Massino’s Rebuild/Era

[Angelo Santino]

How about we narrow down the definition of power, so we stop arguing over nothing. There’s monetary power, “militaristic” power (a crime group’s capacity to kill), organisational power (the lines of communication between admin and capo), etc., etc., etc.

The Gambinos of the 1990s were both more powerful and less powerful than the Bonannos of the 1990s, in different ways.

That's what I'm trying to articulate but you did it better. We can break these categories down to an infinite number of sub categories that, at the end of the day, we'd have to go by the incomplete data that we have access too.

I do think "Associate" needs to be broken down and classified by some determined criteria of association: friend, relative, lawyer, criminal associate, business partner, etc. It's such a broad term to classify and describe the mob's largest faction at the bottom of the pyramid.

I do not necessarily disagree with your arguments, but I think you should not overlook the fact that support from others is also equal to manpower.

A capo with just 2 guys under him being recognised by the Commission in effect means he has hundreds of people behind him.

I think one can define power in having the ability to withstand (physical) assault from your enemies. It just depends on how you look at it. From my pov, numbers are crucial because most often it correlates with the other essentials.

Ofcourse it isn't everything, but the correlation is always there.

Alexander and Djenghis Khan were initially outnumbered too, but once they won their empire and armies became the biggest by default.

I don't disagree with yours either, we're kinda splitting hairs but I enjoy the debate (not argument).

I meant a capo as in captain and was comparing the rank between Johnstown or Youngstown with a captain in New York. Each would have their pros and cons. It was a bad example, I should have used Scalish and compared him with someone.

The ability to withstand external assault is a great category. I fully agree. But again, none of these large faction examples that we're discussing from Masseria to Stanfa were able to withstand the onslaught. If the numbers were accurate and Masseria/Stanfa or any larger faction could count on even 50% of their so-called factions, things might have turned out differently. But in the end, we see when the going gets tough, the larger faction thins out quickly to about 25-40% of its estimated power. Omitting the C-War for lack of documents, the Orena and Stanfa factions hitters/active war participants leveled out to around the same number or less that the opposing smaller Persico and Merlino factions had.

Like my future ex wife says: 'it's not the size that counts, it's how you use it.' Unless she's just trying to make me feel better.

[Angelo Santino]

Actually, ironically, the only example that comes to mind of a larger faction winning would be the Profaci-Gallo war. Most if not every other other internal mob war- Capone, Merlino, Massino, Persico were the underdogs who won. The reason for the latter's victory was a combination of legitimacy (membership) and force (bonafide Hitmen.), not because their (made mafia members within their) faction numbers. They were also benefited by the fact that in the median, about 45-55% of the membership just want to make money and not take up mafia politics or partake in hits, which thins out the larger faction considerably. Cafaro went into how if he it to do all over again he would have been just a soldier running a club far away from Salerno's orbit.

Montreal maybe? Montagna was winning an unwinnable war until he was betrayed by Desjardins who also betrayed the Rizzutos?

[gohnjotti]

How about we narrow down the definition of power, so we stop arguing over nothing. There’s monetary power, “militaristic” power (a crime group’s capacity to kill), organisational power (the lines of communication between admin and capo), etc., etc., etc.

The Gambinos of the 1990s were both more powerful and less powerful than the Bonannos of the 1990s, in different ways.

That's what I'm trying to articulate but you did it better. We can break these categories down to an infinite number of sub categories that, at the end of the day, we'd have to go by the incomplete data that we have access too.

I do think "Associate" needs to be broken down and classified by some determined criteria of association: friend, relative, lawyer, criminal associate, business partner, etc. It's such a broad term to classify and describe the mob's largest faction at the bottom of the pyramid.

I agree, when I say associate I am usually referring to somebody "on-record" with a made member. And, of course, even "on-record" can be somewhat loose, so when I picture "associate" I picture an on-record associate whose superior would be willing to formally sit-down on his behalf.

I do not necessarily disagree with your arguments, but I think you should not overlook the fact that support from others is also equal to manpower.

A capo with just 2 guys under him being recognised by the Commission in effect means he has hundreds of people behind him.

I think one can define power in having the ability to withstand (physical) assault from your enemies. It just depends on how you look at it. From my pov, numbers are crucial because most often it correlates with the other essentials.

Ofcourse it isn't everything, but the correlation is always there.

Alexander and Djenghis Khan were initially outnumbered too, but once they won their empire and armies became the biggest by default.

I don't disagree with yours either, we're kinda splitting hairs but I enjoy the debate (not argument).

I meant a capo as in captain and was comparing the rank between Johnstown or Youngstown with a captain in New York. Each would have their pros and cons. It was a bad example, I should have used Scalish and compared him with someone.

