JP Morgan buys Bear Stearns for $2 a share? Can't believe my eyes!
wsj breaking news. JPM pay $2 a share for Bear
wsj breaking news. JPM pay $2 a share for Bear
+239 | My chaotic IB journey | 27 | 7h | |
+211 | MS M&A vs GS HC | 48 | 14h | |
+176 | Ending My Life if I don't get an SA 2025 Offer | 63 | 22h | |
+115 | Anyone live in a different country before? What’s it like? | 43 | 17h | |
+73 | Hazing in the Bullpen. What to do? | 15 | 9h | |
+53 | MD shoved food down my throat. Is this normal? | 16 | 19h | |
+40 | Improving in TMT | 11 | 4h | |
+35 | Basically necessary to be a varsity athlete to get BB IB from Bowdoin? | 22 | 1d | |
+34 | Later Chodes - I'm Taking My Talents to The Mega Fund Leagues | 8 | 1d | |
+19 | Too late to be Analyst 1 with 5 years of experience? | 16 | 2d |
Career Resources
Anyone know what banks helping with this? Does this valuation make sense? Are we really this fucked?
$20 a share, not $2... big difference
i got the e-mail alert and thought that the $2 was a typo also.
my eyes bugged out when i saw 2. holy hell
------
"its the running joke now, we now have fair trade with china so they send us poisoned sea food and we send them fraudulent securities."
It's front page. $2, plain as day. What gives?
DAMN that's fucking crazy.
"J.P. Morgan agreed to buy Bear Stearns for $2 a share in a stock-swap transaction, people familiar with the matter say. J.P. Morgan will exchange 0.05473 shares of its common stock per one share of Bear Stearns stock. Both boards have approved the transaction."
There you go, buddy.
J.P. Morgan Chase agreed to buy Bear Stearns for $2 a share in a stock-swap transaction, people familiar with the matter say. J.P. Morgan will exchange 0.05473 shares of its common stock per one share of Bear Stearns stock. Both boards have approved the transaction.
People familiar with the discussions said all sides were pushing hard to complete an agreement before financial markets in Asia open for Monday trading. "None of these things is done until they're done," Treasury Department spokeswoman Michele Davis said Sunday afternoon. "But I think everyone's expectation is sometime in the early evening hopefully" the deal will be done.
One stumbling point appeared to be the amount of risk that J.P. Morgan would absorb in any type of transaction. While J.P. Morgan is eager to snap up some of Bear Stearns assets -- such as its prime brokerage business that caters to hedge funds -- Chief Executive Officer James Dimon was reluctant to pursue the deal without certain assurances that would protect his firm's exposure, said people familiar with the matter.
Despite the emergency funding from J.P. Morgan and the Federal Reserve that was announced Friday and gives Bear access to cash for an initial period of 28 days, the clock is ticking against the 85-year-old company. Regulators, bankers and investors are concerned that the firm could plummet even further when markets open Monday. A continued exodus by parties that Bear trades with could even cause the investment bank to collapse.
So would anyone who shorted the stock at $30 make 15x their money?
Poor Jimmy Cayne. His net worth just plummeted.
Things must have detiorated rapidly over the weekend. BSC market cap was $4.08 bn at Friday's close. JP just paid under $300 mm for Bear.
I too thought it was a typo and am now bugging out with the "who's next" question...
JPM took on a huge amount of exposure but damn that's a steal, their headquarters alone is worth $1.2 bn.
JP Morgan Chase is offering to buy troubled investment bank Bear Stearns for between $15 and $20 a share, CNBC has learned.
Jin Lee / ASSOCIATED PRESS Bear Stearns
Bear's board is currently meeting to discuss the proposal, which based on Bear's 118 million shares outstanding, would be valued at between $1.8 billion and $2.4 billion.
A deal in principle could be announced Sunday night, although the agreement would still need shareholder approval.
Here's what makes this a tricky situation: without shareholder approval, there is no real deal, so other banks and clients may be reluctant to deal with Bear on Monday unless it's part of a well capitalized JP Morgan.
Because of this, most executives inside Bear believe the Federal Reserve and Treasury will play some role in making sure there is a backstop if the shareholder approval isnt reached.
Of course, the deal itself could fall apart at the last minute, which would mean Bear would have to find another buyer, possibly JC Flowers.
An offer of $20 or less would be well below Bear's closing stock price of $30.85 on Friday, which was already down 47% for the day. As one senior Bear executive--who like most of the senior team is paid and continues to hold Bear stock--puts it: "based on the information i'm getting, lets just say I wont be retiring early." ...
Lol@Closer121.
how could CNBC be 10+ dollars a share off? In the span of 12 hours?
UK Telegraph is reporting $2.00. Holy fucking shit...
why did Bear Stearns accept this? why couldnt other firms bid? and what does this mean for current employees/summer/ft hires?
There are going to be redundancies that need to be taken care of, but it will be awhile before that gets soreted out. For current FT analyst and associate offers I doubt this does anything. For summer interns it might mean a smaller % are offered FT jobs.
Nyc123, offered to buy @ $20 and closed the deal @ $2 are completely different dumbass.
I am pretty sure other firms couldn't bid because, the Fed asked JPM last week to lend Bear the money under new plan. The Fed also approved the deal at $2/share.
I'm waiting on the conference call to start right now I'll let you know what I hear that isn't yet available online.
Oasising, I realize that, I didn't know that a separate story came out regarding the closing when I made the post because I had read the $20 story only a few minutes before I read this post so I figured the OP made a typo and was grossly exaggerating the story to all the readers, turns out I was wrong
Gotcha, yeah everything happened so fast that it's hard to keep up with the news.
matty-- thanks. please keep us updated.
http://investor.shareholder.com/jpmorganchase/presentations.cfm
presentation is here, conference ongoing. JP sees $1b added revenue, talks about added prime brokerage (obviously), extended equity and energy platforms. He didn't say much beyond the powerpoint, questions coming shortly.
Check it out.
i have heard from BSC employees themselves that they will most likely get laid off this week; although who knows, i surely hope that this is not the case
The BSC building is worth 1 billion, so JP Morgan Chase is buying a building for 75% off, and getting a company thrown in.
A company with 33 billion in mortgage exposure still, and atleast 2 billion in sub-prime.
yea they have taken on a lot of exposure
Will they rescind FT associate offers?
I see in the presentation that there will be $6bn of deleveraging, litigation, and consolidation and accounting reconciliation costs, and I think they explained the cost of deleveraging. Could someone just go over what it means exactly? From my understanding, JPM is going to buy bear and just pay down some debt, but why should shareholders be paid less than what everyone thought they were going to be paid ($20 vs $2) just so JPM can play with capital structure? I'm trying to imagine other scenarios in which company A buys a very leveraged company B. A still has to pay full market value for B shares, right? Or is JPM just saying that bsc shares are simply not worth even $20?
