an interview with Head of Revenue at Clause, Parsa Pezeshki, and Diana Stern, Lawyer and Legal Innovation Designer on the IncuBaker team at BakerHostetler.Episode transcript (What does Clause do?):Let’s start with the basics, what is a smart contract? O.K., so exact definitions vary here depending on exactly who you feel like talking to, but typically this means something like an automatic self-executing contract, where the terms of the contract are written as a series of rules a computer can follow. These contracts are often stored on a blockchain, but that doesn’t have to be the case, they could be just saved on your company’s network.And why would you use them? The same reason you’d automate anything else really. Being able to automate the execution and management of obligations in your contracts will save you time, reduce execution error and provide improved data.Specifically what Clause is offering us here is a software tool that makes it easier for you to create those smart contracts, think of it as kind of like Microsoft Word but for smart contracts. Usefully Clause realised early on that codifying entire contracts would be difficult to do because in many cases the grey areas of contracts just do not translate into hard and fast rules that a computer can follow. Because of this Clause emphasises using their tool to create smart clauses, which you can then overlay on top of your human language contract rather than creating the entire contract digitally, this allows your to partially automate the obligations which are more clear cut.Other than just writing those smart clauses, the platform also helps you to manage some of those contract actions with a growing list of integrations to external tools, things like Slack, Stripe, Docusign and more. Allowing you to automate payments, communications or even just do data entry to your other systems.This may still be a little abstract to understand for some though, so let’s do a quick example.Imagine your business has licensed some cloud based software, and as part of that contracts the vendor has an SLA to maintain 99% software availability uptime, if that is not achieved there is a partial refund. Using Clause you could create a smart clause that measured the availability of that website and if it fell below 99% automatically trigger the appropriate refund be sent to your bank account. Episode transcript (Who should use Clause?):As far as legal technologies go, smart contracts are certainly a more nascent one, so it is worth posing the question who should start using this?As with most enterprise technology there is some initial effort to implement the tool. So you need to make sure the benefits will offset the effort.I’d suggest that organisations where there are complex contracts that require high touch management, over a long period of time, would be a good fit as there is a greater opportunity to automate transactions over that contract life. Likewise if you have high number of standard but single transaction contracts that could be good too.In order to benefit from the really endless list of things you could do with smart clauses it does help (although is not totally essential) if you are an organisation that already has some good data to work with (supply chain for example), as the smart clauses have to make decisions based on something. It can also really help if you have access to a good internal IT team, because the existing integrations that Clause provides while good, are not likely to cover off every system that you want Clause to integrate with. Correction: Diana Stern's full title is 'Lawyer and Legal Innovation Designer' on the IncuBaker team at BakerHostetler not 'Product Designer' as stated in the episodeAbout Clause:Clause is the leading provider of smart legal contracting technology, enabling users to add Smart Clause® provisions to turn their existing legal agreements into “living documents” that integrate with enterprise software systems and blockchain networks. Companies in industries as diverse as supply chain, insurance, telecom, financial services, retail, and others can use Clause to automate compliance with legally binding contract obligations, reducing operating costs and minimizing revenue leakage. The Clause platform also provides real-time visibility about the contract performance of partners, suppliers, customers, and other counterparties. Connected Contracting® functionality from Clause can be accessed via a web application or the Clause API. Clause’s Smart Clause® technology is a driver of the DocuSign Agreements CloudTM. Clause also established the Accord Project with leading law firms, standards bodies, and technology organizations to develop the foundations of smart legal contracts and distributed ledger applications for transactions. For more information, please visit www.clause.io and contact sales@clause.io.About BakerHostetler:Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups – Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax – the firm has nearly 1,000 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com.About Legaltech Tapas:Legaltech Tapas is a regular podcast that serves up bite sized summaries of the latest legal tools, what they do, and why you might use them. Each episode discusses a different legal tool, and includes an interview with a guest from that company so you can hear directly from the horses mouth why you should be using their product. Get on the email list at legaltechtapas.substack.com

El año 2008 fue verdaderamente espantoso para la economía mundial, pero como el destino tiene un sentido fuerte del drama, terminó en la nota más alta posible. Bernard L. Madoff, reputado genio financiero, ex-presidente del Nasdaq, que a través de su magia en Wall Street hacía millonarios a sus clientes, fue revelado como el centro de una estafa multimillonaria. Se descubrió que en lugar de hacer negocios con el dinero de sus clientes, hacía un esquema de Ponzi bastante sencillo. Esquema de Ponzi que terminó siendo un agujero negro por el cual se fueron 65000 millones de dólares. Inclusive algunos dicen que es más dinero del que se perdió con Ivar Kreuger. ¿Cómo ocurrió esto? ¿Cómo pudo el hombre más prestigioso de Wall Street ser un fraude sin que nadie lo sospechara nunca? Acompáñennos mientras corremos el velo de Madoff: el estafador más grande del siglo XXI. Fuentes/Textos - AX, Joseph. (2013) Fake trades and a fridge used in Madoff fraud -witness. Reuters. - HENRIQUES, Diana B. (2015) Bernie Madoff’s Essential Man. New York Times. - HENRIQUES, Diana B. (2011) The Wizard of Lies: Bernie Madoff and the Death of Trust. Times books. ASIN B004OA6402. - HENRIQUES, Diana B. (2009) Madoff Suits Add Details About Fraud. New York Times. - GELLES, David. TETT, Gillian. (2011) From behind bars, Madoff spins his story. Financial Times. Fuentes/Podcasts - FISHMAN, Steve. (2017) Ponzi Supernova. Audible Originals. Fuentes/Sitios web - Wikipedia Música, en órden de aparición: El tema de la Tortulia es una versión de Caravan por Oleg Zobachev. El tema original es de Duke Ellington.

