April 25, 2024

DealBook: Adoboli, Ex-UBS Trader, Called Scapegoat for Bank’s Woes

Kweku M. Adoboli, a former UBS trader whose risky trades resulted in a multibillion-dollar loss, claims the bank knew of and encouraged his actions.Carl Court/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesKweku M. Adoboli, a former UBS trader whose risky trades resulted in a multibillion-dollar loss, claims the bank knew of and encouraged his actions.

LONDON — Kweku M. Adoboli, a former UBS trader in London, was cast by the defense in closing arguments on Friday as the scapegoat for a multibillion-dollar loss at the Swiss bank.

Charles Sherrard, Mr. Adoboli’s lawyer, told the jury that the bank’s management had singled out his client after a series of scandals and missteps at UBS. “He has had to bare the brunt about what has been going on at UBS,” Mr. Sherrard told the jury. “He has been blamed for redundancies, the share price fall and reputational damage.”

Mr. Adoboli, 32, is charged with six counts of fraud and false accounting in connection with a $2.3 billion loss at the bank. If convicted, he could face more than 10 years in prison. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges. The case should go to the jury early next week.

Over the course of the trial, the prosecution portrayed Mr. Adoboli as an “arrogant” investment banker who sidestepped the rules when it suited him. On Thursday, Sasha Wass, the lead prosecutor, called him a “gambler” who was “playing God” with the bank’s money.

The defense argued that the allegations represented a “character assassination,” which failed to highlight the role of the management of UBS in condoning his trading activity. Mr. Sherrard added that the bank’s actions were representative of an industry driven solely to make money, an industry that puts enormous pressure on traders to make profits.

“Senior management are never to blame,” Mr. Sherrard said.

UBS is not a defendant in the case, and is not permitted to comment on criminal cases, according to British law.

During almost five hours of closing arguments on Friday, the defense rebutted accusations that Mr. Adoboli acted alone to create false trades and hide losses from 2008 to 2011. Mr. Sherrard told the jury that several layers of management knew about the activities, but they did not stop Mr. Adoboli because he was earning profits.

Mr. Adoboli joined UBS in 2003 and rose quickly to work on the Delta One desk, a plain-vanilla version of derivatives trading. Traders in the unit create investments that track specific financial assets, like a basket of company stocks.

He is accused of creating false trades to hide his losses, according to prosecutors. They claimed that Mr. Adoboli created separate accounts, which he called his “umbrella,” to mask the profits and losses from his unauthorized activities.

The defense said Mr. Adoboli’s activities were well known in the bank. His supervisors, according to the defense, condoned the actions because they proved to be profitable.

Mr. Adoboli’s team earned $8.8 million in 2010, Mr. Sherrard said. That figure rose to $52 million for just the second quarter of 2011. In a single day, the unit posted a $6 million profit, he said.

“The next level of supervisors knew much of what he was doing,” Mr. Sherrard said. “For almost three years, everyone basked in his glory.”

While Mr. Sherrard acknowledged that his client had lied to UBS officials, he said Mr. Adoboli had been buying time to recoup his losses. The former trader also initially said he was solely to blame to protect his colleagues, his lawyer claimed.

Later, Mr. Adoboli said others at UBS had been aware of his actions. Mr. Sherrard also told the jury that members of his client’s team used the so-called umbrella to cover up their trading activity.

The prosecutors are “trying to desperately portray this man as a rogue trader,” his lawyer said. “The minute you see that the whole desk was working as a team,” the prosecution’s case falls apart, Mr. Sherrard added.

The defense similarly countered claims that Mr. Adoboli had gambled with the bank’s money for personal gain. Mr. Sherrard read excerpts from the former trader’s UBS evaluations, which portrayed him as hard-working, humble team player. He added that these glowing reviews debunked accusations that he was driven by profit.

“The notion is absurd,” Mr. Sherrard said.

Article source: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/jury-is-told-ex-ubs-trader-was-made-a-scapegoat-for-banks-woes/?partner=rss&emc=rss

DealBook: Morgan Stanley to Cut 580 Jobs in New York

Morgan Stanley headquarters in Manhattan.Richard Drew/Associated PressMorgan Stanley headquarters in Manhattan.

Morgan Stanley will slash 580 jobs in New York as part of a broader wave of layoffs underway at the bank, according to a public filing.

In a notice filed with the New York State Department of Labor, Morgan Stanley cited “economic” woes as the cause of the layoffs. The cuts began Dec. 15 on a “rolling” basis, according to the filing, known as a WARN, or Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification.

Earlier this month, Morgan Stanley said it would cut 1,600 jobs, or 2.6 percent of its work force, by the first quarter of 2012. The bank plans to spread the round of reductions across all divisions, including investment banking and trading.

