With a $2 to $3 billion trading loss and about $20 billion in market capitalization erased, there are really the only two likely conclusions facing JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon: at best, he's incompetent; at worse, laws may have been broken.
True, so far, it is very difficult to know what really happened because JP Morgan – or more accurately, it's CEO -- is saying a lot, but disclosing very little. In fact, there appears to be a disinformation campaign designed to confuse and mislead regarding what really happened at the bank and how it happened. Nevertheless, cutting through that spin, what we do know raises very serious questions about the bank's conduct and that of its vaunted and lionized CEO.
In summary: in early April the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg reported specific facts about the bank's high risk trading operation in London, which the CEO claims he didn't learn until early May. But, the CEO had previously transformed the bank's London operation (it's Chief Investment Office or CIO) from low risk hedging to high risk derivatives betting. Confirming the concerns many have had, former traders from the bank's proprietary trading business were moved into the CIO. While the new high risk CIO generated billions in profits, concerns about the risks were raised with senior officers including the CEO personally, who were told that the CIO was an "accident waiting to happen."
Ignoring those many internal warnings and red flags apparently resulted in this big loss, but it also required JP Morgan and its CEO to ignore the prominently reported facts in early April.
Read the whole article: JP Morgan's CEO Jamie Dimon: Incompetent or Culpable? | Better Markets.
Who did it then, his greedy, evil, identical-twin, bankster brother?
Thanks for starting the deregulation craze, Ronald Reagan. You really made a mess of things. Where's Franklin D. Roosevelt's clone when he's needed? Let's see, Barack Obama told the banksters that his administration is the only thing between them and the pitchforks. Well, FDR also told the banksters that FDR was actually saving capitalism.
That's too bad. It's too bad that "freedom" and "liberty" means laissez-faire at JP Morgan and caveat emptor for the rest of us. Why do you think that being free of evil via regulations isn't considered freedom? I like being self-regulated, but I'm not averse to God. It seems way too many libertarians/neoliberals really just want the delusional liberty (it isn't real freedom) to rape with impunity.
Why do you think Jamie Dimon has failed? He's failed because he's on the wrong side. It will always come back around to haunt and destroy. Evil gets you when you turn to it. That's the eternal fact.