How much of Bear's workforce will get cut?
Can someone explain how the $2 thing can even theoretically happen? If others were allowed to bid, wouldn't they pay waaay more than this? I'm really curious...
Maybe others were not allowed to bid since JPMorgan was in charge of the temporary fix, maybe they had full control
If the deal falls through, they will file for bankruptcy meaning equity value will be $0. It doesn't matter what the share price was at close on Friday.
Shopping the company to other bidders takes time - time that Bear didn't have (as I said before, come Monday morning they would have filed for bankruptcy without a buyer in place). Also, important to note that the deal went through because the Fed is providing a $30 billion guarantee for some of Bear's liabilities. The Fed would not provide this kind of financing to just anyone. It is because it is JP Morgan that the Fed agreed to provide this.
Has there been a significant change in the Fed Funds Implied Probability? If someone could pull this up, I would be greatly appreciative of it. Now, looking at BSC and how this affects the FFIP... if BSC is going under and the FFIP hasn't seen a significant increase towards the 75BP Cut rate or higher, something is really fucked up here. I know we're all thinking it considering the Fed meets tuesday... now that's going to be an extremely fun meeting. Once Bad News Ben gets up there... how many points should we say the market will drop by?
$2 is for the equity. I am guessing that there are liabilities which JPM will have to take over from Bear, therefore JPM will end up paying more than $2.
why didnt the shareholders get to vote? is that even possible, if the top management approves it, then the sale goes thru?
others had taken a look (JC Flowers): "When Bear Stearns invited potential buyers for detailed presentations by department chiefs yesterday, only JPMorgan and private equity firm J.C. Flowers & Co. showed up, according to people familiar with the talks." http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&refer=home&sid=aWbXzzlz…
Most importantly though, few banks were as familiar with Bear (JPM was a rumored acquiror this summer) and few had the capital/knowledge to make a decision following a due diligence process JPM so confident that shareholders would approve the deal (other than for PR reasons)? what shareholder would approve a deal for less than the price of its headquarters?
$2> liquidation value of the firm. So, I still think it's a reasonable offer if JP takes care of the debt and moves all these pass-throughs on their balance sheet. I couldn't believe when I read yesterday that 186,000,0000 shares changed hands on Friday! Cannot confirm it, but I heard most of the shares outstanding are actually owned by employees, more than 25% of the company. They will really get screwed--doubble the pain if they lose their jobs and investments all at once.
fuck fuck fuck a duck screw a kangaroo ( or in this case a bear)!
Just wow. I wonder what kind of liabilities they're assuming, that's the only explanation for the $2 per share equity value.
Sorry to anyone working there or set to work there. Lots of uncertainty lies ahead, I'm not even sure what to advise here.
Dosk17, when this whole saga is over, you will have a lot to write about for your mergers & inquisitions blog. Get your pen ready. ha ha.
i can't imagine that JP Morgan would want much of bear's ib franchise. i'm not in the know or anything, but i suppose we could see lots of of talented people out of a job by the end of this week.
just a guess...but i think lehman brothers stock is gonna take a huge hit tomorrow.
I am digging out Bear Stearn's recruiting souvenir from last year. Might have some antique value some years from now. Lol.
haha
------
"its the running joke now, we now have fair trade with china so they send us poisoned sea food and we send them fraudulent securities."
lol I'm saving the card of a Senior Managing Director at Bear I interviewed with.
lol!!
What does it mean when you guys are referring to the "clearing" business?
that doesn't seem right. that would be completely against all free market principles... how can you get such an awesome deal just because you are in charge of the temporary fix?
Ok ok i get it now. so the problem was that the other banks didn't have enough to react quickly enough...
Shareholders do get a vote. JPM was very confident on the call that shareholders would approve, though one flustered caller said he wasn't approving the deal.
Also, total transaction costs associated with the deal are estimated at $6B (source: JPM presentation).
T73, what free market? The Fed bailed out BSC to begin with last week, or they could have very well be gone Friday Afternoon.
Right, but they said other banks still had a chance to bid on it, but nobody seemed to be interested except for that one other bank which I cant remember now who it was. So I guess it was a matter of now having enough time to prepare due diligence and/or Bear's debt was so enormous it pushed the price down all the way to $2...
Other firms have the chance to bid on it before the deal closes. Obviously the people at JP have a much better grasp of the situation than anyone here, which explains their confidence in the deal going through at $2. The $2 price is most likely fair, since nobody else wants it or can handle assuming the liabilities/counterparty risk that Bear Stearns is exposed to. Remember in the beginning Bear came to JP for help, so I am sure Bear thought they could get the best (only?) deal from them.
Check this out...
http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2008/03/14/bear-fortunes-up-in-smoke/
Un-freaking-believable. Historic downfall. I realize that the official definition of a recession has not been satisfied, but it would be stubborn for anybody to claim otherwise. I hope my friends at BS (both current and potential) are fine.
I wonder which bank is next. It is obvious that Lehman will take a big hit and might face similar fate. A buyout by another firm, which I originally struck out as an impossibility, now seems possible for Lehman. It seems that the banks are in much worse condition than we all suspected. I really don't want to make any other prediction other than that Lehman will be dramatically and negatively affected.
Anybody have any predictions for UBS?
UBS = U've Been Split.
How is this going to affect Citi?
Citi's commercial banking part is saving its ass.
Lookout, Lehman Brothers might be next....... Lehman is just a large version of Bear Stearns with slightly more diversified operations.
JPMorgan can use a respected prime-brokerage unit, however, they will have to also take aboard the not-so-hot IBD of Bear Stearns.
$2 a share is truly fucking crazy.
I thought it was a typo, but I guess I'm wrong. When looking at the situation, though, who in their right mind would want to buy a bank that has reached fame dealing mortgage related securities at this point in time????
I won't be surprised if Bear Stearns just collapsed to $0.
At least JPMorgan people might have a very nice office that is worth $1.5 billion alone right outside Grand Central.
Delirium2, interesting that you mention that UBS will split. It is an option that Rohner is not ruling out, so I do not blame you for your prediction. Although I hope you're wrong, I can only anticipate for the management to decide to preserve both the wealth management and investment banking businesses. Then again, we've experienced our first ever net-loss in a year in the history of the Swiss bank, so I'm not exactly expected to be completely optimistic.
Nevertheless, my gut feeling tells me that we will not make any radical decisions before some other firms (ex. Lehman) take a tumble. I believe the same for Citi. However, most of this is mere speculation. It is hard for anybody right now to predict anything concrete given what just happened with BS.
The only ironic thing is that many of the people on this forum (from Bear and other banks) laughed at the possibility of BB (or sub-BB) buyouts and now Bear-Stearns (Lehman Brothers next) is bought out at a laughably low price. $300mm (w/o risk)! The f'in headquarters is worth over a billion as it is! Bear was always not that great of an investment bank and they suffered because of it.
