Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 9:33AM

first

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 9:55AM

You mean that highly valued portion of UBS? I can't imagine...

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 9:56AM

@2 kick yourself in the balls

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 10:29AM

Is UBS finished?

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 10:29AM

UBS is paying Lazard to do a strategic review that will given them permission to shave off the IB. This objective opinion will save them the embarrassment of changing their minds about their vaunted "integrated business model." Look for Lazard's surprise results in October. Ho hum.

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 10:32AM

Too long, didn't read.

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 10:49AM

#8 that gets funnier every time

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 10:51AM

cuomo, jr: a Spitzer in a tailored suit.

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 12:11PM

Where is UBS getting $19 billion from?

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 3:51PM

What about Morgan Stanley? Are they going to be on the hook as well?

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 6:08PM

How does this affect JPM/Lehman?

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 6:15PM

that's pretty ironic considering that some pay good money to get reamed in the ass by cuomo.

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 6:16PM

NYC is so fucked.

Banned?

Posted by guest , Aug 08, 2008 10:33PM

How would UBS go about selling or spinning off its IB division in times like now?

UBS will have to pay someone to take it. A little like giving an ugly daughter a big dowry to piss off and get married with whoever comes her way.

There will only be value if UBS can separate the FICC business from the Corporate Finance business and sell off the pure investment banking business sans the FICC business. I suspect Lazard was hired to come up with a way to restructure the IB business to enable a such a sale or spin-off in 2009.

UBS's DCM, ECM, and M&A businesses are still performing strongly and will be a nice addition to the likes of HSBC, Santander, BNP, or Barclays.

But I can't see UBS spinning off the i-bank to its shareholders due to the legal and accounting complexities of such a move. It also means UBS will have to tell the truth on the i-bank's financial position. Furthermore, in the words of one Kennedy Thompson, existing UBS shareholders "have had all the fun they can take with investment banking" and want closure.

Posted by guest , Aug 09, 2008 1:31PM

For this go to the Mountain(s?); 100 Hookers in Hedge Funds..or is it 100 Hedge Funds in Hookers?

Posted by guest , Aug 09, 2008 1:47PM

Just hope there's no truth to drg and orgy rumours involving mafiosi screaming from the pain of butt-plug insertions(not that there's any wrong w banker-inserted butt-plugs, in Zurich..johhny F leading the charge

Posted by guest , Aug 09, 2008 2:07PM

If,as stated, the IB Fucked wealth management clients up the Ass, what do you think the options are if they don't want to disappear altogether. They are in big trouble not just because of Hew Jenkins but also John Fraser at Asset Management (clown city). Everyone should go...and the building manager can shut off the lights. Investors are such stupid MFs.

Posted by guest , Aug 09, 2008 2:11PM

If I had had personal wealth with them, I would be lunching w lawyers all week long. Total pieces of shit.

Posted by guest , Aug 09, 2008 6:16PM

And if Scoby gets divorced and Dudley gets another u kn wh ..they are fucked..even more, which it exactly what that co needs.