The ability to withstand external assault is a great category. I fully agree. But again, none of these large faction examples that we're discussing from Masseria to Stanfa were able to withstand the onslaught. If the numbers were accurate and Masseria/Stanfa or any larger faction could count on even 50% of their so-called factions, things might have turned out differently. But in the end, we see when the going gets tough, the larger faction thins out quickly to about 25-40% of its estimated power. Omitting the C-War for lack of documents, the Orena and Stanfa factions hitters/active war participants leveled out to around the same number or less that the opposing smaller Persico and Merlino factions had.

Like my future ex wife says: 'it's not the size that counts, it's how you use it.' Unless she's just trying to make me feel better.

Precisely, the Orena faction was larger in numbers and in net worth (it's an impossible figure to gauge, but it's glaringly obvious that the Orena faction had far more sophisticated rackets) but were not in a position to mount a proper assault against the Persico faction due to disorganization, lack of communication, and no effective contingency plan or passing-of-the-torch when Vic Orena was taken off the streets in April 1992.

Your wife is spot-on . The Orena faction was well-endowed, but vanilla. No foreplay, no hair-pulling, busted its load way too soon. The Persico faction was like that skinny white guy you see walking around with a knockout 10 under his arm, and you know that he's gotta be the king of cunnilingus.

[Lupara]

How about we narrow down the definition of power, so we stop arguing over nothing. There’s monetary power, “militaristic” power (a crime group’s capacity to kill), organisational power (the lines of communication between admin and capo), etc., etc., etc.

The Gambinos of the 1990s were both more powerful and less powerful than the Bonannos of the 1990s, in different ways.

In the world of the Mafia where people often rise to power through violence numbers are everything. The Corleonesi are the classic example. It proved that in such an environment monetary power was no match to militaristic power.

In any case, I think the Gambinos have always been more powerful in both subcategories.

One can make a good case the Bonannos had more political power at the time.

[gohnjotti]

How about we narrow down the definition of power, so we stop arguing over nothing. There’s monetary power, “militaristic” power (a crime group’s capacity to kill), organisational power (the lines of communication between admin and capo), etc., etc., etc.

The Gambinos of the 1990s were both more powerful and less powerful than the Bonannos of the 1990s, in different ways.

In the world of the Mafia where people often rise to power through violence numbers are everything. The Corleonesi are the classic example. It proved that in such an environment monetary power was no match to militaristic power.

In any case, I think the Gambinos have always been more powerful in both subcategories.

One can make a good case the Bonannos had more political power at the time.

I don't know who had more militaristic power (it feels like we're talking about world diplomacy here ) but the Bonannos had some serious hitters, and could carry out hits pretty efficiently, no? I wouldn't say the Gambinos vastly outmatched the Bonannos in terms of "military," because in New York it's less about capacity for violence and more about capacity for getting away with violence. I'm not an expert on the various hit-teams and murders that were going on for either of these families during that time, however. You would have to go to Wiseguy for that, I think he made a list of hits during the 1990s.

[Lupara]

Montreal maybe? Montagna was winning an unwinnable war until he was betrayed by Desjardins who also betrayed the Rizzutos?

Unwinnable in what way? Most of the Rizzuto people were in jail but that war (it was rather an internal housecleaning) was fought on a political level. And Montagna was politically the strongest at that time. Desjardins was perhaps militarily the strongest. But in this war there where no real winners if you look at in what state it left the mob over there. And ironically, it can all be traced back to Massino.

[Angelo Santino]

How about we narrow down the definition of power, so we stop arguing over nothing. There’s monetary power, “militaristic” power (a crime group’s capacity to kill), organisational power (the lines of communication between admin and capo), etc., etc., etc.

The Gambinos of the 1990s were both more powerful and less powerful than the Bonannos of the 1990s, in different ways.

In the world of the Mafia where people often rise to power through violence numbers are everything. The Corleonesi are the classic example. It proved that in such an environment monetary power was no match to militaristic power.

In any case, I think the Gambinos have always been more powerful in both subcategories.

One can make a good case the Bonannos had more political power at the time.

I don't know who had more militaristic power (it feels like we're talking about world diplomacy here ) but the Bonannos had some serious hitters, and could carry out hits pretty efficiently, no? I wouldn't say the Gambinos vastly outmatched the Bonannos in terms of "military," because in New York it's less about capacity for violence and more about capacity for getting away with violence. I'm not an expert on the various hit-teams and murders that were going on for either of these families during that time, however. You would have to go to Wiseguy for that, I think he made a list of hits during the 1990s.