The Bear Stearns laughable buyout price shows that even if you have a great prime-brokerage business, if you make a large percentage of your money in one area and that area goes to shit like it is now.....you are no longer going to exist.
Again, it's not without risk. haven't you heard Jamie Dimon say that JPM is guaranteeing all of Bear's obligations? that could be worth more than the headquarter.s
Correct me if I'm wrong, but BS never lost money over 83 years of operations until recently. Hence, I can hardly consider them as being 'always not that great of an investment bank.' Granted, they were questionable at times, but I would hold back from insulting their abilities as an investment bank.
I agree, however, that Lehman seems to be next. It's very hard to avoid a run on a bank and Lehman will inevitably face similar situations as BS. Its share price, I believe, reflects the general publics' beliefs in the bank's capabilities.
can anyone comment on how this will affect JPM employees?
also if JPM & Bear deal goes thru .... doesn't thing significantly raise the profile of JPM as TIER 1 Bulge Bracket?
since when was JPM not tier 1? they've always been mentioned along with Lehman Citi & ML
StudentBanker: Nice first posts big guy. You took an extremely complicated situation with thousands of moving parts and distilled it down to one insightful question.
PS Change your screen name or I will make fun of you. You're the kind of tool that will consistently dilute the quality of otherwise interesting conversations.
PPS Ordinarily I wouldn't care, but in a case where thousands of employees could be adversely affected, your immaturity is insulting.
WTF is a TIER 1 Bulge Bracket?
If you're asking if this helps JPM, who knows it's far from done. Even if it does get done, there's a lot of waiting and evaluating to be done. There's 1,000 things that could go wrong and nobody has any idea if this will be a successful play.
You've really got to get off of the whole ranking nonsense.
Good point, some people on this site have their mind to focused on prestige rankings.....Bear was considered a top five firm and look what happened...
The economy is tanking at a rate not seen in years, and you people are worried about prestige rankings.
AMAZING.
lol prestige rankings aka ego rankings
what else should we do then? Maybe call bernanke or paulson to provide our valuable counsel?
I've a card, and this nice little black bag I use for gym from Bear Stearns. :)
just listed on ebay:
Bear Stearns Cafeteria Card http://cgi.ebay.com/Bear-Stearns-Cafeteria-Card_W0QQitemZ280209757288QQ…
Bear Stearns mint stuffed bear NWT RUSS finance http://cgi.ebay.com/BEAR-STEARNS-mint-stuffed-bear-NWT-RUSS-finance_W0Q…
Damn, this really sucks. All you Bear SAs out there, I would like to express my condolences.
I got a business card from a HR recruiter I met at my school's job fair. I'm giving you folks on this board a special bargain: $5. Any takers?
My card from a senior managing director trumps that
You know you are totally fucked when your business card sells for 150% more than your stock. This is just unbelievable, as others have said. Wow.
I just voted for Bear Stearns in the "nicest website" poll, figure it wont be around much longer.
to whoever asked about FFIP #s above: 3/18 Meeting 2.00 2.25 2.50 29.8% 33.2% 19.5%
The $2 appears to be predicated on JPM assuming Bear's trading losses, so while it may well be a bargain I doubt that it's a steal. In a more traditional deal, a buyer's loss may be limited to its initial equity investment, but that doesn't sound like the case here.
I'd compare it to buying a box filled with cash for pennies on the dollar - with the only catch being that the box likely also contains a ticking time bomb of unknown magnitude.
I'd be interested to see what the deal is with the MAC... heard from different sources there either is or isn't one. I think with the Fed insuring a lot of the obligations, JPM is in a much better situation than we are presuming.
I'm don't doubt that a MAC is in place here, but of critical importance are the terms and conditions of said MAC.
I'm guessing that any MAC provisions would be pretty air tight, thus leaving very little room for JPM to back out of a deal.
there isn't a mac. read the preso...
don't mind me asking but does MAC stand for mergers and acquisitions committee?
Material Adverse Change...co's will typically add a MAC clause so that if new information that wasn't disclosed previously comes to the surface, they can reneg or change the terms of the deal.
Broader, market-based MACs are also quite common.
Checked the press release though and you are correct - although I'd guess the lack of a MAC here is a product of the capital cushion they've been provided by the Fed.
in the conference call, the CFO said there is no MAC in place.
MAC = Material Adverse Change = clause in the agreement that would allow JPM to back out if some market event happened that caused Bear to lose significant value.
Clearly, a MAC would be kind of absurd. Hard to imagine anything getting materially worse than this. And even if JPM says, "OK, we're going to exercise our rights under the MAC clause - deal's off" wtf do they do with Bear then?
Obviously, there's substantial risk and uncertainty to JPM here, but I think the $2 price reflects it. If JPM wanted to protect themselves via a MAC clause, then they shouldn't consider the deal at all. It's not that kind of deal - there's no time. Either you're in or out. If you're in, name your price. If you're scared, stay home.
$2 a share looked like a steal when I first looked at it. Let's keep in mind though, that JP Morgan and the Fed are assuming billions in Bear Stearns' obligations at this point. So, they're going to pay the 256 million AND take care of the many skeletons in Bear's closet.
BTW, I would love to get a hold of the model that led to this deal at some point in my life.
Wow. That is all I have to say.
Any takes on where the broader market will head tomorrow?
JPM really did get a steal. The Fed is going to back $30 billion of the outstanding Bear liabilities so that leaves JPM with very little exposure. Talk about a good deal.
I'd say the broader market is going to shit tomorrow as people are going to be scratching their heads thinking, "wtf is the fed doing". The Fed also extended their lending to all security firms for some time. Basically, I think people are losing confidence in the Fed's ability to prevent a recession and might even be making it worse by trying to.
EDIT: After looking at the foreign markets, I can say with almost certainty that the market is going to tank tomorrow.
Hang Seng: -1,046.29 -4.71% 21,190.82 Nikkei: -454.09 -3.71% 11,787.51
Even JPM's conference call, after the Fed's backing, they still add roughly another $13 billion in mortgage exposure, and this is only after 3 days of due dili.
I would say that is far from a steal.
But picking up Bear Energy and Prime Brokeage, sure will help JPM plenty in the future.
Adehbone, could you give me a link to where you read or heard that?
$2 a share, maybe for you but not for this guy hes getting 29.50/share because he used a stop-loss order
HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAA
"it will be bloody, especially for those who cannot grasp simple concepts like stop loss orders! I will lose a lose few dollars a share since my order will be executed at $29.50 tomorrow but that's not that bad. How quickly you forget the basics, you never think of "What ifs." Learn! "
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_T/threadvi…
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA PRICELESS
hilarious
http://investor.shareholder.com/jpmorganchase/presentations.cfm
webcast for march 16
thanks.