The layoffs at Morgan Stanley are the latest round of severe cutbacks on Wall Street, which has suffered a year of humbling returns and enormous cost-cutting. Citigroup recently announced it would shed 4,500 jobs. Bank of America and Goldman Sachs have also begun carrying out major staff reductions. In June, Goldman told the New York Department of Labor that it would layoff 230 New York workers through March 2012.

The job losses have taken a toll on New York City, the center of the financial industry. The securities industry in the city lost nearly $3 billion in the third quarter, according to a report released this month by the New York State comptroller. In October, the comptroller disclosed that an estimated 10,000 Wall Street workers could lose their jobs by the end of 2012.

Some of the cuts at Morgan Stanley in New York, the filing said, will impact workers at the firm’s Midtown Manhattan headquarters, 1585 Broadway. The layoffs will also affect three smaller Morgan Stanley offices in New York: 1 New York Plaza, 750 Seventh Avenue and 1221 Avenue of Americas.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=ab96410ac34858fd09099e6bc76d9cce

You’re the Boss Blog: No Credit? No Problem

The Agenda

How small-business issues are shaping politics and policy.

One of the most important questions for small businesses hovering through all of the tumult of the last three years is whether they’ve been able to get the credit they need. The question has been hotly debated — even becoming a partisan issue last year, when Congress wrestled with the small-business lending fund that ultimately became law in the small-business jobs act. Banks tell anyone who will listen that they are eager to lend to any creditworthy business they can find. Republicans tend to put it slightly differently: small businesses that deserve credit can get it, but many are too cautious to make investments right now. Many Democrats and some small-business advocates say a good loan is hard to find.

Last Thursday, when we asked small-business owners around the country how they were faring in this new period of uncertainty, one of the things we wanted to know was whether they needed credit, and if so, whether it was available to them. And while our informal survey was small and hardly scientific, it will not reassure those who think making credit available is the chief solution to small-business woes. None of the businesses we asked told us they were having trouble getting a loan.

Several were making new investments. Sahadi’s, the Middle Eastern food emporium in Brooklyn, hopes to expand its store to vacant space nearby. But the Sahadi family, which employs about 45 people, isn’t worried about not getting the loan it needs to undertake construction. “Our relationship with our financial institution is still very good,” said Bob Sahadi. “I mean we’ve had no reason to give them grief, and they have no reason to give us grief — we’ve both been good to each other.”

In Toledo, Ohio, Mancy’s Restaurant Group is adding a catering business to the four restaurants it already operates. But rather than borrow a million or two to buy a building and dedicate it to the new business, the Mancy family opted for a more modest course. “At our central office we have a commissary where we bake bread and have a butcher shop for our restaurants, and we’re in the process and we have converted part of this facility to also prepare catered food,” Gus Mancy said. The family is relying on “existing community assets” to host the events they cater. “At the big art museum in town we just found out Friday we’re the preferred caterer, and the only caterer named right now,” Mr. Mancy added.

Like Mr. Mancy, Scott Tate, of Tate Technology, a contract electronics manufacturer that employs 35 people in Spokane, Wash., was not eager to take on more debt. “We’re always looking at updating our equipment,” he said. “Obviously, to do that we would pay cash. We’re not going to go out and borrow money to do it. But, he added, he was not in any rush to make the investment, given the current climate. “If you’re trying to sell me a piece of capital equipment four years ago, I’d probably be a lot more interested,” he sad. “Now I’m not too sure I want to go spend any money.”

Here’s one other thing Tate Technology and Mancy’s Restaurant Group have in common, besides thriftiness: both are succeeding in part because competitors have failed. Mancy’s, Mr. Mancy said, was filling a void left when other Toledo caterers closed their doors. And Mr. Tate said that his business has grown over the last three years because of a more aggressive sales strategy but also because several competitors shuttered. “We lost three contract electronic manufacturers in the Spokane area in the last three years,” he said. “There used to be six, now there’s three. Back before the dot-com crash in the late Nineties there were nine or 10 of us. The customers that they were servicing obviously have probably gone down, but they’re still around. So that lower volume has to go somewhere else.”

They weren’t alone. Dan Pratt, owner of Pratt’s Pets and Feed in suburban Phoenix, said that this year he’s seen his best sales of the past decade — buoyed in part by less competition. “There were two stores very close to us that went out of business right away when things started getting pretty bad,” he said. “So we recouped those customers as best we could because they were in our proximity.”

They say that what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. In the case of at least some of the small businesses that survived the last recession, that seems to be true.

How about your business? Have you benefited from the loss of competitors? Have you struggled to get credit?

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=bf23940a2788ae4c1619c080f80aecf2