Goldman Sachs To Offer More Would-Be Partners Opportunity To Go David Tepper On An Executive's Ass This Year

Each year, after a long and very comprehensive background check, a lucky group of Goldman employees are abducted from their desks, blindfolded, gagged, and led by candlelight through a dark hallway and into a subterranean conference room. Standing on the table before them are Lloyd Blankfein, Gary Cohn and the rest of the management committee, who ask if they are prepared to pledge their devotion to the firm above all else. Those who agree have their nether regions dipped in a vat of gold, genuflect before Cohn's groin, and, at the stroke of midnight, are inducted into the Brotherhood of the Sach. While there are many ways that becoming a member of the club will change one's life, the most important one involves the partaking of astronomical profits on payday. As a result, when people are not invited to join the group, they tend to get very upset. For instance, hedge fund manager David Tepper, who became a billionaire many times over after leaving the firm, was still so upset about the snub twenty years later that he bought and bulldozed the house of the guy who passed him over. Others probably wouldn't have even gone to the trouble of buying the place first, and operated the wrecking ball themselves. Which is why we say in full seriousness that the Partnership Committee might want to watch its back. Goldman Sachs has begun vetting potential new partners and is expected to appoint a smaller number of bankers to its upper echelons this year, according to senior executives involved in the process... The nomination process for new partners ended during the summer. The internal vetting process began earlier this month and is expected to last until mid-November when the new class of partners will be announced. The vetting process is known within the bank as “cross-ruffing”, in reference to a manoeuvre from the card game bridge and typically sees a team of partners deployed to every division to talk to employees who know the candidates. [FT, related]
Author:
Publish date:
Updated on

Each year, after a long and very comprehensive background check, a lucky group of Goldman employees are abducted from their desks, blindfolded, gagged, and led by candlelight through a dark hallway and into a subterranean conference room. Standing on the table before them are Lloyd Blankfein, Gary Cohn and the rest of the management committee, who ask if they are prepared to pledge their devotion to the firm above all else. Those who agree have their nether regions dipped in a vat of gold and, at the stroke of midnight, are inducted into the Brotherhood of the Sach. While there are many ways that becoming a member of the club will change one's life, the most important one involves the partaking of astronomical profits on payday. As a result, when people are not invited to join the group, they tend to get very upset. For instance, hedge fund manager David Tepper, who became a billionaire many times over after leaving the firm, was still so upset about the snub twenty years later that he bought and bulldozed the house of the guy who passed him over. Others probably wouldn't have even gone to the trouble of buying the place first, and operated the wrecking ball themselves. Which is why we say in full seriousness that the Partnership Committee might want to watch its back this year.

Goldman Sachs has begun vetting potential new partners and is expected to appoint a smaller number of bankers to its upper echelons this year, according to senior executives involved in the process... The nomination process for new partners ended during the summer. The internal vetting process began earlier this month and is expected to last until mid-November when the new class of partners will be announced. The vetting process is known within the bank as “cross-ruffing”, in reference to a manoeuvre from the card game bridge and typically sees a team of partners deployed to every division to talk to employees who know the candidates.

While the Tepper retribution was a bit extreme, at the very least, fewer people named partner = greater chance someone's doorknob is getting pissed on.

Crop Of Goldman Partners Seen To Shrink [FT]

Related

There's An Opening For Chief Partaaay Planning Partner At Goldman Sachs

According to an incredibly distressing report by Bloomberg today, Richard Kimball Jr., he of topless pool parties, topless and bottom-less Halloween parties, and what sound like orgies in the backyard-fame, is no longer a partner at the firm. Goldman Sachs, which is scheduled to announce its new class of partners next week, has 407 members of that elite group, down 31 in about nine months, according to a company filing. That’s because 33 people listed as part of the partnership in a February document weren’t included in a filing released Nov. 2...Names dropped from the latest list include investment bankers Jason G. Cahilly, who specializes in advising media and telecommunications companies; Alastair J. Hunt, who works with businesses involved in natural resources; Kevin A. Quinn, a specialist in semiconductor firms and Richard A. Kimball Jr., who worked with the health-care industry. Although rumors circulated a while back that Goldman was considering simply de-partnering Kimball, a painful process that nevertheless allows neutered ex-partners to still gain access to the building, we're told that he has in fact left the bank entirely.* So the position is up for grabs and while it's unlikely that anyone will be able to fill his considerable shoes, that's not a good enough reason to not give it a try. Goldman Sachs Partner List Drops 31 Since February, Filing Shows [Bloomberg] Earlier: Goldman Sachs Managing Director Richard Kimball Finds Finds New Apartment Board Not Hell-Bent On Ruining His Good Time; Goldman Sachs Considering Punishing Richard Kimball For His Prudence, Joie De Vivre; Goldman Partner’s Neighbors Scandalized By Shirt Optional Parties; Goldman Sachs Supposedly Not Happy With Topless Story; Banks Advising Employees To Avoid Flashy Hamptons Homes This Year, Vague About Whether Or Not Pulling A Kimball Is Okay *Whether to start his own hedge fund or design a line for La Perla is unclear at this time.

Half A Dozen Former Goldman Partners Will Be Forced To Fight The Urge To Attend Greg Smith's Book Signing Next Week*

Something you may have picked up on is that next week, Grand Central Publishing will release Why I Left Goldman Sachs: A Wall Street Story, by former employee Greg Smith. Should you buy the book? That depends on you ask. Some people, like the ones who made Smith famous, say no. Others, like those who enjoy vivid descriptions of a naked Lloyd Blankfein and edge-of-your-seat ping pong matches, would probably say yes. One group of people who'd prefer you save your money? Goldman Sachs. As previously mentioned, the bank embarked on a Discredit Greg Smith tour last month which has involved equating him with a first or second or third-year analyst who thinks people care about all the crazy stuff he was privy to when in fact it wasn't crazy and no one does; leaking unflattering performance reviews that suggest he was "unrealistic" about his abilities and earnings potential; and generally painting a picture of someone who was a nobody at the firm ("My first reaction [to hearing about his Op-Ed] was, who is he," the firm's head of HR told Bloomberg TV this morning), who wrote his book out of spite for not receiving the bonus he thought he deserved, and whose claims re: The Firm should not be trusted. For the most part, a number of people-- from current to former employees to those familiar but not intimately familiar with Goldman-- have concurred with their assessment of young Greg. Of course, every now and then you have some individuals who speak out of turn and who should probably consider sleeping with one eye open. There are a lot of people who acknowledge these things internally, but no one is willing to say it publicly,” Smith, who was a vice president when he left Goldman Sachs, said in the “60 Minutes” interview. “And my view was the only way you force people to change the system is by saying it publicly.” Seven former Goldman Sachs partners and managing directors, positions that are more senior than vice president, said in March interviews that Smith shouldn’t be taken seriously because he was a junior employee and may have been disgruntled about his pay or career. All asked not to be identified because they didn’t want to risk ruining their relationship with the firm. Six of the seven said they agreed with Smith’s criticism of how the firm has treated clients under Chief Executive Officer Lloyd C. Blankfein, 58, and President Gary D. Cohn, 52, and that current members of the management committee would, too. Even so, they said they don’t expect the board of directors to take action or that anything will change because the bank has made money and outperformed most rivals. What? He shouldn't be trusted because of X, Y, Z but, having said that, he does make some excellent points? Do you hear yourself talking? This is what happens when you don't stick to the script! Goldman Sachs Op-Ed Wasn’t a ‘Betrayal,’ Smith Tells 60 Minutes [Bloomberg] *And will lucky if they're not eating out of feeding tubes..