Trade4size, that is not the way stop losses work. It gapped down to 4$. That is the price he is stopped out at.
..about the stop-loss order is that the guy thinks a stop-loss order is a put option. He will make that mistake exactly once. If a stock trades discontinuously over a stop loss, the sell order for the stop loss doesn't execute until trading resumes, and at the lower price.
lol @ trade4size... buy the puts next time buddy :)
I am pretty sure that trade4size actually knows that, and was just being sarcastic and is making fun of the guy in the link that thinks his stop-loss will protect him.
I rarely watch CNBC, but tuned in earlier today and was reminded of why I so rarely watch the station. Reminded me of a good quote from one of our partners this morning:
“Just ignore anything that's being reported in the media right now, particularly on TV - no one has a fucking clue of how this is actually going to play out.”
lol smugguy, was this the same partner who dealed in prostitutes? what he says is pretty accurate though.
haha lol im quoting the guy on the yahoo forum. a friend sent me the link, couldnt stop laughing. Its hilarious people dont even know basic market functiosn this isnt even a strategy flaw its plain them not knowing how execution works. so much for his "stop".
hahahahaha as if i thought a stop loss would protect me from a gap.
I thought the laugh was a "diabolical haha, I'm smarter than you bastards" laugh as opposed to a "this bastard's such an idiot laugh"
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2b7_1205751955&to_friend=1#to_friend
Xosere: That's funny... :)
What do you guys think about this guy:
Not that I'd want to advocate Cramer or support FED's actions in recent days/months, but honestly, it's hard to believe FED's doing this because JPM is its shareholder. $2 a share is a steal but God knows how much crap is on Bear's books that JPM will have to swallow. Also, it's funny to see a video of Cramer saying that BS about BS but honestly, how could he know? If ANYBODY knew this was gonna happen, they'd be billionaires today... Cramer just made the wrong bet. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Simple as that.
Haha, this one's pretty funny too...
rumor on the street is that bond holders and guys who sold protection on Bear are major buyers on the stock so as to vote this through. In other words, $2 is a feasible end price for the stock.
It's pure speculation, but intriguing none the less. Might this have been an anticipated outcome of the $2 offer all along (i.e., letting BSC creditors pay up a bit for insurance against a Chapter 7 bankruptcy)? Given that BSC employees held ~30% of the outstanding equity, and that a sure $6.00 offer might sound better to those folks than a potential deal going through at ~$2.30, it does seem possible.
To caveat, as if it were really necessary, this is nothing more than pure speculation by someone who doesn't have a clue how things will play out.
nobody has asked the REAL question here: WHY WAS BSC TRADING AT OVER $35/share ON FRIDAY???
I attended a speech by Gary Parr yesterday (he's the main advisor to Bear Stears) and he said that there are two reasons why it's trading at $6 instead of $2.
1.) as mentioned, bondholders trying to gain control over the decision whether the deal should go through, trying to protect their bonds.
2.) this one was beyond my financial knowledge so I can't really explain what he was talking about :) It had something to do with hedge funds using credit swaps and other credit derivatives, doing I'm not exactly sure what :)
Not sure if it's the point you were trying to explain for #2, but there is speculation that hedge funds who are shorting BSC bonds and credit-default swaps are also bidding up the equity, in hopes that shareholders will reject any potential deal so long as BSC stays well north of $2, thus eventually forcing the Company into bankruptcy.
They aren't just buying "in hopes that shareholders will reject any potential deal," they are buying the votes so that they can help reject the deals. At $6 a share, you could buy 51% of Bear Stearns for roughly $350M. If you stand to make more than that on CDSs (or bonds, the other way) then there is no reason not to buy as many votes as you can get your hands on.
Of course they'd get the votes, but this isn't a practical strategy. Do you know understand how the process of buying and selling shares works?
Secondary market transactions require both willing buyers and sellers, and any dislocation between buyers and sellers has an impact on security prices. No fund could snap up 51% of BSC's outstanding shares without driving their price through the roof. Much easier to put a little pressure on the price and potentially influence votes on the ~30% of total equity being held by employees (which is largely restricted from trading).
Yes, I understand the impact on prices—that's why the stock is at $6 and not $2. They are not buying 51%—which would be impractical, I agree—but the bondholders and HFs are buying as much as they can, within reason, to sway the vote one way or the other. I only used the 51% = $350M numbers to illustrate that buying a significant chunk of Bear is very cheap right now, especially compared to potential billions in bonds or CDSs.
JPM to cut half of Bear employees (Originally Posted: 03/17/2008)
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s (JPM) takeover plans for Bear Stearns Cos. (BSC) include cutting more than half of Bear's 14,000-member staff, CNBC's Charlie Gasparino reported Monday, citing sources at JPMorgan. The layoffs are anticipated over the "next couple months," Gasparino said. Gasparino added that expansions are planned for Bear's trade-clearing, prime-brokerage and energy-trading businesses. He said JPMorgan will consider bringing in Bear people to bolster JPMorgan's existing fixed-income and investment-banking operations. -Rebecca Townsend, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5174, [email protected] > Dow Jones Newswires
well there you have it. best of luck to everyone involved
Thanks man. Though I wish they directly would say how interns would be dealt with (I know this is completely unrealistic and would not be issued in a press release), I'd like to make use of a fitting quote from Dumb and Dumber:
"So you're saying we've got a chance!?"
I wonder how interns would be placed as well. What ever it is, 7000 employees of which I'm assuming 1500 are in New York itself.
Please stop assuming
NEW YORK, March 17 (Reuters) - JPMorgan Chase & Co, which on Sunday agreed to acquire struggling investment bank Bear Stearns Cos for just $240 million, expects to cut about half of Bear's 14,000 employees, business news channel CNBC reported on Monday, citing unnamed sources. JPMorgan expressed interest in Bear's prime brokerage, securities clearing and equity trading businesses, and believes Bear's investment bankers can help expand the bank's own financial advisory business. Morgan is expecting the deal to generate $6 billion of expenses, from severance and retention to waves of litigation and asset write-downs. JPMorgan officials were not immediately available to comment.
They included Bear's INVESTMENT BANKERS...there might be some light at the end of tunnel...maybe.
is it better to accept another SA offer (even if less prestigious) rather than wait to see what JPMorgan has planned?
Granted I don't normally pay attention to things like prestige, but I can't really imagine what would be less prestigious than Bear Stearns right now. Stratton Oakmont, perhaps?
Hey guys,
Do you think Lehman Brothers is going to follow Bear Stearns in terms of a total f*ck up!! There going to publish there results tomorrow, they've slashed jobs, and there share price has dipped 40% today!
What do you think?
