I’m watching that hearing. They are actually being quite nice to him. I guess it’s hard to be mean to someone who projects that much of a “buddy” vibe.
Senator Bob Menendez: I listen to this [hearing] and I paraphrase Shakespeare when I ask, a hedge or not a hedge, that is the question. Jamie Dimon: [staring] Senator Bob Menendez: Anyway. When you reduce a hedge or hedge a hedge, isn’t that gambling? Jamie Dimon: No. Senator Bob Menendez: You said the hedge morphed. What did it morph into? Is it Russian Roulette? Jamie Dimon: No…
I honestly don’t understand why this deserved a “hearing”……it was a mistake that was fully acknowledged….yes, they wanted to probe further into whether this was prop trading or not, but the senators didn’t have the intellect to decipher that…..
Well, that’s basically the story, right? JPM in general has super strong risk controls and great management. This time, they failed to control a particular person/desk, but it’s unlikely that they will be as careless in the future.
If there’s no actual question, don’t say anything.
If there is a question, you only say the bare minimum without explaining much (these have already been prepared well in advance)
If they keep pressing, you basically repeat those prepared statements.
That’s exactly how the GS guys did it
Hope. It is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and greatest weakness.
I honestly don’t understand why this deserved a “hearing”……it was a mistake that was fully acknowledged….yes, they wanted to probe further into whether this was prop trading or not, but the senators didn’t have the intellect to decipher that…..
It deserved a hearing because JPM is the only big bank that the government hasn’t had a change to drag through the mud and s*it on yet.
Plus Jamie Dimon is the only big bank CEO with the balls to tell the truth and say that Dodd Frank and the rest of the financial reform is useless, so this gave them a good excuse to haul him into a Senate hearing.
Give it a month and nearly everyone will have forgotten about this…
Well, that’s basically the story, right? JPM in general has super strong risk controls and great management. This time, they failed to control a particular person/desk, but it’s unlikely that they will be as careless in the future.
I wonder if tighter regulation will only lead to escalation of evasive methods by the finance industry…if we assume companies like GS/JPM etc will always outsmart the public sector’s ability to police the industry, and the mentality of those in power continues on its current trend then surely many of the regulations are just short term window dressing
I wonder if tighter regulation will only lead to escalation of evasive methods by the finance industry…if we assume companies like GS/JPM etc will always outsmart the public sector’s ability to police the industry, and the mentality of those in power continues on its current trend then surely many of the regulations are just short term window dressing
there are a few things: seperating investment banking from retail is a start…..and heightening capital/liquidity requirements is another…..though it is true they will always find a way to outsmart the system, you want to make sure you can at least identify who and where these guys are….at this stage, everything is all mashed up and interlinked…..i blame derivatives for the most part due to their lack of transparency….munger was right….i can see it now finally…..
Even with creative response, banks will lose profitability throughout the adjustment period. Let’s say it takes 3 years following the introduction of new regulations for banks to restore profitability to old levels. That’s a long time for a trader/IB etc.. I would not want to sit on stagnant revenues for a few years while the bank figures out the new system.
bet you this guy scores with the babes…..the hottest and classiest of them all….
Studying With
Senator Bob Menendez: I listen to this [hearing] and I paraphrase Shakespeare when I ask, a hedge or not a hedge, that is the question.
Jamie Dimon: [staring]
Senator Bob Menendez: Anyway. When you reduce a hedge or hedge a hedge, isn’t that gambling?
Jamie Dimon: No.
Senator Bob Menendez: You said the hedge morphed. What did it morph into? Is it Russian Roulette?
Jamie Dimon: No…
gotta love this guy.
(from dealbreaker)
Studying With
The gist of this entire hearing is “We messed up, won’t happen again.” This is what a teenager says to their parents.
NO EXCUSES
Critique my resume: http://www.razume.com/documents/27593
Like electronic music? Check out my latest mix: http://www.mixcloud.com/bpdulog/mix-5/
I honestly don’t understand why this deserved a “hearing”……it was a mistake that was fully acknowledged….yes, they wanted to probe further into whether this was prop trading or not, but the senators didn’t have the intellect to decipher that…..
Well, that’s basically the story, right? JPM in general has super strong risk controls and great management. This time, they failed to control a particular person/desk, but it’s unlikely that they will be as careless in the future.
“I’m a CPA! I got money b***h!”
Those are all lawyer tricks.
If there’s no actual question, don’t say anything.
If there is a question, you only say the bare minimum without explaining much (these have already been prepared well in advance)
If they keep pressing, you basically repeat those prepared statements.
That’s exactly how the GS guys did it
Hope. It is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and greatest weakness.
It deserved a hearing because JPM is the only big bank that the government hasn’t had a change to drag through the mud and s*it on yet.
Plus Jamie Dimon is the only big bank CEO with the balls to tell the truth and say that Dodd Frank and the rest of the financial reform is useless, so this gave them a good excuse to haul him into a Senate hearing.
Give it a month and nearly everyone will have forgotten about this…
hah, yeah right
Chase me if you can!
No, it’s hard to be mean to someone who’s company contributed to some of the senators pockets.
I wonder if tighter regulation will only lead to escalation of evasive methods by the finance industry…if we assume companies like GS/JPM etc will always outsmart the public sector’s ability to police the industry, and the mentality of those in power continues on its current trend then surely many of the regulations are just short term window dressing
______________________________________________________
You must be the square root of two cause i feel irrational around you
http://alphahive.wordpress.com/
Studying With
This has been going on for decades.
NO EXCUSES
Critique my resume: http://www.razume.com/documents/27593
Like electronic music? Check out my latest mix: http://www.mixcloud.com/bpdulog/mix-5/
there are a few things: seperating investment banking from retail is a start…..and heightening capital/liquidity requirements is another…..though it is true they will always find a way to outsmart the system, you want to make sure you can at least identify who and where these guys are….at this stage, everything is all mashed up and interlinked…..i blame derivatives for the most part due to their lack of transparency….munger was right….i can see it now finally…..
as an aside also, i dont’ think the world would be worst off if there were fewer traders out there……..
Even with creative response, banks will lose profitability throughout the adjustment period. Let’s say it takes 3 years following the introduction of new regulations for banks to restore profitability to old levels. That’s a long time for a trader/IB etc.. I would not want to sit on stagnant revenues for a few years while the bank figures out the new system.
“I’m a CPA! I got money b***h!”