Kobe and Compliance
Compliance is one of those fine print realities of working in finance. I can't count the amount of times a future monkey's excitement was dashed to dust at the realization that his master plan was actually a misuse of proprietary info. Any job at a large firm carries the weight of silence along with it. After all, you're dealing with a lot of secretive information that could damage the firm's earnings, reputation and operations if it were to leak out. Attorneys and bankers are great examples of employees who are terrorized by the strict and often incomprehensible boundaries of compliance.
But what do we make of a guy like Kobe Bryant? His newest public escapade has made me laugh harder than the majority of Man Week commentary. A bit of potty mouth in an adrenalized state is worth a $100,000 fine... Is it hate speech warranting a scarlet swastika? Apparently so...
When Kobe went to the Laker bench earlier in the week against San Antonio, he angrily blurted out in the direction of the referee...calling him a fucking faggot. The uproar has been predictably huge and theatrical, collecting as much, if not more immediate attention than Bryant's alleged rape of a Denver hotel employee back in 2004.
What Does This Have to do With Wall Street?
Well, nothing or perhaps... everything. Kobe is a cash cow for his industry and he was at work when the incident occurred. Makes sense that his employers would fine him, if they saw fit. That having been said, Bryant was not fined by his employer, but by his industry's regulator/legislator. The NBA and its lord and master David Stern make all the calls in situations like this one. Maybe they are right, maybe they are wrong in this regard. I won't get into that. It isn't my issue.
What interests me is to what degree do you guys feel your employer or industry regulator should have say over the words coming out of your mouth?
In an industry where compliance is paramount, there is a huge list of issues, topics and opinions we avoid because they are potentially inflammatory. So many in fact, that we shy away from discussing anything that could even be considered controversial or troublesome.
Leading me to wonder:
How precisely are we to avoid huge pitfalls and economy shattering mistakes when we are indoctrinated into a culture of watch what you say from the very first day? How do we speak out against Toxic Tranches, Dirty Derivatives and other shameful practices, when our focus is on not offending anyone?
Simple...
We are not. Maybe that is the ultimate lesson of our compliant era.
Stay quiet little chimp. Good things will happen, if you just stay quiet...
So Kobe using a derogatory term with millions watching should just be ignored? The NBA has a lot of $ at stake, of course they are going to act.
Or better yet, since we can't openly use bigoted hate speech every day at our jobs, that ties our hands so we can't speak out against shameful practices? dude, that is a laughable reach...and kind of sad if you think that "watching what we say" is the reason for the shameful practices going on for so long. It's called $ and self-interest, not fear of "opening your mouth"...
I think you have it backward - when the bonuses are flowing, and "shameful practices abound", it is usually the RESULT of little compliance and self-interest, not because anyone feels like they can't "open their mouths."
Ever been on a trading floor?
He's not using the term with millions watching. He's using it in the heat of battle with very little ability to police himself at that point as his optimal output requires adrenaline as much as it requires thought. The NBA, the Lakers or anyone else endorsing a methodology which encourages an athlete to put politically correct thought in front of optimal performance is laughable. Especially from the business optimization perspective. I don't recall this big of an issue being made when Charles Barkley spit in the face of a little girl during a game. Isn't that a bit odd?
Similarly, I might push/punch/kick/choke you on the trading floor en route to getting my buy/sell acknowledged in the pit. Anyone who's been out there for longer than a week would understand it as implicit rules of engagement. The choice of the populist apparatus to zero in on his emotional (and most likely NOT premeditated) outburst at a moment where logic is rarely present is the only fallacy I see.
I agree. But what then of a certain derogatory term used by NBA players in self reference on almost a game-by-game basis? I haven't been to an NBA game in the last 10 years without hearing players arbitrarily hurl the term at one another and I rarely have court side seats. Why is brand "x" acceptable to brand "y" when they both come from the "same family" of products? Is poison really any less harmful when sprayed by non-unionized labor?
The flowing bonuses are definitely an enticement to ignore bloody murder. But the shut down of the cash flow spigot conversely entices a wall of silence approach which is nothing more than a contra positive. I think that is a better example. My point is about neither, however. Your presupposing to know what I think on the subject is much like presupposing Kobe's intent. Intent is the penultimate pre-requisite to a punishable offense. Yet that crucial aspect is (not the least bit shockingly) ignored. I am arguing that by selectively choosing what can be said by whom and when we are building up the potential for precisely that reverse incentive compatibility you are attributing to my backwardness. Whether Kobe is a bigot or not, he's behavior is being reverse engineered in slow motion to create an image of reality which does not exist in real time. Much like the notion of compliance is misused to make the victims pay for the crimes in the industry...
Ever heard of Raj?
Agreed with above. Maybe its man-week testosterone kicking in but this post beyond a reach.
Please tell me how many parents you know that would cheer if their kid goes to school tomorrow, argues with a teacher and says "fucking faggot". What if one of your nieces of nephews did that, would you cheer them on?
It is 2011, there is certain things in society that is not acceptable. I hear way worse on the trading floor daily. But if we were ever in a meeting with a client or others, and someone just blatantly said in a hateful way to someone else "you fucking faggot" in anger that would be unacceptable.
I do not think anything to do with not accepting hateful terms towards certain groups of people has to do with "empowering" us to fight back against corruption and greed.
Furthermore look at your post on Dr. Burry. He has good solutions and ideas to fix the issues at hand. I do think he needs the motivation of being able to call people "hateful names" on a daily basis, or bullying others down to come up with those solutions or speak up.