"The future belongs to those who prepare for it today" - Malcolm X
Looks like they're just going to wipe out anyone in a back-office position. Expanding prime brokerage, energy, and trade-clearing is the wise thing- those should've been the 3 backbones to Bear. They're still well-respected in those avenues, and I'd bet most of the bankers who stick will be involved in their energy business and telecom, where they've done a bunch of major deals of late.
I'm curious myself what would happen to folks with full-time offers or summer offers... I don't care from a personal standpoint, but it's a nasty situation to be in, I'm sure. I presume JPM takes on the contractual obligations to employees?
Do they pay severance to FT hires in the fall? Lots of old people I know think they don't need to pay severance cause we haven't officially started yet, but I think otherwise.
What do you think will happen to Bear's IBD? Will JPM absorb their IBD division?
Hey all -
I'm actually supposed to intern there this summer...but the trader I initially interviewed with just got laid off today. Called around 12, said he was busy, so I tried again around 5. Some other person answers, and informs me that said trader "no longer works here".
As for the internship...it's anyone's guess though I've heard rumors that JPM will be absorbing us.
http://dealbreaker.com/2008/03/no_one_not_even_the_hopeful_su.php
Then I'm assuming iy was you that leaked this to dealbreaker? Hope you enjoyed your 15 min of anonymous fame. I'm sure the rest of the BSC hopeful hires will love you spreading this rumor w/o knowing the truth behind what's actually going on.
Honestly, they could have quit too...or maybe started looking elsewhere, I doubt they would let go of people that quickly...that's kinda nuts.
"some other person answers, and informs me that trader 'no longer works here'". thats fukin depressing.
You called a trader at Bear Stearns today to ask about your SA stint? Seriously?
"It is a fine thing to be out on the hills alone. A man can hardly be a beast or a fool alone on a great mountain." - Francis Kilvert (1840-1879)
"Ce serait bien plus beau si je pouvais le dire à quelqu'un." - Samivel
Haha, very good point that I don't think anyone picked up on. I know everyone on here is freaking out about this summer, but I'm guessing the traders at Bear have much more to worry about today than the status of your 10-week internship. It's probably better you didn't reach him.
Call HR, part of their job is to calm hyperventilating college students.
You should be glad he didn't pick up.
When did I ever say I was calling specifically about my internship? Don't make assumptions, particularly when you could the one hyperventilating tomorrow.
Whether or not you called specifically to discuss your internship is irrelevant: the point was that it's kind of ridiculous for a college student to call a trader with whom he happened to interview at a time like this. A little inappropriate, unless he was a personal friend of yours, which he clearly wasn't, because you would have mentioned that to begin with.
not sure about growing but Bear Energy will be around and hope to stay in Houston.
I think we should have a moment of silence for our fallen brothers at Bear Stearns
I wonder if my unpaid summer internship will still exist! I'm a freshman now and my career is over!
Ha-ha. Just kidding. My god people, get a grip. I love my life in the entertainment industry here in Hollywood - no bankers, but still a grip of fake people. Lol
Just in from legitimate source...
my hallmate's close friend got her Bear Stearns SA offer turned down today.
...it's more serious than i thought meh.....
Best, SoulSearching
I'd like to state that soulsearching is full of shit. Not only did he say there was a "rumor" that everyone below the VP level was going to be let go at Bear (by poorly citing the merger agreement which didn't elude to anything of the sort), but now he's making reference to a "legitimate source" though it's a hallmate's friend.
I'm currently an anxious/worried SA with Bear. I am trying to stay optimistic, but I realize the odds may not be on my side. That said, I did not receive any news today. Maybe this SA was in a different department than I, but I'd take what this dbag says with a grain of salt.
hes full of it, dont worry.
Guys on here who make these claims without knowing for sure what is going on is a severe loser. I will admit, I have become somewhat a frequent reader of these boards and I have found some useful information because of it. However, anyone coming on here making wild claims and trying to get people all riled up needs to find a hobby.
I am/was going to be a SA in Bear's IBD and I am awaiting news but it is 100 percent out of my control. I have not contacted anyone at the bank because I believe that it is somewhat innapropriate to contact people who have legitimate worries to ask about my own situation. I feel for the guy with 3 kids and a house he needs to pay down who just saw his stock in the firm widdle away to nothing. Those are the guys with real problems. In the grand scheme of things, myself and my class will make it out ok. None of us are trying to pay our mortgage, pay for our kids college and plan for retirement. We are all young and obviously had some smarts to get into a bank in the first place. I firmly believe this will all pan out and we will become stronger in some way or another. Stay positive, and hopefully something will work out, it always does.
Speak it brotha'
I heard from a source that much of Bear's IBD in the US will be let go. The likelihood of FT hires to get absorbed into JPM's IBD is highly unlikely. Been told by the source that it would be wise to look at other possible options. So sad.
Can you become an admin or something on here? That's the most rational response to the Bear situation I've seen since it started.
It is 100% out of your control, in fact they probably haven't even decided what is going to happen yet. Sure, consider other options, but don't assume anything.
i posted this elsewhere, but now i cant find the topic or its tracking on my acct, so just to reiterate whati said before:
i dont want to be alarmist, but if you are a bear sa, you really should not be adopting the wait and see approach. i don't have any insider info, haven't heard any rumors, etc.
but consider the following:
it costs roughly 20k to employ a summer intern for the summer after employer taxes. if there are 100 summer analysts, that is a cost of 2 million dollars, or a little less than 1% of bears market cap according to jpm.
and remember, summer analysts add zero value to the firm--they are a pure human capital investment. this makes sense for an organization that is growing etc-->not one that is about to lay off half its staff. if youre going to be in bear energy, equities, or pb, youd probably be ok. otherwise, really start the search for alternative opportunities.
I am a college athlete, and have been in sports my whole life. I have played at levels where coaches get paid to win and therfore treat kids like shit just to do so. If I was a coach/company, and you gave me the opportunity to have an 40 kids come to my tryouts/intern to see who will make it into my team/company, I would do it in a heart beat. JPM obviously did not pick an intern class full of all stars, no firm ever does. If they pick up Bear's class, they end up with a 09 FT analyst class of top talent (the best from both). To me, it is worth the 2 million dollars (subtract it off the 1.4 billion of the building and your left with 1.398 billion lol).
just my opinion but I doubt they honor Bear SA's in IBD, you're looking at a business environment where everyone on the street is cutting back jobs due to the difficult market and lack of deal flow. JP has a higher rated IB than Bear, their mentality in this is that they are the superior bank and they will take who they like and who can add value. that is certainly not an SA, plus JP hasnt interviewed these SA's so they are going to go with the guys they hired themselves. this isnt just an SA issue either, there are sure to be plenty of analysts/associates that are in Bears program that are going to be let go, doesnt matter if they are cheap or not. again this is just my opinion but across IBD id be shocked if more than 15% of Bears people come out of this employed. in FI Cap Mkts/S&T id think itll be the same or worse, with some mbs people staying on since Bear has some top notch mbs guys. honestly its out of your control as to what happens, the best thing you can do is try to find other opportunities for yourself in case the SA program is cancelled. by that point you will most likely have more clarity on the situation and will be able to make a better decision.
