Former TigerDirect President Indicted In $230 Million Laundering Scheme 109
McGruber writes "Carl Fiorentino, known to many slashdotters for his regular hyperbole-filled emails advertising 'unbelievable' blowout pricing on memory, storage, other components, and overclocker specials, has been indicted in New York federal court on seven counts of fraud and money laundering charges. Fiorentino allegedly took more than $7 million in bribes and kickbacks in exchange for steering more than $230 million in business to the Taiwanese and California companies that made the payments."
Throw the Book (Score:3)
Just throw the book at this guy. He's scum. This is precisely what's wrong with the corporations on our planet and there has to be some kind of accountability, not that it would do much good in convincing CEOs to play a fair game. It seems everyone is cutting corners these days.
That is NOT how you grow a brand.
Re:Throw the Book (Score:5, Insightful)
You're kidding right? Don't you know that every Fab manager in Asia does extra runs of chips under that table and sells them on the gray/black markets? Even large companies like Qualcomm know this, and they look the other way because they want the cheap chip production.
Every public company is operating against the interests of their common employees, and FOR the interests of their upper management / board of directors (and indirectly the stockholder). Know this and you will be less confused as your buying power is slowly eroded to nil.
Re: (Score:1)
You're kidding right? Don't you know that every Fab manager in Asia does extra runs of chips under that table and sells them on the gray/black markets? Even large companies like Qualcomm know this, and they look the other way because they want the cheap chip production.
Every public company is operating against the interests of their common employees, and FOR the interests of their upper management / board of directors (and indirectly the stockholder). Know this and you will be less confused as your buying power is slowly eroded to nil.
Sigh. From TFA:
Re: (Score:3)
Sigh. From TFA:
Yes, and everybody that has an American Express Corporate card uses their reward points only for business related activities, and when they visit a client and are offered lunch always politely refuses. Kickbacks exist from the janitor to the CEO. Either it's all okay or it's all bad.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Either it's all okay or it's all bad.
There is plenty of middle ground. Some places realize that some kinds of meetings will span meal times and that meals are included in some functions, so allow meals to be covered, with some cap on price, others allow small gifts up to a certain value to help with allowing samples and simple tools to be given. Others can allow more, but require things to be declared, so that if there is a problem it gets stopped right away and the interference is more clear. As long as things are open and known, it is a l
Re: (Score:2)
how is anyone surprised that the Type A personality was selfish?
Re: (Score:1)
There is NOTHING that will convince me at this point in the game that corporations are run for stockholders in *any* way, directly or indirectly.
Re: (Score:1)
It's a logical fallacy to assert something is okay because others are doing it. If something is done by EVERYONE, and the result is GOOD for society, then that action is morally good. If something is done by EVERYONE and the result is BAD, then that action is morally bad.
Stop buying things from public
Re:Throw the Book (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't about TigerMax doing anything; it's about an employee of TigerMax cheating his employer.
Re: (Score:2)
Just throw the book at this guy. He's scum. This is precisely what's wrong with the corporations on our planet and there has to be some kind of accountability, not that it would do much good in convincing CEOs to play a fair game. It seems everyone is cutting corners these days.
That is NOT how you grow a brand.
Don't be so quick to judge. You don't know the details of the case. I'm willing to bet you don't even know which Federal statues were allegedly violated. All you have are prosecutor's comments.
The feds have a 96% conviction rate in these types of cases. 90% of all their convictions are via plea deal. This is not because they are so good at finding criminals, but because many of the laws allegedly violated by these "scum" are so vague and wide-ranging that they are impossible to defend. Of the non-plea
so (Score:5, Interesting)
So he laundered 7 million in kickbacks from steering $240 million in business, not a $240 million dollar money laundering scheme. Too bad he's not HSBC, the only government authorized money launderer.
Re: (Score:1)
I didn't know HSBC was part of the Fed... Oh wait, which government are we talking about?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh wait, which government are we talking about?
Just call him Wile E. Cayote... (Score:1)
Super Genius-- gets $7mm in kickbacks, buys $8mm house... hmmm..... give me $7mm and I'm set for life, dammit.
Not surprising (Score:3)
Pretty much the norm these days, and not just in the US but everywhere. People in places of unbalanced power breaching the law. He will not do the kind of "time", as you or I, if found guilty.
Re: (Score:3)
yeah,,,i was in vegas recently and a homeless-looking guy was just pulling a 6-pack out of the cooler when a store employee grabbed him and called the cops. he hadnt even left the store yet. i actually walked over and offered to buy the beer for the guy just dont get him arrested. they would not let me 5 minutes later the cops come and arrest the guy...for what i still have no idea.
the point? that guy will probably do more time in jail then Carl will...oh yeah American justice sure.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
for what i still have no idea
Exactly, you have no idea. Here's the likely explanation: trespassing. The store is private property, and the guy has probably been told to stay out because of earlier incidents. If you've been formally told you're not allowed in the store, and come in anyway, that's trespass. And it is a crime, and you get arrested for it. And no, it's probably not going to mean jail time unless you are a real ass and just keep doing it over and over again.
