After 12 years of outstanding service, Lucas van Praag, global head of Corporate Communications, will retire from the firm at the end of March. We are pleased that Lucas will continue to provide strategic advice as a consultant to Goldman Sachs…Lucas has played a critical role in helping the firm navigate through one of the most difficult and testing environments the firm has faced, particularly during the recent financial crisis and its aftermath. His strategic counsel and deep understanding of complex issues defined his career at the firm as did his warmth, natural inclusiveness and determination in the face of relentless demands. The countless hours he spent with external constituencies was matched by the time and attention he committed to all of us, explaining and engaging on important issues and trends. Lucas was a tireless advocate and we are pleased that we will continue to benefit from his judgment and experience. Please join us in thanking Lucas for his extraordinary contributions to the firm and wishing him, Miranda and their family the best in the future. [Deal Journal, earlier]
Lucas Van Praag
Earlier today, some fairly distressing news came out of Goldman Sachs– according to three different people “familiar with the matter,” the bank “may” hire Richard “Jake” Siewert Jr. for “a role similar to the one held by Lucas van Praag.” While we’d love to plug our ears and pretend this isn’t happening, the reality is that it was clearly leaked from the inside and is happening indeed. Though it’s possible Goldman would allow Lucas to hang around the office a bit longer, our beloved spokesman has got a lot more pride than that. If his unique flavor isn’t appreciated, if telling reporters that their stories are “extraordinarily ill-informed,” “nonsense,” “stupid,” indicative of a failure “to comprehend the subject matter,” and/or reminiscent of “effluent” is all of a sudden not okay, if they want to take a more collaborative (read: limp-wristed) approach with the press, then let them. Van Praag’s got better things to do with his time. Continue reading »
A very wise, British-born, not banker but nevertheless partner of Goldman Sachs tasked with dealing with the firm’s image once lamented, “Jamie Dimon tells the government to wank off and the public calls him oh so spirited. Would life change for me if Lloyd wore lifts?” The Masters of the Universe aren’t usually ones to whine (or give a baker’s fuck about what the public thinks) but honestly, what the hell? Why is it that when Goldman has some maybe non-consensual relations with the economy it’s not okay but when JPMorgan does they’re the best bank in the world? How is it that Goldman can somehow get blamed when a kid in Akron, Ohio kicks a puppy but senior management at JPMorgan picks up where Michael Vick left off and they’re just having some fun? Or Lloyd Blankfein is a monster for passing a hobo and only giving him a dollar (when he made so much more last year) but Jamie Dimon rapes the same hobo after helping himself to some change and he’s “just being affectionate.” It’s just not fair and it makes no sense, have come the wails from within 200 West.
The double-standard struck the most sensitive nerve, of course, immediately following the crisis when the hate for Lloyd and GS versus the perceived love for James was so great Goldman’s board considered asking LB to wear a Jamie mask “just in public, or when addressing large groups of people, reporters, etc.” So we were interested to find out if the public’s perception of JD v. LB still chapped some Goldman hide now that things have calmed down a bit. Turns out it does. Continue reading »
First off, this is not some absurd idea we came up with on our own. At an event in London this afternoon, Fiona Laffan, Goldman Sach’s head of media relations in Europe said that the bank is tossing around the idea of 1) advertising on TV and 2) Blankfein appearing on Oprah’s couch. Continue reading »
Perhaps some of you remember Jon Winkelried? The former Goldman Sachs co-president is persona non grata at the firm but for the purposes of context, a quick refresh: Winkelried was the good for nothing prick who abandoned Lloyd Blankfein when the CEO needed him most, and when it would look most bad for the company to have a high level departure (circa the shit hitting the fan era). A traitorous shrew, really, who let deaf ears fall on Blankfein’s pleas to stay, and who traded it all in for a bunch of barnyard animals.
Anywho, Goldman ended up getting on just fine with out he whose name shall not be mentioned, got on great in fact, but his actions did leave a lasting mark on Blankfein, namely that he lost the ability to open up and trust high level execs and that his previously dormant abandonment issues flared up like nobody’s business. So when there was talk of Goldman CFO David “Bones” Viniar retiring, Lloyd naturally panicked. But apparently it was for naught. Bones would never do that to his li’l fella. Continue reading »
But it’s after 5 the night before a 3-day and if I can speak freely? I need to get out of here and can’t wade through this story just now. Also, while I’m sure there’s many a gem to be found within, based on an intimate knowledge of the firm, plus the article’s dek (“When it comes to its role in the financial crisis, Goldman Sachs has a message for the world”), there’s no need. If I know my Masters of the Universe– and I think I do!– the message is this: “blow us.” Or variants thereof. Prove me wrong.
- Use the Bloomberg command
NH BLG_DEALBREAKER <GO>
to access Dealbreaker