i want to make one point that hasn't been made yet. it is very important for bulge bracket banks to have good relationships with target schools (undergrad and MBA). If JPM does wind up not honoring Bear's PT and FT offers, it would likely strain their relationships with schools. i'm not saying it won't happen but it is one reason why they may wind up honoring more offers (or giving 1 year deferrals or even severance) than pure economics would suggest.
to xqtrack: there are only 35 SAs at Bear Stearns, not 100, which would mean it costs less than $1M to keep us. that's petty change compared to Bear or JPM's market cap.
to analyst26: i have no insider info myself, so this is all my own opinion. but you also have to think about the fact that all 35 SAs WERE interviewed and ARE qualified candidates. the only difference between firms is culture. certain banks will choose certain candidates not only based on how technically proficient they are, but how the firm feels the candidate will fit into the firm. with JPM's new acquisition, they will need to integrate Bear's culture in some way. from that standpoint, to say that they wont honor Bear's SA contracts because they are a superior bank and have interviewed and hired only the SAs they want doesnt make too much sense.
ex-banker: I was thinking something along those lines. Maybe they'll keep the class for that reason. That said, as a non-target I suppose I'd still be at risk, unless they decided to keep the entire class.
KMM: I totally agree. The summer analyst program is like aquiring slave labor. We're only on their books for 2 months, and Bear has probably taken care of a good bit of the work already. All they have to do is let us work our asses off for them and then can fire us all shortly afterward if we are really that substandard to their recruiting class that is coming in.
thestreet86: i really doubt they would honor offers from targets and not from non-targets. whatever they wind up doing, i would be shocked if it wasn't consistent for the whole class (in terms of target/non-target). different functions/groups might get very different treatment.
you really think that JPMorgan's relationship with schools is going to play a factor in this for them? what's going to happen...is harvard's career services going to put in a phone call to jamie dimon and be like, 'yo jamie, we know you're throwing out 7,000 people and that all of them now have life savings worth jack shit...but seriously, think about the summers. we're watching you..." do you think that next year princeton recruits are going to be like, you fuckers fired the Bear Stearns summer analysts even though you kept all your own, so i'm not going to go to JPM?
even if there are only 35 summer analysts...that's still a cost of 600k to the bank. or 2 traders. or 2 associates. ie, people who add value. summer interns are trainees. in s&t, you guys aren't even licensed to do anything. in ibd, you could still crank out models, but that assumes that bear has models to be cranked out that the current non-fired staff couldn't handle.
anyways, i'm done on this topic--regardless, i really hope things work out for you guys. i have some friends who were going to be at bear this summer, and i hope you all get lucky. but really, start the work looking for an alternative offer now; you have nothing to lose.
Well said. It's a hilarious notion that JPM would even think about relationships with universities at this point. In bad times, companies will withdraw offers - it happened in 01-02 with I-Banks and Consulting firms, and it might start happening again here shortly.
Of course the career mgmt office at each school is not happy about it, but WTF are they going to do? Stop JPM from recruiting their kids? That's going to do more harm to their own students rather than JPM. It's a buyers market right now, and the best thing to do is to come to this realization and grab any IB job/internship you can get.
im with xqtrack here. they arent going to care about hurting their rep with schools, even if they were banned one year from campus you think kids wouldnt be falling over themselves trying to get hired anyway? you need to be realistic, these firm dont care about SA's, it dog eat dog. you think if there was good will on wall st jp would've paid $2/share for bear? to the poster above, jp most likely thinks the SA's they hired are better than Bears so with that in mind they will proceed with the people they hand selected. again just my opinion
look, i'm not saying repuation is going to be the most important factor in whether JPM honors Bear SA offers, but yes I do think that it plays a role. And yes, reputation on campuses is worth more than 600k. The issue is not that JPM won't be able to fill slots in years to come, it is that they may not be as competitive for top candidates if reputation is damaged. Finally, these firms do care about SAs. Why else would they have them (given that they are pretty much useless from a work product standpoint)?
read something earlier today that pretty much sums up the situation. "when Rome wins, Romans take over" you can choose to believe different and maybe they will decide to honor all SA offers, as a matter of fact i hope i am wrong so you guys get a good experience during the summer but that doesnt change my point of view of what i think is the most likely outcome.
All my support goes out to you guys.
A few of my thoughts..
To disagree with a statement above, JPM absolutely cares about the Bear SAs. The last thing they want to do is a lay-off a class of strong candidates. It hurts everybody. However, JPM's priorities are with its shareholders.
Is it difficult to lay someone off? Yes!
Is it hard to crush someone's hopes and plans? Yes!
We all know that at the end of the day JPM will do what is best for JPM.
Is JPM concerned about its relationship with core-schools? Yes! Is it concerned enough to be fiscally irresponsible? No! Does career services understand this? Yes! Next year those target schools will be throwing more resumes at JPM because Bear is gone.
My advice to Bear SAs: take initiative (you guys are used to doing this anyway), stop reading this stupid thread and go find some fantastic opportunity to replace your internship if necessary.
JPM in talks to up bid for Bear (Originally Posted: 03/24/2008)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/24/business/24deal.html?_r=2&ref=busines…
JPMorgan in Negotiations to Raise Bear Stearns Bid
JPMorgan Chase was in talks on Sunday night for a deal that would quintuple its offer for Bear Stearns, the beleaguered investment bank, in an effort to pacify angry Bear shareholders, according to people involved in the negotiations.
The sweetened offer is intended to win over stockholders who vowed to fight the original fire-sale deal, struck only a week ago at the behest of the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department.
Under the terms being discussed, JPMorgan would pay $10 a share in stock for Bear, up from its initial offer of $2 a share — a figure that represented a mere one-fifteenth of Bear’s going market price.
The Fed, which must approve any new deal, was balking at the new offer price on Sunday night after several days of frantic, secret negotiations, these people said. As a result, it was still possible the renegotiated deal might be postponed or collapse entirely, said these people, who were granted anonymity because of their confidentiality agreements.
Also being reported by CNN and FoxNews.
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/24/jpmorgan-in-negotiations-t…
It was just confirmed.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120635948382859081.html?mod=hps_us_what…
Will the JPM/Bear deal close? (Originally Posted: 03/24/2008)
With all the speculation, stockholder backlash, and price changes, will the JPM/Bear deal close? What do you guys think? Will the price go up even more? Is there a chance that JPM decides to pull the plug on Bear?