She was my partner in crime. Farnoosh recently hosted her own show on CNBC. She also has a super popular podcast. And she’s a successful book author and all around writer. But to me she’s more than that. From 2006 to 2008 we did videos together every day. We would meet on Wall Street, a video guy would tape us talking about whatever we wanted to talk about, and then we’d send that video out onto the interwebs. The day the first iphone came out we went to the Apple flagship store near Central Park. We interviewed the people who were waiting on line all night. A homeless guy started to pick on Farnoosh. Not that I am so brave but I didn’t want to seem unmanly so I stood in between the man and Farnoosh and asked him to please go away. He lifted me up and threw me to the ground. And then he went away. That was a fun story that I wanted to share. But more...Farnoosh is a textbook example of how a career can be made and be a success. She had a fulltime job learning skills she loved and then mastered: financial markets, writing, video, multimedia, communication, and the business of business. While at the full time job, she wrote a book on the markets: YOU’RE SO MONEY. From that, she no longer needed thestreet.com and diversified her sources of income by writing for many outlets, going on various TV shows, starting her own show, writing more, starting a successful and profitable podcast, and many other activities. And ten years later, we still find each other doing videos together or podcasts, or articles, or whatever. Building a career is like knitting a tapestry. It’s small thread by small thread. It takes years. It becomes beautiful. And it’s something you can fall into when it’s done for comfort and security. That tapestry becomes your network. A career is not what you created today, but the networks you built up today that will create unexpected opportunities for you ten, fifteen, twenty years later. As an example: I just did a deal with a friend of mine I began working with twenty years ago. Every day I see these opportunities. And I’m horrible at networking. Farnoosh isn’t. But there’s another reason I wanted Farnoosh on my podcast. Farnoosh is great at interviewing. And I wanted her to interview me. I find when I am a guest on other people’s podcasts I always find new ways to say the things I want to express, new ways to say what I’ve learned from my guests and my experiences. Who better to interview me than the person who has been interviewing me for almost a dozen years. “I came prepared,” she told me. Because she wanted to find out what you don’t see on Google... Here’s what we talked about: The rise of entrepreneurship and the rise of “gurus.” Farnoosh asked me, “Who should people trust?” But really, it doesn’t matter. Anytime you “study” entrepreneurship, it means you’re not DOING entrepreneurship. It’s great to have ideas. And it’s fine to read one business books (TOPS), but then that’s it. Get in the mud and starting doing. - listen at 7 minutes Farnoosh asked me, “Do you remember the first time you used the internet?”  It was before the web. I logged into a news group and could talk to people from Norway about Star Wars. Besides the phone, it was the first time I spoke to someone without being in the same room…  It was 1986. And then the web started. Hypertext came in. And I thought it would be used for storytelling. But then it became huge for commerce. Then she asked me, “What’s next?” - listen at 19 minutes Mentorship and finding your inner circle - listen at 25 minutes Evolution, willpower and the access economy - listen at 36 minutes My daily schedule (the morning is my “maker” hours, in the evening I manage several businesses and at night I have fun. I do comedy.) - listen at 38 minutes Is it better to focus on one thing and enjoy the subtleties of what it takes to be the best in the world at something? Or diversify? I struggle with this. Farnoosh said she bought the book, “The One Thing.” Because she wanted to get focussed. “I bought it and never finished it,” she said. The irony… she got busy doing “other” things. But maybe the other things takes us off our path, out of our delusions and shift us into doing more fulfilling learning curves. - listen at 43 minutes The story of “lucky Lisa.” That’s Farnoosh’s nickname for the friend who helped me get rid of all of my belongings - listen at 53 minutes “What about dating?” Farnoosh wondered if dating is weird for me. Because I have no home. And then we talked about renting vs owning. I used to believe in renting. But now I just borrow. It’s part of the new access economy. We live in a world of access (and Airbnb). But I eventually answer her question about dating, too. - listen at 59 minutes Then we talked about money. “If you couldn’t pass on any money to your kids and all you could pass on was investment strategies, rules, a portfolio, what would it be?” - listen at 1 hour and 5 minutes “Do you like talking about politics?” she asked… - listen at 1 hour and 10 minutes “Did you vote?” No. And I don’t think it matters. Here’s why. Saying it’s your “civil responsibility” to vote is not true. I agree we all have a civil duty. I do mine by writing 300 articles a year, giving talks, doing 100 podcasts a year and giving it all away. You get to decide how you fulfil your this civil duty. If you choose voting, that’s fine. But I don’t. I don’t want to outsource my contribution. We started debating - listen at 1 hour and 11 minutes Hear the story of the time I went to Bernie Madoff and was turned away. He said, “The last thing I need is to see the name Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC on the front page of the Wall Street Journal” - listen at 1 hour and 19 minutes How to get into TV - listen at 1 hour and 22 minutes AND the “choose yourself” method for getting into TV (how to get past the gatekeepers) - listen at 1 hour and 27 minutes See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.