Quote:
Originally Posted by MDFlyer
If true, that GWG is determined to be a Ponzi Scheme shouldn't the brokers, in my case Michael L Whitaker, be partly responsible to their clients? We did rely on these brokers/advisors to guide us but were left hanging when they knew, or should have known, GWG was in trouble.
(Cut and pasted from the original post) The information I have found says that this "GWG Was a Classic Ponzi Scheme"-Official Committee of Bondholders of GWG Holdings, Inc. The CEO transferred from the bondholders $258 million into his new company Beneficent. It stated that GWG used new bondholder funds to pay their monthly payouts to existing bondholders for years and they sold over $1 billion in L Bonds.
I also found that the company Michael works for New Bridge Securities is also under investigation over the GWG L Bonds.
|
What I have read is that GWG started "Robbing Peter to Pay Paul" about 5 years before the SEC started to investigate them. Which is a classic Ponzi scheme. In fact, GWG blames the SEC for bringing them down because they started an investigation.
How for the 5 years before the bankruptcy did this go unnoticed by SEC, New Bridge and Michael, isn't that their job.
I guess their commission trumped people's best interests.
What I find unbelievable, is Michael wants my parents and all his other clients is to trust the company that he knows is run by crooks. He states the company that GWG is part owner will be part of will be GWG saving grace, but the new company is owned by the same crooks. How does that even make sense?