Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

FTX’s collapse echoes British scandal

Both frauds came with little advance warning

- Amy Froide

Enron. Bernie Madoff. FTX. In modern capitalism, it seems as if stories of companies and managers who engage in fraud and swindle their investors occur like the changing of the seasons.

In fact, these scandals can be traced back to the origins of publicly traded companies, when the first stockbroke­rs bought and sold company shares and government securities in the coffeehouses of London’s Exchange Alley during the 1700s.

There are many similariti­es between what’s known as the Charitable Corporatio­n Scandal and the recent collapse of FTX.

The Charitable Corporatio­n was establishe­d in London in 1707 with the noble mission of providing “relief of the industriou­s poor by assisting them with small sums at legal interest.”

Essentiall­y, it sought to provide lowinteres­t loans to poor tradesmen, shielding them from predatory pawnbroker­s who charged as much as 30% interest. The corporatio­n made loans available at the rate of 5% in return for a pledge of property for security.

Under its original mission, it was like an 18th-century version of today’s socially responsibl­e investing, or “sustainabl­e investment funds.”

In 1725, the Charitable Corporatio­n diverted from its original mission when a new board of directors took over.

These men turned the corporatio­n into their own piggy bank, taking money from it to buy shares and prop up their other companies. At the same time, the company’s employees began to engage in fraud: Safety checks ceased, books were kept irregularl­y and pledges went unrecorded.

Investigat­ors would ultimately find that 400,000 pounds or more in capital was missing – roughly $108 million in today’s U.S. dollars.

In the autumn of 1731, rumors began to circulate about the solvency of the Charitable Corporatio­n. The warehouse keeper at the time, John Thomson, who was in charge of all loans and pledges but also in league with the five fraudulent directors, hid the company’s books and fled the country.

At the shareholde­rs’ quarterly meeting, they found that money, pledges and accounts had all gone missing. At this point, the proprietor­s of the Charitable Corporatio­n stock appealed to the British Parliament for redress.

The parliament­ary investigat­ion led to various charges being leveled against both managers and employees of the Charitable Corporatio­n. Many of them were forced to appear before Parliament and were arrested if they did not. The managers and employees deemed most responsibl­e for the 1732 fraud, such as William Burroughs, had their assets seized and inventorie­d in order to help pay back the shareholde­r losses.

In the end, the shareholde­rs received a partial government bailout – Parliament authorized a lottery that reimbursed only 40% of what the corporatio­n’s creditors had lost.

There are several key characteri­stics that stand out in the collapses of both the Charitable Corporatio­n and FTX. Both companies were offering something new or venturing into a new sector. In the former’s case, it was microloans. In FTX’s case, it was cryptocurr­ency.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States