Thanks for digging out that article. Putting hard numbers to the extent and length of Sachdeva's embezzlement is quite breath-taking. How anyone can feel that they deserve that much money or be that greedy is beyond comprehension. She's got to be mentally unwell on some level just to perpetrate that level of fraud or am I being naive?

That must have been some extremely inventive bookmaking on her part. I guess 'the recession' has become the new catch-all excuse to replace 'terrorism' for irrational and egregious actions.

How anyone can feel that they deserve that much money or be that greedy is beyond comprehension. She's got to be mentally unwell on some level just to perpetrate that level of fraud or am I being naive?

I worked as a relationship manager in the private banking arena here in Cayman for 5 years. Our minimum assets under management requirement to take on a new client was $10 million. Most of the trusts were in the $20-$50 million range, and one held nearly $20 billion of investment assets.

I never met or talked on the phone to a single client who was what I'd describe as "happy" or "contented" with his or her level of wealth. It didn't really matter what age they were, what country they were from (all over the world), what their source of wealth was (whether earned directly via personal business interests, indirectly via investments, or inherited). They all wanted more. That was essentially my job: to make extremely wealthy but never satisfied people even wealthier. While it was exciting at times, eventually it got old.

It's amazing what big money can do to people. In this woman's case, she was already prone this sort of "the more the merrier" mentality, so the fact that she got away with it for so long just fed into her ego, greed, and sense of entitlement. In her mind, it was her company because she was the one in charge and Michael Koss was a big idiot in her eyes.

It's interesting how she created all sorts of diversions from having to face the truth of what her life really was: a complete and utter fraud. My guess is that none of these charity causes actually meant a thing to her. It was all about being seen and appreciated/valued by the high society folks she like to roll with, as being so "generous" (with her employer's money, of course).

In summary. Never underestimate people's greed.

I never met or talked on the phone to a single client who was what I'd describe as "happy" or "contented" with his or her level of wealth. It didn't really matter what age they were, what country they were from (all over the world), what their source of wealth was (whether earned directly via personal business interests, indirectly via investments, or inherited). They all wanted more. That was essentially my job: to make extremely wealthy but never satisfied people even wealthier. While it was exciting at times, eventually it got old.

Although I don't work with people with assets in that league, I do work with several clients with a net worth of 1 - 10,000,000. Have to say that what Mr McManus said is sadly true. I have only met one person of means whom seemed satisfied with what he had. I think it is human nature to want what you don't have. Greed! Sadly, she chose embezzlement as a means to acquire what she didn't have.

Edited January 19, 201016 yr by Dusty Chalk
fixed quote

Isn't that quality kind of what made them wealthy in the first place?

I dunno, some people do it for the challenge and satisfaction more than anything else. My parent's are "of means" (entirely self earned) but I would argue that greed really isn't in their vocab. I strive to be much the same.

Isn't that quality kind of what made them wealthy in the first place?

No argument. It seems to be a primary motovation for the drive to succeed and amass wealth. I'm not addressing the philosophical argument of "how much is enough?" which has no clear answer and means different things to different people.

However, when she and the Bernie Madoff's of the world believe they're above the law, they've gone too far.

Part of it for me, as well, was the fact that I was in an advisory capacity. Thus, by the very nature of my relationship with these clients, I was talking with them about their money and what they wanted to do with it. Not just new investment opportunities, but how to structure their affairs, reviewing the performance of their portfolios, etc. They never exerted any huge pressures on us nor did they show distrust in our advice, but there was always this sense that they expected nothing but upside. Even though they willingly took on risk, they were always surprised when the coin didn't turn up heads 100% of the time. I got the impression that it's all a huge game for them. All about winning.

I find it rather sad that you guys think that greed (which is not self interest) makes the world go round. It certainly drives a lot of people but I don't think the majority is this way.

I know a lot of people that could earn more but chose not to because they didn't enjoy it (ex lawyers, from the good times).

However, when she and the Bernie Madoff's of the world believe they're above the law, they've gone too far.

True enough, and that's the real issue here. That, and the fact that the legal system is far too soft on these people. Like anything, they can buy their way out of it with money, even when it's not their own.

I find it rather sad that you guys think that greed (which is not self interest) makes the world go round. It certainly drives a lot of people but I don't think the majority is this way.

I choose to interpret what they're saying as something other than this. I don't think they're saying it makes the world go round, I'm hearing that the hunger for more money/material acquisitions (aka greed) is what made them do things to feed that hunger -- aka, acquire or make more money/material goods. That's not necessarily the same thing as making the world go round, although it's a large part of it.

I've always said that I enjoy being frustrated, because frustration is what makes the world go round. Frustration with the status quo -- politically, financially, socially, whateverally -- be it yours or someone else's, depending on how self-interested you are, but it's frustration. Yeah, sometimes the desire to make money ends up badly (as it did with her case), but sometimes it causes investors to invest in good things (as with -- hopefully -- at least some of Wayne's clients).

[/soapbox]

I think it more or less is greed that makes the modern world go 'round, unfortunately. I'm sure you'll find people who think greed isn't the primary factor, and you'll also find people who think that greed being the primary factor is a good thing.

