JPMorgan Said to Weigh Bonus Clawbacks After Loss

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by Banjo, May 15, 2012.

  1. Banjo


  2. There will be hell to pay if JPM tries to take away money from the execs who were doing what they were told by Dimon to do: risk billions to drive profits. The fact that Drew brought the company billions of dollars in profit during her time there shows she was performing to the best of her ability. Her contributions seem to far outnumber her mistakes.

    Drew and the others who's heads are rolling are scapegoats in this situation. As long as Dimon continues as CEO of JPM, this whole thing will be a sham. He is the one who orchestrated the the changes, taking the CIO from a risk-mitigation unit, to a profit center.

    A real man would step down in light of his poor judgement and lack of effective leadership. A rich man merely blames others for his mistakes.

    Shame on you, Jamie. :mad:
  3. newwurldmn


    Jamie made a mistake here, but he's done far more for JPMorgan than this has cost them. JPM was one of the few financial firms to emerge from the crisis stronger than when it entered it.

    They got 2 out of the 3 things they really wanted (prime brokerage and branches in California) and they didn't have to pay for it.

    He should get a pass on this.

    Ina Drew and company should be taken to the cleaners.
  4. Unless the 90 billion dollar position they are holding can't be unwound and explodes on them.
  5. newwurldmn


    Even if they lost 10Bn on it, removing Jamie Dimon for it is a mistake.

    There isn't anyone one of his calibre to replace him, especially in a time where there is so much uncertainty with the banking business model. Citi could only get a guy who ran a capital markets business and a failed hedgefund.
  6. RobtF


    Agree with most but you're giving Ina a pass she doesn't deserve. From accounts I've heard she argued forcefully to maintain the position. That has to have consequences.
  7. zdreg


    "A rich man merely blames others for his mistakes. "
    nonsensical statement
  8. much can they claw back