Shoe, I too read that Reuters article.
"One analyst, who asked not to be identified, said Grubman's words carry weight because of Salomon's relationship as WorldCom's bankers."
"Anything (Grubman) says is important because Salomon are the bankers" for WorldCom, said the analyst, who added that a recapitalization is likely under consideration if Grubman is mentioning it."
After all the talk about the breach in the Chinese Wall, if Grubman's opinion is based on insider knowledge from the banking side, he has to be crazy to use it as an analyst. On the other hand, perhaps the risk/reward ratio favors flaunting the law. If someone who was short a ton of WCOM paid him millions to go negative, it might be too hard to resist. With a good defense, even if guilty, he would get a slap on the wrist - a fine, probation, license revocation, etc. I have no idea if he acted out of anything but pure motives, but I know that it is very hard for anyone to turn down lifetime security. Consider a customs officer that is earning $36,000 per year and is offered $2 million to take a coffee break instead of inspect a particular truck coming across the border.
I dunno!
Bob |
