He wasn't a "Goldman bigshot", he was on the Goldman board; he as a McKinsey bigshot. And he doesn't appear to have made any money off of this either. And, incidentally, it's not in any way at all related to the 2008 debacle - it's just basic straighforward claims of insider trading.
Yes, I forgot, intentional obtuseness is OK when you just need to make a point. The 2008 crash had absolutely nothing to do with insider trading, that's more related to the S&L crisis in the 80s. No one said it's OK, but it has no connection at all.
Meredith Whitney weighs in on JPMorgan: JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) (JPM)’s $2 billion trading loss stemmed from profit-seeking bets rather than hedges meant to mitigate loan losses, as Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon has described them, banking analyst Meredith Whitney said. “It’s very hard to argue that what Jamie Dimon is now on the Hill for is a hedge,” Whitney said today in a radio interview on “Bloomberg Surveillance” with Tom Keene and Ken Prewitt as the bank chief testified at a hearing of the House Financial Services Committee in Washington. “A credit hedge in banking should be a loan-loss provision, plain and simple. Anything else is a proprietary bet.” http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-06-19/jpmorgan-hedges-were-really-prop-trades-whitney-says
Oops...maybe it's a $9 billion loss. JPM shares down in pre-market trading. I hope Jamie's bonus is safe though. http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/06/28/jpmorgan-trading-loss-may-reach-9-billion/
And apparently there will be no clawback for JPMorgan's former CIO Ina Drew: http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/06/29/what-happened-to-ina-drews-clawback/ oop:
JPM being investigated for manipulating the electricity markets in Cali & midwest: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/06/us-utilities-jpmorgan-ferc-idUSBRE8620LK20120706
There's something rotten in the banking business. It will shock everyone to hear, but there are no people with any morals in it! Seriously, how bad has the culture gotten so that in order to defend the industry you have to put each incident in a little isolation chamber and call it unrelated to all the other bad stuff. It maay be technically true, but the reality is there is a giant culture problem (greed! loose morals! unchecked power! boys club favor trading! ) in our financial industry and it's going to be a long time before it is fixed....if ever. Confidence in the institution of banking is fundamental to successful capitalism, and we can't reasonably have that anymore.
Since we're talking energy... (maybe we need a new thread?) http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/07/06/512293/duke-energy-ceo-one-da/ Duke Energy CEO To Receive $44 Million Payout Despite Resigning On His First Day
"Jamie will never know if we just tell him it was only $1 billion lost" JPMorgan Chase, which reported its second-quarter results on Friday, disclosed that the losses on a soured credit bet could mount to more than $7 billion, as the nation’s largest bank indicated that traders may have intentionally tried to conceal the extent of the red ink on the disastrous position. http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/jpmorgan-says-traders-obscured-losses-in-first-quarter/
Well, hey, if you want super-talented highy productive, results-oriented people who are going to lead your organization, you will need to pay them $44 million to work for one day.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/jpmorgan-to-take-back-millions-from-former-officials/ oops indeed
http://nyti.ms/Z2bY80 This is almost worth taking nicephoras off ignore "JPMorgan Chase, the nation’s biggest bank, ignored internal controls and manipulated documents as it racked up trading losses last year, while its influential chief executive, Jamie Dimon, briefly withheld some information from regulators, a new Senate report says. The findings by the Congressional investigators shed new light on the multibillion-dollar trading blunder, which has claimed the jobs of several top executives and prompted an inquiry by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The 300-page report, released a day before a Senate subcommittee plans to question bank executives and regulators at a hearing, will escalate the debate over how to police complex risk-taking on Wall Street. It may also foreshadow a criminal case against employees at the heart of the troubled wager."
Criminal case? Yeah, right... and monkeys might fly out of my butt. I predict strong words from Elizabeth Warren and absolutely no criminal charges against anyone at JP Morgan. Maybe fine the company an hour's profit or thereabouts. nicephoras will then post again about how it's not illegal to make really bad trades even if it puts the wider economy at risk.
It's certainly worse. The actual JPM loss wasn't statistically significant relative to their assets. The cover up suggests a much bigger issue as far as risk controls and proper disclosure procedures.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...al-charges_n_3792294.html?utm_hp_ref=business Let me guess: A fine, a slap on the wrist and back to business as usual.
I love the whole "they'll pay half-a-billion $ fine but will not have to admit to any wrongdoing." So the giant payment is a donation out of the goodness of Jamie Dimon's black heart? Brings a tear to my eyes it does.
CNBC is rending their cloth over the Feds trying to destroy JPM through backdoor nefarious means. They have a point. It should be done in a completely transparent manner. Maybe inject Elizabeth Warren with Ebola and set her loose in the board room.
Ok, Nice. Please explain this one. Is it fabricated or does it make the case for higher lampposts? http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/larry-summers-and-the-secret-end-game-memo
There's no doubt that Summers thought deregulation was a good thing. That's what he was doing at the WTO - the idea was to liberalize the provision of banking services (not to eliminate deregulation globally, which the WTO can't even do). The rest of the article is a combination of misunderstanding (the usual Glass Steagall silliness), bad inferences (Brazil's failure to sign the WTO had nothing to do with its performance in the crisis - it did well because it was a commodity exporter), assumptions (derivatives=bad!) and a crazy conspiracy theory. Of course Summers would have enlisted CEOs to support his views - they would have supported it too. Of course, my favorite part of the article is the assumption that Summers wanted to do this because otherwise money would flow to safer jurisdictions. That NEVER happens. Basically it's amateur hour.
Why do they keep recycling these same deregulation douchebags like Larry f-ing Summers? Why not our Randian bubble economy hero Alan Greenspan again? He has to be tired of looking at Andrea Mitchell's mug every day. The get-tough-on-Wall-Street war has been over for years. Their influence is too cozy & pervasive in DC. A true presidential hero like FDR not only passed commonsense regulations that (mostly) lasted over 75 years, but vowed never to hire the scoundrels that helped ruin the economy. Obama lets them hump his dog after drinking his last beer. Even after 2008 Wall St. has been posting record profits. Some unlucky bastards with bad connections lost (hey there, Dick Fuld) and Mother Merrill had to eat a shit sandwich and marry a hillbilly cousin. But in the end things have gone quite well. Sometimes they "accidentally" cheat the public and pay fines like JPM will in this energy case.