[Questioneer]

Remember "Stratcap" folks. The organization made to funnel insider info into other nations where it would be profited off of, I believe JP Morgan or some other shady company was to be the financial backer.

Then the "terrorists" wikileaks helped expose it all.

Bonus snippet from the leak:

On Jul 23, 2011, at 11:41 PM, Don Kuykendall <[e-mail]> wrote:

"We blamed everything on the lawyers. The result will be a frustrating StratCap and Service agreement that you and Bruce will vomit over. So be it. George, Shea and I are on the same wave length and are willing to have loose ends in the contract to get the business deal done. The three of us have an understanding that goes beyond whatnots in the future that might happen. If we can't trust each other, then things are going to fail regardless what the contract reads. StratCap and STRATFOR are the same investment to Shea, George and me."

[1] http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/releasedate/2012-02-27-00-strat...

edit: I cannot for the life of me figure out why this would be down-voted. Was it the syntax, grammar? Was it highlighting one of Stratfor's own emails about StratCap and Stratfor being considered one and the same? The cultivation of insider info paid for, then 'laundered' offshore for for-profit use while those involved also get a cut of the profits?

Beuller?

edit edit: I would honestly appreciate input to whoever does the negative votes, sometimes sprees. In some instances in which I vote down myself I cannot fathom down-voting without adequately explaining why the to user.

[bradleysmith]

This post was certainly not worth a downvote, but the details are a little fuzzy. Perhaps it was the because your second sentence seems to assume nefarious intention on Stratfor's part. I'm upvoting, for the sake of discussion.

StratCap was an attempt by Stratfor to start their own hedge fund of sorts, funded by Shea Morenz, previously a regional director for Goldman Sachs.

Morenz, "proposed a new venture, StratCap, which would allow us to utilize the intelligence we were gathering about the world in a new but related venue-an investment fund. Where we had previously advised other hedge funds. We would now have our own, itself fully funded by Shea. Shea invested over $2 million in Stratfor and more in StratCap. In return he took a seat on Stratfor's board and a minority position in Stratfor, whose control remains in Don's and my hands. It was a good deal for Stratfor, a good deal for StratCap, and since the deal closed officially on August 1, we now have the task of doing what we all want-building Stratfor and StratCap." [1] email from Friedman to Stratfor employees

As I understand it, the deal never took flight, and caught a lot of clouded press after the leak.

I'm not sure what you mean by: >organization made to funnel insider info into other nations where it would be profited off of

Statfor deals with off-the-shelf OSINT available to you and me. StratCap was Stratfor's attempt to profit FROM a hedge fund "Where [they] had previously advised other hedge funds." [1]

If you have any info on StratCap having 'insider trading' intentions, I'd love to hear about it.

[1] - http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/2312421_re-fwd-labor-day-r...

[consonants]

This is easily the most insightful post in this thread, it is unfortunate that anyone downvoted you.

[Questioneer]

shrugs

Sorry for not fully elaborating on the subject as it is convoluted and mostly easily searchable with the keywords I've already listed.

To further discussion, what did you find insightful in context to this parent thread's topic? I can only begin to imagine the possibilities to access what is moderated and what is not. What is your opinions?

edit: How is consonants doing? I am a bit down at seeing the same actors in the news again doing their same shifty acts. I have always assumed headlines like NSA/Snowden would have a damper on the will to start-up business or innovate a new industry but never considered the change in tone it would have on HN users in general.