Lowenstein then lauds Dimon’s exceptional risk-management skills:
That he manages to be the exception to the rule is a credit to his radar for trouble. Judy, his wife, whom he met at Harvard, claims he has an instinct for danger. Jay Fishman, who worked with Dimon in the ’90s (today he is chief executive of Travelers), says: “Jamie has a healthy regard for the idea that we will go through crises and that we will be lousy at predicting them. The flip side is he will run his businesses more carefully.” In the early ’90s, when banks were racking up huge losses in commercial real estate, Dimon ordered Fishman to study what would happen to Primerica if Citibank should fail. It was the sort of far-fetched risk that no other banker would worry about. A few years later, Primerica acquired Travelers, which had been weakened by Hurricane Andrew. Dimon demanded to see the catastrophe risk in every region the firm covered. Dimon did not have day-to-day control over insurance, but he routinely trespassed over organizational charts. He told Fishman to limit his exposure so that even a once-in-a-century storm would not cost the company more than a single quarter’s earnings. That was a highly unusual, and unusually conservative, approach.
THIS FALL, DIMON SPOKE at a conference sponsored by Barclays Capital: a thousand people crammed into the ballroom at a Manhattan Sheraton to hear him. The master of ceremonies began by noting that Dimon was also the lunchtime speaker at the conference in 2006, just before the mortgage bubble burst. It was interesting to recall, he said, who else spoke then: Kerry Killinger, the chief executive of Washington Mutual; Michael Perry, chairman of IndyMac; as well as executives from the subprime lender Countrywide Financial and Lehman Brothers. “Jamie told us that day about subprime exposure — his was the first major bank to talk about that,” the master of ceremonies said. “All of those other firms disappeared.”
What Lowenstein doesn’t do, at this point, is talk about how all this only serves to underscore how weak the U.S. banking system’s risk-management systems are: JP Morgan Chase survived in large part thanks only because it was lucky enough to have Dimon at its helm. If Stan O’Neal had been in charge, things would have turned out very differently indeed. As a result, it becomes not only sensible but necessary to hobble JP Morgan more than Dimon feels is warranted. You don’t set speed limits on the basis of how fast the very best drivers can safely travel.

Hello,
Thank you Felix for your post. It is ironic for Mr. Lowenstein to miss the TBTF point for a man who already wrote (good) books about derivative dangers in the past !
It would be great if he could answer to you. ;)
See ya
#1 Posted by peterlo, CJR on Tue 7 Dec 2010 at 05:08 AM
Do you know the story about the man who committed a murder and was found guilty? His sentence? To be a life long client of Mr. Dimon's bank. Lehman Brothers was a 14 year old firm with a 158 year old name. JPMorgan-Chase is a decade old firm with a 140+ year name. J. P. Morgan and Salmon Chase are revolving in their mausoleums at what BancOne and Dimon have done to this elegant institution.
#2 Posted by Mike Robbins, CJR on Tue 7 Dec 2010 at 05:37 PM
I would think that any profile of JP Morgan's head would examine how JP Morgan does business.
They were the ones who came up with credit default swaps formulas, they have been a major obstructionist when it comes to mortgage adjustments and foreclosure
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/jamie_dimon_and_jp_morgan_on_t.php
and they've been involved in many shaky debt deals involving municipalities if not countries like Greece.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64833
If savvy is how you characterize a survivor of a car crash who drove the car into a wall, then Jamie Dimon is a savvy banker but a sucky human being.
#3 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 7 Dec 2010 at 11:17 PM
And the turks take is that this was the worst article of the year.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNxAoWnZRXU
#4 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 7 Dec 2010 at 11:27 PM
> Dimon argues that all businesses charge for some things and not for others.
That's true. But not all businesses use a multitude of charges to squeeze the poor as hard as possible. If McDonalds charged people like banks do - it would have gone bankrupt decades ago.
> If a lender to Texan oil drillers goes bust, the systemic repercussions are de minimis. If Citigroup or AIG goes bust...
De minimis? It may just me be ya'll but if you say "de minimis" in Texas - I bet people will think you're talkin' about something like French food. Or maybe a Japanese hybrid.
Orwell talks about decadence in language
George Orwell, "Politics and the English Language," 1946
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm
I fail to see why the word like "minimal" can't be used in that sentence. And it's jarring to use a Latin phrase followed just a few words later with a slangy phrasal verb.
---
And I don't know - maybe "I am the state." should have been rendered in English.
---
I know that Felix Salmon is no college student - but college students will surely be reading his articles. At least, I hope so.
#5 Posted by F. Murray Rumpelstiltskin, CJR on Wed 8 Dec 2010 at 11:43 AM