I think it basically has to close. I don't have much inside info, but I don't see how all who are involved could afford to not let it close. That said, if there is much resistance now after upping the offer 5x, I don't think JPM will be extremely happy.
With the 39.5% stake JPM just bought up and the guarantee of the board's 5%, this deal seems like a lock from a voting perspective. Large shareholders, however, have promised to put up a legal fight as well. In reality, the deal may never go through and all that happens is JPM comes away with a bargain basement deal on 40% of a company that they helped weather through the liquidity crisis. If in a years time a new deal is negotiated, or no deal goes through but Bear is solvent with $80 per share book value, JPM would stand to make a ton of money if the stock reappreciated.
Just my 2 cents.
I would vote yes the deal will go through
It's a bit mind blowing to hear people arguing against BSC approving a deal (my favorite argument is the one involving the value of BSC's building, since it points out just how poor of an understanding some folks have regarding equity, and not asset, value). One bit of rational commentary that I enjoyed reading:
“Bear was going to fail as of Monday. Bye bye equity and many if not most jobs. How hard is this to understand? I thought anyone who was remotely financially literate understood what bankruptcy means. The employees should be grateful to get anything. But no, the media slavishly accepts their sense of entitlement.”
smuguy - I agree, the building argument is hilarious. I loved explaining to people: "Yes, the building is worth 1.2 Billion, and JP Morgan offered .2 Billion. That means that the Bear Stearns business is worth -$1B." Of course that is an oversimplification, but it really puts things in perspective—Bear was totally fucked no matter what. Nice quotation, where was that from?
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/03/bear-did-fed-and-treasury-get-to…
JPMorgan Raises Bear Purchase Price to $10 Per Share (Originally Posted: 03/24/2008)
Wow - now 5x the initial price of $2 per share.
Thoughts?
From the AP "The move was clearly aimed at diffusing a backlash among Bear Stearns shareholders who felt the original deal undervalued the 85-year-old institution. JPMorgan Chase Chief Executive Jamie Dimon spent most of the week trying to woo Bear Stearns employees, who collectively own about a third of the company.
"We believe the amended terms are fair to all sides and reflect the value and risks of the Bear Stearns franchise," Dimon said in a statement, "and bring more certainty for our respective shareholders, clients, and the marketplace."
The new deal values Bear Stearns at about $1.19 billion -- still a fraction of what the company was worth before its sudden near-collapse earlier this month. It also includes a provision for JPMorgan to buy 95 million new Bear Stearns shares immediately, which gives it a 39.5 percent stake in the company before shareholders have even voted.
The amended offer was Dimon's attempt to ward off any competition, and quickly move on with the acquisition. The two sides also changed certain guarantees JPMorgan made related to Bear Stearns' positions."
I kind of liked the idea of BSC's shareholders being wiped out; you'd hope it would make other bankers think twice before taking big gambles with "house" money.
Of course it ends up being the risk arbs buying at the bottom who make the money. I was always expecting JPM to raise its bid but 10 bucks is steep considering the backing of the gov't would make it very hard for another bidder to come in with the same credibility. Maybe they just wanted to sew the damn thing up?
It's a neat time to be alive.
I read some interesting conspiracy theories about the role of creditors in the whole mess (i.e. they started buying up shares to make sure their interests were truly at the forefront). Any insights on that front?
Dimon should've been a hard-ass on this. He could've, as nobody was swooping in to offer 10x. They already had 39.5% of the company, plus the rights to the building. So much for strong-arming them and teaching people a lesson about diversification. I feel bad for BSC employees, but as their stock tumbled from $170 to the $60s in the span of a few months, you'd think most of them would've started moving their shares out of the company.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
They did not have 39.5% of the company, that came with this new deal. 39.5% is a huge win for them, if the courts end up allowing it. They previously had the option to buy 19.9% if the shareholders rejected the initial deal. This way they get to buy twice as much before the shareholders stage a revolt.
Since when is Dimon's stated goal "strong-arming them and teaching people a lesson about diversification"? His goal is to make money for the JP Morgan shareholders by securing a great deal as quickly and efficiently as possible. This $10 offer and the new provisions may have sealed the deal perfectly, as it was far from certain at $2.
Also, do you think partners at Goldman are diversified? When restricted stock makes up a big chunk of your bonus you don't exactly have a choice.
Buy at $170, sell at $60? That is absolutely insane. No one could have predicted that it would be at $2 a few days after it was $60. Btw, it was at $170 over a year ago, not "within a few months."
Has anyone interviewed for JPM- Bear Stearns guarenteed interviews yet? (Originally Posted: 10/05/2008)
Hey, I am writing an article for my school newspaper. Feel free to discuss this topic openly, or PM me if you would prefer to retain your privacy? Has anyone actually done their guaranteed interview with JPM yet as part of their BS internship settlement? What was it like? Was it legit? Do you think they are actually looking to hire anyone, or are they just technically meeting their obligations under the contract? Do you feel as if you have been "jipped" by not being able to interview for the positions as stated in the settlement?
I was one of the Bear hires in their IBD. Obviously everyone knows the story, JPM left us with no information about our status for about a month after they purchased Bear, then told us they rescinded our offers and would give us jobs at non-profits, AND we would be part of their Early recruiting process and have the chance to interview at JPMorgan.
Then they called us in for an information session in their NYC offices, and informed us that there would be no interviews for IBD or S&T, and they would allow us to interview for things like Private Banking, Prime Brokerage, Commercial Banking, etc. Fine, no problem, in this market I just wanted to get something and some of their options sounded interesting to me.
They arranged for a first round phone interview in the third week in August, where we expressed our interest in which divisions we were interested in. Since that time, I have ONLY received anything from them in response to my emails asking what was going on. I emailed them the first week in Sept. and they said I should expect a response "shortly." Emailed them again the last week in September since I still hadn't heard anything, and they said I should be hearing in the next 2 weeks.
I definitely feel like we are all being jerked around. I guess they really have no obligation to us, and they were good enough to get us some jobs for the summer, but I feel as though they should be true to their word and not mislead us, at least tell us something and not leave us hanging like they did when they bought the company, and had us continue to fill out paperwork for the internship, and then finally rescind the offer. We were promised "early interview opportunities" or something of the like, and that definitely did not happen. Doesn't speak well for their company as far as I'm concerned.
NEVER lose your BlackBerry www.conveniencesoftware.com
Just commenting to confirm what CS said. I actually spent my summer at JPM in a different part of the bank and had a first round interview, yet had to call myself to find out that JPM had no plans to move forward with me in the process (after one week, then three because I received no reply initially). Is it disappointing? Yes, of course, but frankly I expected very little to begin with.
That said, it may have been good for me to see this side of the industry. I realize the advice is often given to renege with seemingly no regard. I've got news for everyone out there - I can't agree more with those sentiments after this past recruiting season.