In The Last Mafioso, Fratianno fretted about the amount of "deadhead" members and estimated that either only 20% of total membership or 20 members in a particular family- LA or Chi (I disremember) were capable of actually "doing work" (hits.) Regardless of whether people agree/disagree with those estimates, he was of the opinion that actual killers were in the minority.

Lupara is right, violence is the power that usually wins which explains why Capone, Merlino, Orena, Maranzano etc won. But when you zoom out, the mob as an organization isn't designed or set up for war. Unlike the cartels or even street gangs they don't have their own combat units for a full on engagement. Like you said, the mob best conducts itself in the shadows. Most mob murders involved getting someone alone and shooting them up close as opposed to Sparks Steak House/St Valentines.

[Lupara]

How about we narrow down the definition of power, so we stop arguing over nothing. There’s monetary power, “militaristic” power (a crime group’s capacity to kill), organisational power (the lines of communication between admin and capo), etc., etc., etc.

The Gambinos of the 1990s were both more powerful and less powerful than the Bonannos of the 1990s, in different ways.

In the world of the Mafia where people often rise to power through violence numbers are everything. The Corleonesi are the classic example. It proved that in such an environment monetary power was no match to militaristic power.

In any case, I think the Gambinos have always been more powerful in both subcategories.

One can make a good case the Bonannos had more political power at the time.

I don't know who had more militaristic power (it feels like we're talking about world diplomacy here [emoji38] )

In effect we are. [emoji3]

Anyway, I'm guilty of derailing this thread so if Soliai or any other mod wants to enact their political power on me I can only accept those consequences...

[Pogo The Clown]

In fairness the Stanfa faction did win briefly. Ciancaglini was dead, Merlino was in jail and the rest went into hiding. The portion of street tax that the Merlino faction controlled was taken over by Stanfa. It was only after the Feds swooped the whole bunch off the streets that the Merlino crew emerged.


Pogo

[Angelo Santino]

Montreal maybe? Montagna was winning an unwinnable war until he was betrayed by Desjardins who also betrayed the Rizzutos?

Unwinnable in what way? Most of the Rizzuto people were in jail but that war (it was rather an internal housecleaning) was fought on a political level. And Montagna was politically the strongest at that time. Desjardins was perhaps militarily the strongest. But in this war there where no real winners if you look at in what state it left the mob over there. And ironically, it can all be traced back to Massino.

Unwinnable by public perception, including myself. When Montaga was deported he was "a man without a family" during a time after Rizzuto's conviction and the release of the 6th Family which had everyone debating to what extent they surpassed New York City. That's just the external, the internal I know less of because we have no members speaking of it, but I would imagine even with the convictions, Rizzuto's people were still in power, including Nick Rizzuto whom everyone had pegged as a Canadian Tony Accardo while Montaga had no one under him, which lead to his alliance with Desjardins. Had Montaga won, he'd be an example that size don't matter since I think we can agree that the city of Montreal had more Rizzuto allies than Montagna. But he didn't and Rizzuto came home and died. We'll call it draw?

[Angelo Santino]

In fairness the Stanfa faction did win briefly. Ciancaglini was dead, Merlino was in jail and the rest went into hiding. The portion of street tax that the Merlino faction controlled was taken over by Stanfa. It was only after the Feds swooped the whole bunch off the streets that the Merlino crew emerged.


Pogo

Yes, I mentioned this a page ago, I guess Merlino won by default since Stanfa got locked up? But before that Stanfa won because Merlino was locked up. It's like Kill Bill opening scene.

[gohnjotti]

In fairness the Stanfa faction did win briefly. Ciancaglini was dead, Merlino was in jail and the rest went into hiding. The portion of street tax that the Merlino faction controlled was taken over by Stanfa. It was only after the Feds swooped the whole bunch off the streets that the Merlino crew emerged.


Pogo

Yes, I mentioned this a page ago, I guess Merlino won by default since Stanfa got locked up? But before that Stanfa won because Merlino was locked up. It's like Kill Bill opening scene.

The only sure-fire winners of egregious mob violence are the FBI.

[CabriniGreen]

[

In The Last Mafioso, Fratianno fretted about the amount of "deadhead" members and estimated that either only 20% of total membership or 20 members in a particular family- LA or Chi (I disremember) were capable of actually "doing work" (hits.) Regardless of whether people agree/disagree with those estimates, he was of the opinion that actual killers were in the minority.

I would actually go so far as to say that's a fact in the streets, I've seen it personally....

It's been echoed by mobsters like Gravano and Caramandi too...

