Another Cassandra. Harvard Crimson:
After a year-long stint at a European investment bank and another at Enron, Iris M. Mack signed on to be a quantitative analyst for Harvard Management Company in early 2002, hoping, she says, to find job security and distance from the risky trading and accounting practices that forced her last employer into bankruptcy in the company charged with managing Harvard’s endowment.
But only a few months later, Mack says she was fired after she raised concerns to University officials about managers’ qualifications and possibly irresponsible usage of financial instruments [derivatives] that could have contributed to the recent and sudden decline in Harvard’s endowment.
In an e-mail sent May 30, 2002 to Marne Levine, chief of staff for then-Harvard President Lawrence H. Summers, Mack detailed her concerns regarding what she deemed HMC’s “frightening” usage of derivatives and statistical modeling techniques, as well as the Company’s lack of a timely and portfolio-wide risk management system, high employee turnover rate, and low level of productivity in the workplace, specifically among managers.
According to documents and e-mail records, all provided by Mack, Levine had initially assured Mack that their correspondence would remain confidential. But on July 1, HMC chief Jack R. Meyer called Mack into a meeting, in which she was presented with copies of her e-mails, according to a letter sent to Levine and Summers by Mack’s attorney.
Gotta run, so read the rest of the story for the detail.
- lambert's blog
- Printer-friendly version
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
Wow. Larry Summers, so far, hasn't been criticized as much as
Timmie--and even Barry.
This is big and really calls into question his ability to manage his advice role, much less the Big Bankster Boiz.
"Regulatory capture", indeed.
Must read entire article later, also gotta run.
Get away from the PC for half a day and, wham, learn majority of GM's board of directors resigning. So, will BO be naming the new directors? Choosing which new models to build? This ought to be interesting.
An auto analyst on Diane Rehm show said one point Obama disliked about GM's restructuring plan was that they were not closing enough facilities. This analysts said that might be very short sighted, as GM needs new vechicles to attract the buying public--why close? Asked if BO would be deciding which plants to close. Why not retain for future use? I didn't quite hear the whole argument on this.
But, sounds like BO will pressure GM bondholders big time. So...what will happen there re: Big Bankster Boiz.
No company size of GM has ever gone through bankruptcy in 30 days. Shortest has been months, usually years.
Hhhmm. An invitation to failure? Or BO and his experts knows something the outside business experts don't? Stay tuned--this ride ain't over, kids. As Atrios writes, Wheeeeeeee!