Jump to content

Excerpt from new Sheila Bair book


Kraven
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here is an excerpt I just saw from the new Sheila Bair book.  In it she describes the big meeting of the major bankers with Paulson, etc. when they were told they would need to take on government money.  She describes each of the players and I have to say, I was surprised that she just lets loose on them.  Ken Lewis is described as being viewed by the others as a "country bumpkin".  Vikram Pandit is described as having "bitterness in his eyes".  She says she has no idea why John Thain was even invited.  Spicy stuff! 

 

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/09/20/bair-bull-horns/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an excerpt I just saw from the new Sheila Bair book.  In it she describes the big meeting of the major bankers with Paulson, etc. when they were told they would need to take on government money.  She describes each of the players and I have to say, I was surprised that she just lets loose on them.  Ken Lewis is described as being viewed by the others as a "country bumpkin".  Vikram Pandit is described as having "bitterness in his eyes".  She says she has no idea why John Thain was even invited.  Spicy stuff! 

 

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/09/20/bair-bull-horns/

 

Reminds me of the HBO special "Too Big to Fail", where Paulson gives his staff an introduction to the bank heads. http://youtu.be/8c8TRh7MMbA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, though I find her to be somewhat of a blowhard.

 

I think she has provided some of the most candid, insightful commentary on the bank bailout process.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/magazine/sheila-bairs-exit-interview.html?_r=0

 

I'm invested heavily in BAC but that doesn't mean I think the right things happened in 2008.  Maybe I am naive but I believe all the banks should have simply been exposed to the same FDIC receivership process as banks always are - protecting counterparties and depositors and imposing losses on shareholders and bondholders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, though I find her to be somewhat of a blowhard.

 

I think she has provided some of the most candid, insightful commentary on the bank bailout process.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/magazine/sheila-bairs-exit-interview.html?_r=0

 

I'm invested heavily in BAC but that doesn't mean I think the right things happened in 2008.  Maybe I am naive but I believe all the banks should have simply been exposed to the same FDIC receivership process as banks always are - protecting counterparties and depositors and imposing losses on shareholders and bondholders.

 

She's a blowhard and she's provided insightful commentary.  They're not mutually exclusive.

 

In terms of what should have happened in 2008, I am a firm believer in who's to know what was the perfect thing.  Those were dark days and looking at things 4-5 years after the fact is easy.  I would have preferred certain things were done differently too, but I can't cast stones.  I had some tangential involvement in certain matters at that time and all I can say is it was a complete and utter shit show.  People were petrified.  No one knew what to do and there was a very real sense that this time it was different.  It's one thing to calmly make decisions after the fact while quietly thinking in one's office, but to have to do it on the front lines of a meltdown is something altogether different.    I think that at best people can say it would have been great if x, y or z was done, but that it's hard to fault those sleeping an hour a night with the knowledge that the entire world is resting on their shoulders.  Oh yeah, it also always helps too when the only words of advice being given are "don't fuck this up". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's a blowhard and she's provided insightful commentary.  They're not mutually exclusive.

 

In terms of what should have happened in 2008, I am a firm believer in who's to know what was the perfect thing.  Those were dark days and looking at things 4-5 years after the fact is easy.  I would have preferred certain things were done differently too, but I can't cast stones.  I had some tangential involvement in certain matters at that time and all I can say is it was a complete and utter shit show.  People were petrified.  No one knew what to do and there was a very real sense that this time it was different.  It's one thing to calmly make decisions after the fact while quietly thinking in one's office, but to have to do it on the front lines of a meltdown is something altogether different.    I think that at best people can say it would have been great if x, y or z was done, but that it's hard to fault those sleeping an hour a night with the knowledge that the entire world is resting on their shoulders.  Oh yeah, it also always helps too when the only words of advice being given are "don't fuck this up".

 

Totally agree!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, though I find her to be somewhat of a blowhard.

 

I think she has provided some of the most candid, insightful commentary on the bank bailout process.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/magazine/sheila-bairs-exit-interview.html?_r=0

 

I'm invested heavily in BAC but that doesn't mean I think the right things happened in 2008.  Maybe I am naive but I believe all the banks should have simply been exposed to the same FDIC receivership process as banks always are - protecting counterparties and depositors and imposing losses on shareholders and bondholders.

 

She's a blowhard and she's provided insightful commentary.  They're not mutually exclusive.

 

In terms of what should have happened in 2008, I am a firm believer in who's to know what was the perfect thing.  Those were dark days and looking at things 4-5 years after the fact is easy.  I would have preferred certain things were done differently too, but I can't cast stones.  I had some tangential involvement in certain matters at that time and all I can say is it was a complete and utter shit show.  People were petrified.  No one knew what to do and there was a very real sense that this time it was different.  It's one thing to calmly make decisions after the fact while quietly thinking in one's office, but to have to do it on the front lines of a meltdown is something altogether different.    I think that at best people can say it would have been great if x, y or z was done, but that it's hard to fault those sleeping an hour a night with the knowledge that the entire world is resting on their shoulders.  Oh yeah, it also always helps too when the only words of advice being given are "don't fuck this up".

 

Very well put.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...