HashiriyaS14 wrote:That said, I really feel for the people who lost out in this scheme because it really and truly wasn't their fault. I'm sure it looked and seemed entirely legitimate, and it had been going on for decades. This wasn't bad investment decisions on the investors part, it was just out-and-out crime. Huge shame.
As do I, and it may have looked legit, however there were many, many red flags, in which the investors chose to ignore in pure stupidity. In hindsight we can call it stupidity because questions should have been coming up for years about the fund. As the saying goes, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
The purposed strategy used in the fund limits both its growth and fall, however it moves in tandem with the market. So to guarantee a 12% return every year, if the market was up, how much could have the fund made without the purposed strategy and why didn't it fall when the market was previously down?
All of the old people in retirement, I feel deeply for them, I do. They entrusted their life savings to this man and it's poof, gone. Everything. They just became part of the generation of "Hello, welcome to Wal-Mart," without ever having to previously. However, if they were truly smart investors, they would've been more invested in fixed-income investments instead of stocks, which seems to be what the fund said it was invested in mainly. They shouldn't have been exposed to the risk of the stock market at that point in their lives. This goes to show again that you don't put all of your eggs in one basket and why you get two or three financial opinions. My girlfriend's company does its retirement with two different companies, and in starting your 401(k), you have the option of choosing 100% in either or 50/50. I made sure she went 50/50 to minimize risk as one company invests different than the other.