Which has nothing to do with money laundering and the way it's
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
for what i still have no idea
Exactly, you have no idea. Here's the likely explanation: trespassing. ...
You're adding more conjecture to his conjucture? Interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
You're adding more conjecture to his conjucture? Interesting.
No, I'm pointing out a common reason for exactly what he witnessed, as opposed to his vague handwaving and comparing of two utterly unrelated things.
Re: (Score:3)
Quite unfair to the guy
Unless, as is very often in the case in retail settings - especially where packaged alchohol is sold, he'd been previously told that he wasn't allowed on the premises. That scenario makes subsequent arrival in the store trespass, immediately.
Let's say there's someone who comes to your front door and does stuff you don't like, on your property. You tell them to leave, and that the next time they set foot on your property, they'll be trespassing. If he shows up again, you can call the police and tell them
Re: (Score:3)
unrelated? really i was commenting on the post where the person said CF will probably not do any time in prison...my comment had to do with the way America's legal system is constructed nowadays where two men can both commit crimes, one for basically zero dollar damage and one for millions, yet the jail industrial complex will make the zero dollar one actually suffer in jail.
btw obviously i agree with the poster...CF will hire super lawyers and skip and thru the process...the homeless looking guy wont.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
On the off chance you are not just trolling...
The guy who sells you trucks works for a Ford dealer. The dealer pays him commission for selling their product. Nothing shady about that. He is acting in the best interest of his employer when he sells you a Ford truck.
This guy was not acting in the best interest of his employer. Rather than make supplier decisions based on the companies criteria, he was making them based on who paid him the most bribes. Even if you look at the kickbacks as some sort of vol
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I thought that was exactly what advertising/sales do.
maybe their prices will FINALLY come down then (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I have noticed that a lot of items are held in relatively low stock at th
Re: (Score:2)
I've also found the prices, with shipping, to be less than competitive. However, I also live 5 minutes away from a TD retail location, and their prices -- when shipping isn't part of the equation -- are consistently 10-15% cheaper than any other option in my region, whether online or brick and mortar.
Re: (Score:3)
So you're saying that you're sick of TigerDirect shipping more quickly than Newegg for slightly more money? It sounds to me like they're offering something that their competition isn't, and they're charging a little more for it.
I don't care either way - I switch between them both depending on who's cheaper for the component I'm buying - and I HAVE gotten stuff cheaper on TigerDirect than Newegg.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
you can pick up from the store that is part of the warehouse in Naperville il
Re: (Score:2)
Go to Naperville but IL 59 sucks at least it will be 3 lanes each way soon.
There are alternatives (Score:2)
Interstate 355 is a major one, otherwise County Farm rd. / Naper Blvd, or IL-25 is also a good option. I live near Winfield use Naper Blvd to get to H-mart for hippie food & stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
Winfield is nice shortcut to get on I-88. When I went to pick stuff up at tiger I hated the IL-59 slow downs.
Re: (Score:2)
If you live near that area then IMHO obviously Fry's Electronics (at finley + butterfield ) is a much better choice.
Re: (Score:2)
is there a easy way to see what is stock at that store?
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't tried, but the website (frys.com) said it will tell you if something is available in the store (vs. ship only) once you hit checkout.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that doesn't really explain it. he just laundered a a part of his profit margin, it's just tax evasion(if anything it was why their prices were comparable).
what explains is this: they got faster shipping so they still get your business even if they're not the cheapest.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Was I the only one? (Score:5, Interesting)
Was I the only one who always always found TigerDirect to be kind of sleazy? I mean, even back *years* ago, they always reminded me of those skeevy camera stores that are notorious for false advertising and bait-and-switch deals.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Ever since the early days, there has been a loud minority of people proclaiming that Tiger Direct is run by scammers. This reputation has kept me from ever buying anything from them. If these allegations are true, then maybe Tiger Direct does deserve that reputation.
Re: (Score:2)
These allegations have nothing to do with the company, it's customers, or any scam against it's customers. It is about an employee of the company who defrauded the company.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It's true. They don't even sell tigers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Was this back when Microsoft was getting sued for including a browser with their operating system?
Re: (Score:2)
They're semi-sleazy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, I always thought of them as extremely sleazy despite having zero corroboration. My brother buys from them all the time, the stuff comes in a very timely fashion and exactly as represented. One time, about 5 years ago, I even broke down and ordered a 500 watt modular power supply with 2 lighted fans and a bluish chrome finish for 20 bucks. I was sure there was a catch to this deal. Absolutely positive. A couple days later the power supply came, and it was super nice quality. It came with so many m
CEO (Score:2)
He'll never see the inside of a prison for his crimes.
Got busted, eh? (Score:1)
Used to be a SYX shareholder (Score:2)
Tigerdirect is the victim here (Score:2)
and the consumer to some extent... but of course the consumer could always just buy from Newegg.
