Supposedly, the lawyer who “mistakenly” included the clause about JPMorgan being responsible for Bear’s losses regardless of whether or not the deal goes through is “no longer with the firm,” as of this morning. For the life of me, I can’t imagine why. Personally, we feel he injected a much needed dose of comic relief in that place.
And let me just add:
I’d have gone with Blondie. I guess that’s why you’re the blogger and I’m the bloggie.
All the JPMorgan people involved should be gone and the entire lawfirm should be gone. No one lawyer or person can take the whole hit.
Is this the lawyer from Wachtell?
Scapegoat. Steven Black himself repeatedly confirmed this clause, the unconditional guarantee that would stay in place even if the deal didn’t go through, on the conference call. It was made clear to even the meanest intelligence what JPM meant.
2:38 is right. They discussed it on the conf. call. Why should the lawyer take the fall for drafting what JPM wanted?
does that mean there s an opening at Wachtell? i thought wachtell were invincible
On one hand, these are extremely sophisticated bankers… who should know their stuff. The deal is the deal. JPM knows the power shareholders possess.
On the other hand, the deal was put together practically overnight with little opportunity for JPM executives to ponder every possible contingency. That’s why you hire a firm like Wachtell… and JPM seemed pretty surprised by the reaction of the shareholders. At the very least, Wachtell probably should have very clearly advised them that 1) a “No” vote from Bear shareholders was possible (perhaps probable); and 2) the guaranty would definitely survive successive shareholder votes.
Maybe this lawyer just decided he’d rather make real money in investment banking.
I think the lawyer they’re referring to here is Steve Cutler, the recently hired GC of JPM.
Anything that helps out the Bear is okay with people still working there.
Does anyone remember that Mr. Diamond is on the board of the NY Fed? In case anyone forgot, that is the outfit that engineered the BSC backstop.
That horse’s ass Diamond had plenty of opportunity to know what the basics of the deal were.
guest@3:21, I don’t think that the clowns who happen to have landed in the executive suites of major banks are really all that “sophisticated”.
Mr. Diamond’s “sophistication” is clearly on display here. It seems to be lacking some vital ingredient.
“Diamond”? Come on now, you’re pretty harsh for not knowing the guy’s name…
Is the use of the word “supposedly” evidence of journalistic ethics???? From Bess freakin’ Levin????
Maybe he meant Barclays Bob Diamond? Either way 4:35 is a rambling mess
@4:46– yes, because it means they’re not asserting it as fact, genius.
Anal_yst
4:35 has to be the same from the RBS post. This is one lost soul.
@ 4:52
Must be. Its not even worth correcting someone that clueless (or, to give said individual the benefit of the doubt, a really really – insert at least one: drunk, stoned, cracked-out, etc – former banker)
Come on guys, if you worked at Bear, you’d be drunk and posting rambling nonsensical messages attacking Jamie by 4:35 pm too
i think 4:35 got lost on his way to “gawker”.
something tells me if you worked at Bear you would know Jamie’s last name (regardless of whether you were drunk, stoned, cracked out…..)
I don’t think the clueless commenter was a Bear employee. I agree with @5:48pm that every last one of them knows how to spell “Dimon.” They probably also know how to spell “Cayne,” “Bernanke,” and “screwed.” I think it was one of the investment-bank hating Wall Street critics that drop by the site. Seems I have heard that use of “clown” before. Hmmm.
It’s quite simple. It never occurred to JBW to check the contract to see where the risk was going. A little later they thought it might be relevant.