All civilization is just an effort to impress the opposite sex... and sometimes the same sex.

My interpretation is:

The only people who get beyond a certain level of wealth because wealth is what matters to them. Once you hit a level where you can't easily spend the money you've acquired, continuing to acquire seems to suggest that the acquisition is the goal.

Hunt, H. L. quote - Money is just a way of keeping score....

And what do you do with it, once you have amassed more than you could spend in a lifetime. e.g. Oprah.

All civilization is just an effort to impress the opposite sex... and sometimes the same sex.

This, too, but I guess it could be said to be a type of greed, too ;p

Misanthropy consumes me sometimes, especially when thinking about things like what's happened with Koss.

I find it rather sad that you guys think that greed (which is not self interest) makes the world go round. It certainly drives a lot of people but I don't think the majority is this way.

I know a lot of people that could earn more but chose not to because they didn't enjoy it (ex lawyers, from the good times).

I agree that not everyone is driven by "greed" but money is something that affects different people in different ways, much like alcohol and drugs. There are those who become addicted to the accumulation of wealth, material things and the status it brings, such that money (and closely related things/concerns) becomes the central, driving force in their lives.

In my experience, people of "ordinary" means (which might also include highly successful professionals and business owners who are comfortable financially but are not filthy rich) are more likely to be satisfied with their lot in life than the rare few who are exceptionally wealthy. The average to above successful person tends to lead a more balanced life, and doesn't worry (or focus almost exclusively) on money matters.

The ultra wealthy tend to be less trusting (always concerned that someone will use them for their money, no doubt borne out by personal experiences) and thus often have a more limited number of friends in their inner circle. They seem surprised when you treat them like anyone else you might meet on the street by showing them that you're comfortable with them, person to person, and are not intimidated by their stature.

I agree that the majority of people are not this way, but almost all of our clients were extremely guarded and suspicious. Some of them are more edgy than others, of course. But it's as though their wealth creates more burdens than joys and they cannot live "normal" lives unless they go somewhere on vacation where they can blend into a crowd where nobody knows them. Interesting characters though.

My interpretation is:

The only people who get beyond a certain level of wealth because wealth is what matters to them. Once you hit a level where you can't easily spend the money you've acquired, continuing to acquire seems to suggest that the acquisition is the goal.

This is a really good way of looking at it. When the endless accumulation of wealth continues to be the primary motivator in their lives, the single thing that they're "worried" about or can get "excited" about (the game of money making just for the sake of it), they tend to become rather sad, isolated and lonely characters. Howard Hughes was a good example of this, although he had a lot of other things going on in his confused brain.

$31 million over five years is almost $1700 a day.

Given she started out slow and built up, that's a

lot of shopping. Don't tell me her husband didn't know

something was up.

I find it rather sad that you guys think that greed (which is not self interest) makes the world go round. It certainly drives a lot of people but I don't think the majority is this way.

I know a lot of people that could earn more but chose not to because they didn't enjoy it (ex lawyers, from the good times).

This is probably a good moment to pause for a second to cherish people like Chris' parents and my uncle, who was not only rich, but got that way by being CEO of a major corporation, and was perhaps the most decent, humble man I've ever known.

Because greed is universal. It's ironic that the people who want for nothing are more likely to be consumed by it than those who really have need. But it's in all of us. The trick is to keep it down to a dull roar.

Given the right circumstances, most people will let greed override common sense, self interest or morality. That's how come confidence games work. And boy do they work! Think about the last decade. A big chunk of our economy had become a giant pyramid scheme. It was pretty obvious, but a whole society went along. A crime of astounding proportions, committed by so many people against so many victims that a lot of people would argue it shouldn't even be thought of as a "crime".

Most of us will never doing anything much greedier/stupider/more self destructive than clicking on a "free vacation" ad and getting a computer virus for our efforts. But what has me freaked is that nowadays when somebody breaks free of the inhibitions that keep most of us trapped in mediocrity (and in a more positive light enable us to function as an orderly, sort of moral society) the scale of things has just gone off the chart. Here we have a petty embezzler who hit a company for $31 MILLION(!?) in credit card charges. Your standard operational grade Ponzi artist these days doesn't get on the front page of the newspaper unless his take is BILLIONS. (I kid you not. We've had two here locally in the past few months. The guy who took $1.4 billion was big news. The guy who took a bit less than a half-billion never got off the local page.)

It's a creepy, weird world.

Former Koss executive pleads not guilty to embezzlement - JSOnline

Former Koss executive pleads not guilty to embezzlement - JSOnline

I'd advise her to do the same. She sounds guilty as hell, but the fucking government still needs to prove its case. But how on earth does her attorney let her show up dressed to the nines? Maybe that helps the mental illness defense in some way? If it does, I don't see it.

Maybe that helps the mental illness defense in some way?

Yup that's my impression. Trying to show that she can't not dress up, addiction, mental illness, blah blah blah.

Then I'd also advise her to piss all over the floor.

Oh, that's coming.