Similar case involving Frys: company executive steers business to certain vendors in exchange for kickbacks [fugitive.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I find the picture in that article funny due to his frown, and the ad right below it to get the "smile you always dreamed of".
Re: (Score:2)
They should also jail (Score:1)
Whoever it is that makes those awful "Black Friday in April", "May Black Friday" etc etc ads.
I don't mind being notified about stuff on sale, but there is only one Black Friday, it's a specific event, and all the other idiotic ads just insult the intelligence of anyone who receives the emails (that, and the sales tend to suck).
Re: (Score:2)
there is only one Black Friday
Heh. "Black Friday" is a piece of marketing fluff that accidentally happened to catch on. Trying to lend it gravitas beyond that is just silly.
Re: (Score:2)
In case you're wondering... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes, the illusion of choice. It was found that over 99% of the subjects would accept it, provided that they thought they had a choice.
Like the US Governmental system.
OT: My LAST experience w/ TigerDirect (Score:3)
I was looking for a RAID enclosure for my little VM setup. What I got was a hard drive array (basically a port extender) with a RAID card thrown in. I went back to look at the advertisement to see how I got it wrong, and the ad used very deceptive wording about "additional items" included. Very shady and one of those transactions that evaporates any trust you might have in a vendor.
Re: (Score:2)
1 star that thing so nobody falls into it after you.
Not MOney Laundering (Score:2)
I'm no lawyer, and never played one on TV, but that doesn't sound like money laundering, but rather payola [thefreedictionary.com].
If I RTFA correctly, he received money from companies in exchange for steering business to them. Kind of like a beer company giving a bar a neon light or posters or other discount in exchange for trying to get their customers to buy that brand of beer...
Money laundering would be taking illegally gained funds and turning them into legal appearing funds by funneling them through (seemingly) legitimate bu
Re: (Score:2)
It's completely clear why this "steering" is illegal. I thought that's largely what sales WAS -- steering to company A over company B for reasons beyond simple differences in product quality or cost.
I have to believe that this goes on all the time, everywhere. I used to get free lunches and unsolicited trinkets from vendors all the time. I never changed my buying habits based on this, but maybe for $7 million I might.
I get why steering is undesirable from an economic perspective -- it's a huge economic
Re: (Score:2)
Oops, that should read "It's NOT completely clear..."
Re: (Score:2)
Of course there is harm. If a vendor is willing to offer rebates because of volume (nothing illegal about that), then that rebate money belongs to the company. The employee keeping the money (and not informing the company) is fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
At some point, while I agree it is shady and not an ideal practice, it kind of seems like it's illegal because business management doesn't like it or get a piece of it, not because it represents material harm.
The reason it is illegal is fiduciary responsibilty. What it boils down to is this: The people who own the company have hired this person to make business decisions which will maximize the profit (or maximize whatever specific metric was defined as his responsibility). When someone with a fiduciary responsibility takes a bribe, they are basically conspiring with the bribing entity to steal a money from the shareholders/business owner and taking a cut of that stolen money in the form of the bribe.
ie: Y
Re: (Score:2)
The assumption here is that the bribe is always paid by a company offering substantially above-market pricing for commodity products and that the price differential between fair market prices and bribery prices pays the bribe.
I would argue that this form of kickbacks is much less common and less likely to happen. There almost always is intense scrutiny of costs and substantive overpricing will almost always be noticed, especially on recurring products.
I think kickbacks are probably more common in situatio
Re: (Score:2)
In the situation where pricing is equal, it's hard to see where the crime is because the company doing the purchasing has nothing to gain or lose switching between vendors.
Even with equal pricing, it all boils down to the purchaser pocketing cash due to the company/shareholders.
So Company A offers to sell to you at $100, Company B offers to sell to you at $100.
A bidding war starts, and Company A cuts their price to $70 Company B also cuts their price to $70 but says if you pick them over Company A, they will give you, personally, $5 per unit purchased.
The ethical response is to turn down the $5/unit and instead purchase the widgets at $65/unit. The $5/unit is money which i
Same thing happened with Fry's back in '06 (Score:2)
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_11290227 [mercurynews.com]
The Fry's CEO accepted all sorts of kickbacks to try to pay down his gambling debts. As I recall, he was only caught when an employee happened to find some incriminating paperwork he threw in a trashcan....
which Taiwanese company? (Score:2)
The article doesn't say. Is that info Public?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
$7 million in bribes and kickbacks in exchange for steering [sales] to the companies
Isnt that called "advertising"?
Re:advertising (Score:2)
That's what I was thinking:
Dude gets paid for selling lots of stuff, news at eleven.
People who didn't sell stuff are angry because he got lots of money.
Deep thinkers say send rich dude to prison and complain about the common thief not getting a fair break.
---
Whatever.
(Not letting my not reading the article get in the way of forming an opinion)