Paul Singer

Paul Singer’s Guilty Pleasure

Derivatives may be imperiling global stability and undermining society, but the Elliott Management chief just can’t help himself. Read more »

  • 09 Sep 2013 at 2:57 PM

Paul Singer Did Pretty Okay For Himself Last Month

Elliott performance. Read more »

Paul Singer Haggles A Third Hess Board Seat

A promise to seat two of its board candidates after Elliott Management voted for its own five was insulting. A promise to seat three under the same circumstances? That’s a compromise Paul Singer can embrace. Read more »

Paul Singer Will Be Vindicated—By Gold

Paul Singer is pissed that gold keeps losing money—his money—and, like John Paulson, he’s mystified that people have temporarily lost some of their attraction to shiny objects.

That said, Paul Singer, who is worried about many things, namely that this country is going to hell in a handbasket, is not worried about gold. Not one bit. Read more »

  • 29 Jan 2013 at 3:51 PM

Paul Singer Is In A Generous Mood Today

The panel– moderated by Morgan Stanley’s chief US economist, Vincent Reinhart, and featuring Jeff Vinik of Vinik Asset Management, Ken Ebberts of Goldman Sachs Investment Partners, Michael Novogratz of Fortress Investment Group, and Rob Citrone of Discovery Capital Management– was asked to grade Ben Bernanke. Everyone on the panel gave the Federal Reserve Chairman an “A” or a “B; Paul Singer gave a “D.” [Absolute Return]

  • 23 Jan 2013 at 1:32 PM
  • Banks

Bank Investors Push For Change Via Strongly Worded Poll Responses

I feel like this exchange did not go well for Jamie Dimon:

[Elliott Capital's Paul] Singer said the unfathomable nature of banks’ public accounts made it impossible to know which were “actually risky or sound”. … Mr Singer noted that derivatives positions, in particular, were difficult for outside investors to parse and worried that banks did not always collateralise their positions. Mr Dimon said the bank did for all “major” clients. Mr Singer retorted: “Well, we’re a minor client then.”

Whoops! Guess someone else doesn’t know what positions banks collateralize. I suspect someone at Elliott is already on the phone with JPMorgan to renegotiate their CSA. Also so many other people; I count about $50 billion of uncollateralized (fair value) derivative exposure at JPMorgan, suggesting that it fully collateralizes a little under two-thirds of its trades.1 Perhaps those are the two-thirds with the major clients, but if so that seems a little irrelevant. That’s a lot of minor-client money.

Why does Singer care? Well I guess he wants better collateral terms from JPMorgan? More seriously … there is whatever incentive to say things that always exists at Davos sessions, which I guess is a thing, ugh.2 Then there is the broad question of whether banks are too opaque to invest in. Singer is not alone in thinking that the answer is no; we talked a while back about how a lot of smart people get kind of freaked out by bank financial statements; derivatives, as well as other buzzwords like prop trading and opacity, play a role in their conclusions as well. Also here is a funny article about how 60% of Bloomberg subscribers are basically commie anarchists: Read more »

According to a report by Reuters, Romney supporters in the financial community are a starkly divided group tonight. In one corner you have those who will be partying (Julian Robertson, Paul Singer, Anthony Scaramucci and other top Romney donors have been invited to attend a soirée at the Westin Boston; John Paulson is throwing a small get-together at his Upper East Side townhouse; and “less prominent Wall Street fundraisers will be gathering at Brinkley’s Station, a bar and restaurant” on East 60th Street that serves “a $23.75 lobster club sandwich and $12 Bloody Marys”). In the other you have those who will be spending the evening punishing themselves and telling anyone who calls, “I don’t deserve to have fun.” Read more »