Our relationship with risk-taking is a schizophrenic one. Bold actions taken, even foolishly, yield bright accolades for winners, enduring damnation for losers. Qui audet adipiscitur, after all. Phrased another way: One may dare, but one must win.
On reflection, David Redmond probably shouldn’t have gone back to the office after a fateful boozy lunch last year that lasted three and a half hours.
The commodities trader arrived back at his desk at Morgan Stanley in London at 4.41pm on 6 February and through the fug proceeded to gamble $10m (£5.1m) in a frantic series of trades. It very nearly went down as the most expensive lunch in history. In the sober light of the following day, he managed to trade his way out of the position without telling anyone and avoided making any losses. But it wasn’t enough to save his neck.
The Financial Services Authority today banned Redmond from working in the City for at least two years for concealing his trading position from bosses and leaving the bank exposed to significant risk. Margaret Cole, the director of enforcement at the City watchdog, said his actions had “showed a lack of honesty and integrity”.
Who among us doubts that, had Redmond come out +20% on the positions, his name would endure in the office forever, emblazoned on brass plaque under the hermetically sealed, bulletproof-plexi case holding the actual glass he drank from that faithful afternoon?
FSA bans Morgan Stanley’s oiled trader [Guardian Online]
Hell, I’d reward him regardless. The guy unravelled a lot of shit in a short period of time. That’s thinking on your feet.
Too drunk, didn’t trade well
The question is, “Who called him a pussy at lunch?” Guys who trade like that are mad at someone and it’s probably some one in their own shop.
You yanks have a clear misunderstanding of how regulation works in the city. The FSA loves the light touch approach so ” honesty & integrity” is all they have to go after someone. And people are shocked this system didn’t work.
EP, Did you learn Latin at Taco Bell? Your translation is a bit off.
I’m confused… so the guy flat-out admitted he was drunk? Is that really the best he could come up with?
@3
Either someone called him a p*ssy, or he IS a p*ssy and can’t function with a lil’ buzz.
5.1M quid. Pfft. Chump change.
You guys are all pussies.
-Nick Leeson
I wasn’t aware I purported to provide a direct translation so I’m not sure what you mean, #5.
this is London… i think you would have a tough time if you made all the traders take a sobriety test after a long lunch with brokers..
I am drunk right now as I type this and I am also pounding my secretary in her ass.
Fateful, EP, not faithful.
That’s a dealbreaker, ladies…
Having Googled it just now, real quick, I think EP is right about her Latin:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Dares_Wins
And @7, we are called FUNCTIONAL alcoholics, thanks
According to WSJ he did come out a winner on the PnL. “The next day, Redmond sold out of his short positions at a profit.”
http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2009/05/20/a-sobering-tale-uks-fsa-bans-trader-over-post-prandial-trading-splurge/
I seriously don’t get it. 10MM was the size of the position he put on or the amount he was down on the trade?
@14
You do realize I (and many others here most likely) am/are part of your “we,” right?
man, i miss the 80′s. this would’ve flown then.
Why don’t the regulators go after some real crooks… This guy is small fry… Kerviel had a positon 5000 times as big and isn’t in jail…
Why don’t the regulators go after some real crooks… This guy is small fry… Kerviel had a positon 5000 times as big and isn’t in jail…
He should have moved to what little is left of Chicago trading firms… He could have sat at Alcocks and traded!
“Alcocks: Where you can Drink AND Trade. Free Wifi.”
-mrp
@21
still not blown out yet