Precisely the point. Kobe is not at a press conference or a charity event. He is not being asked of his world views and responding by promoting sexual orientation based homicide. He is an athlete. His livelihood is based on performance, which is largely tied to his ability to be explosive, volatile and aggressive. This refers to both physical and cognitive abilities. Though it is not discussed much, the ability to do some of the things a top flight basketball player does are not far removed from the actions of top flight intellectual athletes in other fields.
Asking Kobe to watch his mouth while playing ball,(the embedded message of this laughable fine) is like telling you that you will not get paid for making money for your client/protecting their investment because you looked at someone the wrong way on the aforementioned trading floor.
Burry wasn't my post, but I take your meaning. I still do not/will not agree with the notion that punitive approaches to human emotion will create a superior behavioral society. Only a more monotone and co-dependent one. Perhaps I am wrong and that is what actual liberty is?
First off, Kobe was on the bench, its not like it was in the heat of the moment amid play. So the whole an athlete thing in battle kinda goes out the window. However, had it been in the middle of the game it wouldn't have made it any more acceptable.
Kobe is being paid handsomely not only because of his skills but also because he is the face of the game. That requires certain showmanship, poise and control. A game is no different than a press conference. There is a crowd and it is televised. Maybe you could argue that during a practice he should have more leeway, but a nationally televised game, sorry.
Another point is that the NBA isn't some regulatory body such as you eluded to above. They franchise out teams and the Lakers happen to be a franchise. The NBA is essentially a Parent Co. and the Lakers are a Sub. Co. Kobe works for the NBA just as much as he works for the Lakers.
It's not the difficult for a public figure, or anyone in society for that matter, to remove certain words from their vocabulary. Kobe didn't do that so he is paying the price. The price of being an elite athlete/celebrity is acting in a socially acceptable manner. Giving him a pass just because he is playing a game is a slippery slope and should not be condoned as a society.
Fuck the politically correct faggots.
That ref really was being a bundle of sticks.
How about we stop putting cameras on people right after they do something they aren't happy with. I blame ESPN, sportscenter, and our countries ridiculous need to know what everyone else is doing all the time
Yep
We are too PC. Let's be honest, I say the word all the time, although admittedly not on TV. The NBA had to do something, but if I was Kobe I would be so pissed at everyone.
If he had the balls (and the ability to piss off all his sponsors) to go to the press conference and be like "Here's another 100 stacks, go fck yourselves you fckin faggots" he would become my favorite ball player of all time.
If the market doesn't like something, he shouldn't do it, and the NBA should encourage him to act accordingly.
He is not paid to play basketball. He is not paid to be an athlete. He is paid to get people to watch him. If the NBA thinks fewer people will watch him (or buy merchandise branded with his likeness) because of his actions, then it is their business. Doesn't matter if it cussing, racial epithets, or dog fighting; he is their brand.
Same holds true in finance. Analysts have no client contact 90% of the time. They don't actually sell the products. Coming into work in sweatpants would not affect their ability to use excel or pump out pitch books. But they are not allowed to, because it could cost the bank money in other ways.
People are making way too big a deal of this. He said something because he was pissed off in the heat of the moment when he had no clue the camera was watching him. If he had said this at a press conference or any other event when it's obvious that people are watching, then it's different, but during a game when he's on the bench? Lmao. What next, you're gonna fine the college bball player that screamed "what the fuck" during the national championship game? I think the real big deal is that he said "faggot" and so all the "hey man, gay is not a synonym for stupid" phaggots get their panties in a bunch. My god, soon people who literally have low IQs start calling for 100k fines if a player says "idiotic" on live TV.
I'm gonna quote eminem on this, "You want me to watch my mouth, how? Take my fucking eyeballs out and turn 'em around?"
So let me get this right. If he had used the "n" word when referring to a teammate, it would be classified as a term of endearment, and no fine. If he said "bitch-ass", probably no fine. If he had said, "ass-hole", no fine. If he had said "shit-bag", no fine. But "faggot", and he's fined? (sigh). I'm lost...
are you people that inept. "faggot" to the gay community is the equivalent of any other derogatory racial term. so sorry its not the same as "bitch-ass", "ass-hole" or "shit-bag" rather its more in lines of insert racial slur here. quite frankly the use of the term is really ignorant and you should really stop and reflect on its meaning and who you are offending with its use.
Kobe makes more than your MD, it's been a week, I don't think he remembers the 100k...
This is ridiculous. Hypocritical America once again.
Wow, if I had $100,000 for every time someone called me a name, I would never have to worry about finances again. He used poor judgment but to make him pay money for it is a little bit crazy.
online casino
Practice at an online casino before you bet so that you will know exactly what you are doing when you begin wagering real money.
Labore voluptate ex recusandae recusandae aut itaque. Ipsum enim itaque modi animi eligendi corrupti ducimus. Dignissimos omnis vel fugit corporis non. Corporis mollitia pariatur aspernatur laudantium dolorem.
Officia nobis eveniet repellendus laboriosam distinctio autem sit. Aut possimus a quas quam doloremque. Magnam molestiae sapiente omnis accusantium. Qui aperiam non non sint nobis eos. Amet officia eveniet praesentium harum qui autem. Ipsam quia minima corrupti expedita est officia.
Qui labore minima quo quo pariatur maiores ut. Sequi excepturi voluptas possimus.
Laborum ut vitae eum consequatur officia qui explicabo. Quos omnis delectus deleniti voluptatem voluptatibus. Voluptatem eos nesciunt quia saepe molestiae rem molestiae. Delectus sit voluptatem maiores architecto. Omnis facere illo ex.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Nihil assumenda reiciendis eveniet est unde. Repellat sed dolorum est excepturi. Culpa delectus fugiat eum. Veritatis placeat necessitatibus possimus dolor. Labore quas alias voluptas omnis voluptatem nesciunt.