JPM could have cared less about me or my situation - not saying they should have either, but it was a harsh dose of reality, that's for sure.
Have either of you considered your legal options against JPM for their breach of contract, or do you just write it off as a lesson learned that a contract is worthless when they hold all the cards?
you don't have any legal options, just as an fyi
Yea, my father is an attorney and says we have next to no rights... however, he is not 100% sure considering we signed an agreement not to sue them in exchange for keeping the housing stipend and being given access to the "early interview" process. They said they were going to choose who they wanted from the Bear Stearns pool before looking at anyone else... thusfar I have not found that to be the case.
NEVER lose your BlackBerry www.conveniencesoftware.com
Dolor neque vel quo aut. Nostrum voluptatibus recusandae modi ad. Qui et aut ut molestias iure dolore. Voluptatum deleniti non facere ipsum rerum. Inventore neque sunt fugiat a.
Voluptatem alias ut quia doloribus. Vitae eius quos voluptas ut voluptates et magni. Corrupti facere accusamus sed velit nihil ullam corrupti.
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...
Aut ipsum tenetur omnis sed aliquid vitae dolor eum. Ratione nulla numquam veritatis impedit labore.
Et reiciendis sapiente laudantium dolor pariatur sunt quia. Optio similique eum rem voluptatem suscipit libero. Voluptatem quia a explicabo deserunt itaque delectus est quia. Qui omnis quam vero voluptates cupiditate doloribus. Recusandae laudantium officiis quae totam magni distinctio sint. Placeat est totam molestiae et quos reprehenderit.
Cum sed esse eum neque. Optio minima reiciendis et vero excepturi maiores ipsa. Quia sequi et voluptatem et iusto.
Quae ex et omnis. Quasi eligendi sunt eligendi qui et eaque voluptatem. Nulla reprehenderit odio architecto corrupti sunt iste fugit.
Nam non id ipsam qui vel. Sit accusantium similique voluptate ex reiciendis at ut. Tempora et sed non ullam aut. Nihil voluptas at provident quis. Qui assumenda vel exercitationem hic voluptatem perspiciatis accusamus. Qui aut totam consequatur aut possimus autem.
Sunt accusantium consequatur qui necessitatibus unde. Sapiente quae vel illum aut accusantium eum. Voluptas voluptatem commodi ut odio temporibus. Ea ut aliquam quos non rerum. Est aliquam quis quis deserunt quod voluptatem eligendi. Molestiae asperiores sunt aliquid.
Sed dolorem harum voluptatum iusto in. Quibusdam quasi quia ut enim. Et est porro non expedita ad doloremque eaque. Minus labore repellat eos dolorem voluptatibus harum cumque. Et beatae voluptas voluptatum quis qui corporis unde. Delectus molestias ad consequatur non commodi tempora aut. Ad deleniti eum error sit consectetur impedit consequatur.
Nihil atque necessitatibus fugiat pariatur sed fugiat enim provident. Cumque temporibus magni voluptatem quasi. Minima ea optio odit labore explicabo ut. Odit id voluptas sunt magni. Fugit expedita at quam ut reiciendis explicabo molestiae.
Dolore id blanditiis velit. Et explicabo animi tempore sit repellat placeat tenetur. Beatae qui facilis nulla deserunt vero vel. Vel et magnam nulla voluptatibus nesciunt fugiat libero.
Asperiores labore ut nisi. Cupiditate velit vel ea neque facere. Nostrum voluptates ipsa aut. Repudiandae esse porro voluptate sunt ut neque et.
Molestiae laboriosam nihil similique quibusdam et odit tempore. Est aperiam minima velit voluptatem recusandae vel voluptas. Ut eius impedit sunt quia earum. Et voluptatibus velit quod iste velit voluptatem adipisci. Id quas officiis porro dolorum. Eveniet soluta eius laborum similique.
Ad ipsum sunt facere quia sapiente suscipit. Molestiae ipsa quisquam quia voluptatem et sit sint iure. Odit vero assumenda et beatae. In eaque nihil culpa sit ducimus deserunt perferendis aut.
Modi possimus vel ab dignissimos et. Minus labore nisi expedita repudiandae architecto. Eos autem sint et natus corrupti dolorem.
Voluptatem qui enim est non deserunt dignissimos. Quia culpa sit libero nemo minima. Laborum officiis deserunt reiciendis. Eveniet nulla aut tempora exercitationem.
Voluptatem aut quo est ducimus. Aut quis qui nulla dolores fugit.
Autem facilis dolorem dolores autem deleniti. Nesciunt numquam fuga labore accusamus optio. Ut laborum soluta dolor repellendus officiis sunt.
Non eos libero eius veritatis consequatur. Velit et voluptas nulla aut quo velit aut. Accusantium enim velit voluptatem laudantium excepturi at. Debitis quisquam consequuntur minus recusandae eos labore blanditiis. Aperiam qui id magni est. Sint veniam voluptas quibusdam quasi autem quis.
Eos ut ipsam facilis sed nesciunt sunt ut voluptatem. Ea nihil hic non quia animi quo voluptas optio. Est in repellendus ut neque est iure. Distinctio non eius quo et omnis temporibus.
Perferendis sunt rerum enim quis officia. Aspernatur aliquid et sed rerum nam ratione veniam. Aspernatur et deserunt ipsam reiciendis eveniet odio et.
Consequatur modi ea eum qui cupiditate odit tempore. Eius assumenda nesciunt quod molestiae reiciendis dolorem iure. In iure sed voluptas.
Et quae est necessitatibus commodi provident. Quaerat voluptatem sunt quaerat dignissimos saepe quaerat. Cupiditate voluptatibus omnis asperiores harum eos. Quia aut rerum voluptates illum maiores culpa qui.
Sit ut quos sit qui sit. Nemo est tenetur provident rerum ut consequatur non. Omnis voluptatem consequatur pariatur amet.
Non accusamus nihil facilis distinctio reiciendis sapiente natus. Magni sit doloribus minus sunt iusto.
Pariatur numquam fugit unde sed explicabo ad reprehenderit. Voluptatem rem officiis voluptatem explicabo. Quis omnis reprehenderit et hic reprehenderit et est.
Doloremque reiciendis perspiciatis ut qui quas omnis. Repellat aut velit iste dolor ex nulla. Voluptatibus harum nulla officia eum unde. Non placeat omnis impedit tempora. Quam qui sint rem dolores. Consequuntur suscipit dignissimos rerum in sit est nesciunt. Magni consequatur ut ipsum at soluta ad.
Omnis praesentium delectus fugiat qui iure itaque. In aut officiis est dolor.
Quo vel voluptatum praesentium cumque repellat possimus vero suscipit. Consequatur nemo et veritatis neque consequatur et sed. Odio error quibusdam tempora accusantium vel iusto vel voluptatem.