An automated e-mail reply from the Bank of America Corp. account of Rurik Jutting yesterday said he was out of the office “indefinitely” and recommended contacting someone who’s not “an insane psychopath.” Calls to the work and mobile phones of Jutting weren’t answered yesterday outside of office hours, and Paul Scanlon, a spokesman for Bank of America in Hong Kong, declined to comment when contacted by Bloomberg News. A Rurik Jutting who is 29 and until recently worked for Bank of America has been named by the South China Morning Post, the U.K.’s Telegraph newspaper and Sky News as the suspect in the murder of two women in Hong Kong’s Wan Chai district…The automated reply also said: “For escalation please contact God, though suspect the devil will have custody. [Last line only really worked if I had followed through..]” [Bloomberg]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 7:35 AM
To: [redacted at UBS]
Hey [redacted at UBS],
I was on my way to the office this morning but I left my wallet with my ID in it at home. I am not going to be able to continue my internship with UBS this summer.
Update: While the below is in fact “real” (as in it was an email sent out to people), it appears as though it was a prank on behalf of redacted’s co-workers. Let is now serve as an important cautionary tale: failing to lock up your computer upon stepping away for even mere moments may result in your handsy colleagues having their way with your business.
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 2:30 PM
I’m excited for this opportunity to join the [redacted investment bank] Healthcare team and look forward to touching base with each of you in the coming days.
Was not an easy decision to make the jump from [other redacted investment bank] to [aforementioned redacted investment bank] as both banks have a stellar name/ reputation and both consistently rank among the elite of Wall Street in terms of fees and fighting for the largest deals (see attached article). Despite making this move (that some may criticize as a step down), I’m thrilled to be joining the team – I even updated my LinkedIn account a month ago in anticipation.
To that end, just want to lay a couple ground rules before I begin so we all good off on the right foot (Associates and VP’s, this is mainly for you):
…and that would be that he’s too good for Wells Fargo, and he’s wasting his time trying to score a position with the firm. In sum, it’s not him, it’s you, a notion he expressed in an email circa 5AM on Sunday.
Sent: November 24, 2013 5:27 AM
To: [redacted at Wells Fargo]
Subject: Disregard My Application
Dear [redacted at Wells Fargo],
After thinking it over I would like to disregard my application I sent this past week out for recruitment for Wells Fargo securities. Looking at my resume again I realize I can do way way better than Wells Fargo and I don’t want to settle for less. Please don’t take it personally. Thanks for your time. I hope you have a great Thanksgiving holiday.
And the below went out circa 2AM this morning, just to emphasize the point. Read more »
Business Leader Of Tomorrow Asks: Is A Gig In The Upper Echelons Of Corporate America A “Work-Love Trade Off”?By Bess Levin
From: [redacted guy]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 11:05 PM
To: [redacted girl at Deloitte]
Hey [redacted girl at Deloitte],
We talked a couple weeks back at the [university] accounting night. (I was the one looking for equity research positions and had a zit on my lip that could have passed for a cold sore. Lol. Whew. It was not. You’re probably like, “uh.. What?” Maybe that helps you recall, maybe not. Not completely important, I suppose.
No, not really. But when so many farewell emails can veer into an uncomfortable To: All of trying way too hard for comedy gold, this one ought to be acknowledged for including the words “highly experimental civilian space travel program coordinated by NASA,” not biting off more than it can chew, and not trying to be a hero. Read more »
Analyst’s ‘Burning Down The House’ Jingle Part of ‘Robust Internal Debate,’ Penetrating Analytic Process, Says S&PBy Bess Levin
Standard & Poor’s asked a federal judge on Monday to dismiss a U.S. Justice Department civil suit against the rating agency, arguing the government’s case is based on vague statements that cannot be used to prove fraud. In a $5 billion suit, the U.S. government accused the rating agency of issuing inflated ratings on faulty products to drum up business before the financial crisis, despite company statements that its ratings were objective. S&P has vociferously defended itself in public since the case was filed in February in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, denouncing the lawsuit as meritless and accusing the government of cherry-picking emails to misconstrue what its analysts did…While the government says those messages, which include one analyst performing a pop song parody about the housing market burning down, paint a picture of a company knowingly slapping inflated ratings on structured finance products, the company’s filing says otherwise. Those messages, instead, the company said, show internal squabbling or even “robust internal debate.” [Reuters]
If Tommy “I will run you over in the street” Belesis ever beats those fraud charges, the first thing he does is contact the writer of this letter to sign up for a 2-week intensive course that involves shadowing the master around campus (there is much to learn). The rest of you: take notes. Read more »