A Friend Stopped By | 03/10/2009 8:55 am
Did Jimmy Cayne's Sexism Kill Bear Stearns? by Janet Tavakoli

In late 1989, Jimmy Cayne, former president and chief executive officer of Bear Stearns, told the now-defunct M magazine that Wall Street, like bridge, is not a game for women. Cayne alleged women can’t take the pressure and that a woman will "probably have to go to the ladies’ room and dab her eyes." Grand Master Judi Radin, James Cayne’s female bridge coach at the time, was probably surprised to hear it. [Cayne later denied that the quotes were accurate, but reporter Duncan Christy claimed they were “meticulously accurate.”]
Mr. Cayne seemed to fancy himself the undisputed authority on how the opposite sex may or may not relieve pressure in the privacy of the bathroom. His pretension remained unchallenged for years. But The Wall Street Journal’s Kate Kelly turned the tables on Cayne in a front-page profile on November 1, 2007. Cayne later seemed huffy, saying, “This story about smoking marijuana with some woman in a [men’s] bathroom at a tournament site is pure fiction.”
The very same day The Wall Street Journal article appeared, The New York Times’s DealBook leapt to Cayne’s defense, calling Ms. Kelly’s article "unflattering and at times highly gossipy" (yet, I do not recall The New York Times’s protests over Mr. Cayne’s much-earlier allegations about women).
In the summer of 2008, I heard from a former Bear Stearns colleague that Jimmy Cayne was still steaming over Ms. Kelly’s profile. Based on the venom Jimmy Cayne spewed in Ms. Kelly’s direction as related in William D. Cohan’s new book, House of Cards, my news was accurate. But not only are Mr. Cayne’s allegations with respect to Ms. Kelly untrue, his argument was so weak he had to hurl the "c" word. An apology may be in order over representations of who is or is not fit for Wall Street (or bridge). So, Mr. Cayne: You first.
I have spoken with Kate Kelly, author of her own upcoming book on Bear Stearns, Street Fighters; and I have known Mike Siconolfi, senior editor of The Wall Street Journal, for almost two decades (I mention him in the acknowledgments of my own book on the financial meltdown, Dear Mr. Buffett: What an Investor Learns 1,269 Miles From Wall Street). Jimmy Cayne said some harsh — and untrue — things about both of them (among others) and his opinions are related by Cohan in his book.
As for the actual causes of Bear’s implosion, I relate my firsthand take on Bear’s meltdown in Dear Mr. Buffett. I know Ralph Cioffi, former co-head of the Bear Stearns hedge funds, and Warren Spector, former co-chief operating officer of Bear Stearns, and worked with them early in our careers at Bear Stearns.
As for Jimmy Cayne, his view is supported by junk scientists around the globe, including Cambridge professor John Coates, who seems to blame the credit-bubble risk-taking on testosterone. One could pose an equally "scientific" alternate theory that in a world where women got equal pay and equal job opportunity on Wall Street, they would be equally happy to take high risks. In my experience, women working on Wall Street don’t expect to be protected by their peers or bailed out by the government after a major screwup. Besides, if hormones are the excuse, then a woman has much more incentive for seeking to score, since she can experience the thrill of victory many times in a single go — if the theory had any validity.























15 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
In business, it’s all about the bottom line. This guy clearly has issues, and no Board wants an embarrassing CEO, but the real overriding concern cited in the article was "…what the fallout of the firm would be in the fourth quarter—ended November 30—from its exposure to hard-to-value “Level 3 assets,” of which Bear had $20 billion, including $2.4 billion in subprime mortgages."
My question is, why didn’t the Board replace him when they knew that he was not only embarrassing, but also leading the company into financial ruin?
Beau, did you happen to listen to Morning Edition this morning? The interview with the author of the new book atout him absolutely blew my mind. No wonder we are in so much trouble with these jerks floating around:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101681538
Neither pot nor sexism killed Bear Stearns. In my book, DEAR MR. BUFFETT, I devote two chapters (seven and eight) to the mispriced risky assets combined with leverage that toppled the Bear Stearns hedge funds, the Peloton fund, and Carlyle Capital’s fund. All of which led to financing pressures for Bear Stearns itself. This is a tongue in cheek article meant for entertainment rather than explanation of the real causes (but I also say that in the article). Janet Tavakoli
My friend Janet, I find your unabashed attempt to sell your book on this site somewhat distasteful.
Namaste.
For those of you who are interested, this is an adapted excerpt from p. 165 my book about AIG and the WSJ’s protocol with respect to sources:
I told Dave Reilly at the Wall Street Journal: “There’s no way these aren’t showing a loss.”4 That is simply a market reality. This is Wall Street speak for: In my humble opinion, you are a big fat liar. AIG responded: “We disagree.” That is Wall Street speak for: No, YOU are a big fat liar! Before Dave Reilly wrote his article, he talked to experts, including me, for background. Then he called AIG to ask them for their thinking. AIG stood firm. Then Reilly called me again. He didn’t want the Wall Street Journal to look stupid, but told me “they pay me to go out on a limb.” He said he needed me to go on the record. It would make the article more forceful. I did not think that AIG would tell Reilly: You know, you have a point, maybe we should recheck our homework, but I did not anticipate arguing with AIG in the Wall Street Journal’s “Heard on the Street” column. I hesitated. AIG has the resources to crush me like a bug. On the other hand, I am not fat. I finally agreed to go on the record.By June 2008, AIG recorded two back-to-back quarters of its largest losses ever. AIG took more than $20 billion in write-downs on its derivative positions through the first quarter of 2008; net losses for the fourth quarter of 2007 were $5.3 billion, and in the first quarter of 2008, AIG reported losses of $7.8 billion. In February 2008, its auditor said it found “material weakness” in AIG’s accounting.
[End of Excerpt]
What is not in the book, is that Mike Siconolfi (Cayne makes unjustified remarks about him) also double checked because of the sensitive nature of the information, and urged me to allow WSJ to use my name. Had I refused, he would have respected that choice. At the time, I was alone in challenging AIG.