Banks

  • 21 Oct 2014 at 3:06 PM
  • Banks

De Blasio To Dimon: F*ck You And F*ck Your Tax Breaks

jamie-dimon (2)JPMorgan Chase’s cap-in-hand routine isn’t flying with the Big Apple chief. Read more »

If you're good, that is.Unless that place is at the SEC cashier’s office, when your (probably former) employers are paying a fine that your actions helped incur. Otherwise, start planning to buy yourself something nice circa 2025. Read more »

Remember Washington Mutual? Cute little retail bank? Kind of the anti-Chase: Lots of bright colors, no bullet-proof glass, endearingly quirky ads, free smiles? Went under a few years back and was swallowed by Chase, which gleefully ripped out all of those colors and all of that quirkiness? Well, people are still fighting over it, specifically over whether its board and leadership were being distinctly unfriendly to its shareholders when they pumped $500 million into the bank. Read more »

  • 09 Oct 2014 at 12:36 PM
  • Banks

President Obama Has A Question About The JPMorgan Cyberattack

Alas, there is no answer. Read more »

  • 08 Oct 2014 at 5:00 PM
  • Banks

Citi’s Bout Of Montezuma’s Revenge Not Entirely Unforeseeable

La Casa de Corbat may have had an inkling about the problems that led to its $400 million Mexican nightmare. Or it may not have read all of those long, boring missives that the New York Fed insisted on sending year after year. Read more »

A British judge is none too pleased with Lloyd Blankfein, et. al., re: their none-too-serious request of her to junk the Libyan Investment Authority’s lawsuit against it. And for wasting her time and Libya’s money (or, if you believe the accusations that Goldman sold the sovereign wealth fund worthless crap, more of its money), the bank’s gonna have to pony up. Just not as much as Libya would like, because the very same judge isn’t sure that even Gary Cohn’s words warrant this level of textual analysis. Read more »

  • 02 Oct 2014 at 10:00 AM
  • Banks

Will Crisis-Era Litigation Ever End For Banks?

Not any time soon, no. Read more »