熊四叹倒台的事情大家听说了么？就在今年三月份的一个星期内，活活被逼上了绝路，一年前还值一百五的股票，作价两块钱卖给了摩根大通。
我在读华尔街日报关于熊四叹倒台的报告，好过瘾啊，果汁多的一掐就流出来了。原来两块钱的故事是这样的：在还有另一个可能的竞争者事，摩根大通本来打算出＄８－＄１２，熊四叹很不爽了。等拿个竞争者退出，摩根大通就只肯出四块钱一股了。熊四叹的头出离愤怒，打算破产算了，把一堆律师们叫近来开始准备文件。但是发现根据２００５年的破产条例，破产保护对客户帐户没用，还是能被债主拿走。
财政部长包森给摩根大通的头打电话说：＂四块钱太高了，还是得低点。＂
（想象摩根大通的头喜心翻倒的模样）
原来包森不愿意大家说政府拯救华尔街。（当然事后大家也没少说。）
＂两块钱。＂摩根大通的律师跟熊四叹的律师说。
＂你不是这个意思吧。＂熊四叹的律师。。。。
熊四叹的头们又一次的出离愤怒了。。。但是CEO想到联储和政府的晚娘脸色，想到拒绝这个价钱的严重后果，苦苦哀求大家：两块钱也比没有强啊。。。
这个消息一公布，股东们当然很不爽。没到两天就两边的律师们就为并购协议中的一条漏洞吵反了天：即使股东反对并购，摩根大通也得为熊四叹提供一年的财政保证。
摩根大通的头跟熊四叹的头说：＂你意识到我们有个问题么？股东可能会投反对票阻止并购！＂
熊四叹的头仿佛突然见了光：＂你说＇我们＇有个问题是什么意思？＂？
摩根大通的头就跑去跟熊四叹的高级员工，同时也是３０％的股票持有者，讲个话，安抚一下，说：＂这个拿枪逼婚的事儿，我也不想干啊。但是我们不干，你们就要破产，失业。。＂
一粒粗壮的股票经纪站起来愤怒的说：＂你这不是拿枪逼婚！你这是强奸！＂
然后。。。。摩根大通就想不干了。。。。。
到这时候，如果摩根大通不提供财政保护，熊四叹已经虚弱的连破产保护都不够资格，只能破产清算了。他们愤怒的想要跟摩根大通打官司，但是很快意识到。。不太实际。。。
两边僵了一阵，熊四叹的头跟摩根大通的头说：你也要考虑，我们有个心理界限，要不是两位数，我们痛快不了啊。。。你可别跟我说九块九毛九。
财政部长包森也勉强赞同了。价钱被提到了十块钱，熊四叹发行了39.5% 的新股，通通卖给了摩根大通。这下摩根大通做了大股东，也不怕股东投票否决了。
今天是投票的日子，据说，只花了十分钟不到，就通过了。
熊的果汁:两块钱的来龙去脉
Re: 熊的果汁:两块钱的来龙去脉
这句太搞笑了。Knowing wrote:你可别跟我说九块九毛九。
小K写得好。妙趣横生而且我这种经济白痴也能看懂。
印度人的提问
的确很果汁。
小K不知道有没有注意到有一个印度人在关键时候勇于提问的细节。
话说熊四叹的事定下之前，有一个电话会议，街上的江湖大佬都纷纷打进来听风声。我猜听到熊四叹的惨淡下场，各位难免有“兔死狐悲”的感觉。偏有花旗的新大佬（Vikram Pandit）在这当儿排众而出勇于发问...
首先没有说自己是谁，（大伙心想，这谁呀？）
摩根大通的大佬ＤＩＭＯＮ也问这谁呀？－答曰，Vikram。
Vikram问的问题是如此之技术层面／不搭界，
结果ＤＩＭＯＮ只是粗暴地回答说”少屁话。“
看到这里我以为我看错了，然而不，多么典型的印度人的提问情节。
原文：
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1212020 ... email.html
Late Sunday night, as lawyers raced to finalize the merger agreement, executives of the New York Fed convened a call for Wall Street CEOs. So many people were dialing in that officials were repeatedly interrupted by the announcement of new participants.
Messrs. Geithner and Dimon led off with some brief remarks, noting that J.P. Morgan would be guaranteeing Bear Stearns's debts and that if the pact hadn't come together, the market impact may have been catastrophic. During the question-and-answer session, Citigroup Inc.'s new CEO, Vikram Pandit, spoke up.
Mr. Pandit -- who did not initially identify himself -- asked a shrewd but technical question: How would the deal affect the risk to Bear Stearns's trading partners on certain long-term contracts?
The query irked Mr. Dimon. "Who is this?" he snapped. Mr. Pandit identified himself as "Vikram." Offended that Mr. Pandit was taking up time with what he considered granular inquiries, Mr. Dimon shot back, "Stop being such a jerk." He added that Citigroup "should thank us" for staving off further mayhem on Wall Street.
小K不知道有没有注意到有一个印度人在关键时候勇于提问的细节。
话说熊四叹的事定下之前，有一个电话会议，街上的江湖大佬都纷纷打进来听风声。我猜听到熊四叹的惨淡下场，各位难免有“兔死狐悲”的感觉。偏有花旗的新大佬（Vikram Pandit）在这当儿排众而出勇于发问...
首先没有说自己是谁，（大伙心想，这谁呀？）
摩根大通的大佬ＤＩＭＯＮ也问这谁呀？－答曰，Vikram。
Vikram问的问题是如此之技术层面／不搭界，
结果ＤＩＭＯＮ只是粗暴地回答说”少屁话。“
看到这里我以为我看错了，然而不，多么典型的印度人的提问情节。
原文：
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1212020 ... email.html
Late Sunday night, as lawyers raced to finalize the merger agreement, executives of the New York Fed convened a call for Wall Street CEOs. So many people were dialing in that officials were repeatedly interrupted by the announcement of new participants.
Messrs. Geithner and Dimon led off with some brief remarks, noting that J.P. Morgan would be guaranteeing Bear Stearns's debts and that if the pact hadn't come together, the market impact may have been catastrophic. During the question-and-answer session, Citigroup Inc.'s new CEO, Vikram Pandit, spoke up.
Mr. Pandit -- who did not initially identify himself -- asked a shrewd but technical question: How would the deal affect the risk to Bear Stearns's trading partners on certain long-term contracts?
The query irked Mr. Dimon. "Who is this?" he snapped. Mr. Pandit identified himself as "Vikram." Offended that Mr. Pandit was taking up time with what he considered granular inquiries, Mr. Dimon shot back, "Stop being such a jerk." He added that Citigroup "should thank us" for staving off further mayhem on Wall Street.
By KATE KELLY
Part One: Missed Opportunities As the firm's fortunes spiraled downward, executives squabbled over raising capital and cutting its inventory of mortgages.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1211845 ... =Leader-US
Part Two: Run on the Bank Executives believed they were about to turn a corner, but rumors and fear sent clients, trading partners and lenders fleeing.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1211932 ... =Leader-US
Part Three: Deal or No Deal? The Fed pressured Bear Stearns to sell itself, but a misstep in the hastily drawn agreement nearly scuttled the deal.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1212020 ... =Leader-US
有事找我请发站内消息