[Wiseguy]

Power means different things to different people (inside and outside, close and far away). The Genovese's 300+ membership (whatever the number) would win in the Most Membership if that's what we're going by. The Bonanno's international reach into Canada might mean that to others if we're considering territory and so forth. We'd need to establish categories for everything ranging from Membership down to individual rackets (drugs, loansharking, gambling etc) and lay out who has more influence in each set category. Given the fluidity of the Mafia as well as the fact that we don't have complete information, we'd have to go by published/official sources and develop a methodology for measuring.. I'd take my hat off for every attempted such an endeavor.

I don't think much research is needed, in terms of power, when it comes to the American LCN today. Seems to be a general consensus across the board about which family is the strongest.

To you point about specifying certain categories, I imagine it would look something like below.

Gambling/Loansharking
#1 Genovese
#2 Gambino
#3-Tie Lucchese/Bonanno
#5 Colombo


Drug Trafficking
#1 Gambino
#2 Bonanno
#3-Tie Genovese/Lucchese
#5 Colombo


Labor/Business Racketeering
#1 Genovese
#2 Gambino
#3 Lucchese
#4 Colombo
#5 Bonanno


There are methods that government/law enforcement (as well as think tanks) use to determine the strength and threat posed by organized crime groups. Below is the SLEIPNIR Assessment Tool Canadian authories use.

19. Corruption
18. Violence
17. Infiltration
16. Expertise
15. Sophistication
14. Subversion
13. Strategy
12. Discipline
11. Insulation
10. Intelligence Use
9. Multiple Enterprises
8. Mobility
7. Stability
6. Scope
5. Monopoly
4. Group Cohesiveness
3. Continuity
2. Links to Other Organized Crime Groups
1. Links to Criminal Extremist Groups

http://dustinkmacdonald.com/sleipnir-assessment-tool/



Insight Crime explained how they determined the top 10 criminal groups in Mexico/South America in 2019 -

gamechangers-2019-latin-americas-top-10-criminal-groups.jpg

https://www.insightcrime.org/news/analy ... al-groups/

[Angelo Santino]

Power means different things to different people (inside and outside, close and far away). The Genovese's 300+ membership (whatever the number) would win in the Most Membership if that's what we're going by. The Bonanno's international reach into Canada might mean that to others if we're considering territory and so forth. We'd need to establish categories for everything ranging from Membership down to individual rackets (drugs, loansharking, gambling etc) and lay out who has more influence in each set category. Given the fluidity of the Mafia as well as the fact that we don't have complete information, we'd have to go by published/official sources and develop a methodology for measuring.. I'd take my hat off for every attempted such an endeavor.

I don't think much research is needed, in terms of power, when it comes to the American LCN today. Seems to be a general consensus across the board about which family is the strongest.

To you point about specifying certain categories, I imagine it would look something like below.

Gambling/Loansharking
#1 Genovese
#2 Gambino
#3-Tie Lucchese/Bonanno
#5 Colombo


Drug Trafficking
#1 Gambino
#2 Bonanno
#3-Tie Genovese/Lucchese
#5 Colombo


Labor/Business Racketeering
#1 Genovese
#2 Gambino
#3 Lucchese
#4 Colombo
#5 Bonanno


There are methods that government/law enforcement (as well as think tanks) use to determine the strength and threat posed by organized crime groups. Below is the SLEIPNIR Assessment Tool Canadian authories use.

19. Corruption
18. Violence
17. Infiltration
16. Expertise
15. Sophistication
14. Subversion
13. Strategy
12. Discipline
11. Insulation
10. Intelligence Use
9. Multiple Enterprises
8. Mobility
7. Stability
6. Scope
5. Monopoly
4. Group Cohesiveness
3. Continuity
2. Links to Other Organized Crime Groups
1. Links to Criminal Extremist Groups

http://dustinkmacdonald.com/sleipnir-assessment-tool/



Insight Crime explained how they determined the top 10 criminal groups in Mexico/South America in 2019 -

gamechangers-2019-latin-americas-top-10-criminal-groups.jpg

https://www.insightcrime.org/news/analy ... al-groups/

1 I don't disagree at all with your ranking system (I don't follow the recent stuff), but for such a system to withstand scrutiny we'd need to input data into a fact sheet and apply them into the crunch to determine our statistical findings. For instance, every conviction and what those convictions were for, tally them up and input them along with total membership for family to get percentages. The Chedrool Crime Family has 200 members, 50 of them were convicted this year for mopery, so 25% of their members go around doing that. That would be quite an endeavor for every category.

2 I think they established a good grading system to use as magnetic north.

3 I want to ask you, what are your thoughts on splitting "associates" up into different categories. How would you split that up?

Thank you for posting that.

(If this whole conversation continues I'll separate it from this thread. Unless someone thinks I should do so now?)