On point of principle I would like to invite Matan Feldman to join me on a live zoom webinar with all of his customers and anyone else interested in watching. First Matan can explain how after having no knowledge of topics such as structural subordination and inter-creditor agreements. Or how he came up with a slide on "Competing motivation and stakeholder Interests", which is a direct ripoff of a slide I have used for years on competing interests in the Ch 11 process and another for the out of court process. Tell us Matan, when in your long professional career of restructurings and bankruptcy did you develop your assessment of competing "stakeholder interests"
After you explain your newfound knowledge, conveniently after receiving all of my materials under a contract", then we can do a slide by slide comp of our presentations and you can explain the genesis of each one of your slides, where it came from, what was your rationale, how does it fit in the Bk process and what other sections of the Bk code and ch 11 process do they relate to.
If you genuinely developed the materials yourself that should be apparent to the audience and we will let them vote on your guilt or innocence. If the audience finds you guilty then at the foot note of every slide, you must write this material was misappropriated from someone else and I passed it off as my own because that is just the base level of character and ethics I possess" also you will have to record and intro to your Rx webinars stating that you took this material from someone without attribution and in breach of the terms of an agreement with them" I dont care about the $399 you get for each one, I much prefer you to have to make a public confession of your guilt.
Wow Maud'Dib, sign me up. This is like pay per view of the trainers war. I will probably fall asleep in the first 2mn, since Bk law is not really that interesting. Why not just have a cage fight like MMA? That I can get into. Sounds like Matan did you dirty and you want to call him out and expose him. I like the forgoing any damages idea under your contract and making him record an admission. Never going to happen, but makes a great point. Please post if he takes you up on your challenge.
Yes financial damages are not the main issue, it is disgust with Matan and Ziv's scheme to string me along while misappropriating my work and then having the audacity to tell me my Rx materials are not up to WSP standards. Well given that WSP's has no standards when it comes to how low they will stoop or dirty they will play, then I would not want to be up to WSP's standards. I much prefer to call out Matan and Ziv for what they are and let their clients and the whole Rx community see who they really are and what they are about. In fact, I think I am going to record all my presentations as webinars and post them for free on the web just so no one ever has to pay WSP for their cheap imitation ever again.
Yes, post an update if there is going to be a Zoom battle. I think actually there will be some fireworks JT, maybe not so boring. But I do prefer JT's recommendation of a cage match. I guess this is one way to flame someone who steals your stuff. JT, you said on one of your posts you know who Maud'Dib is, can you message me and send me the link to the free materials he has on his website?
Will do Grace. No cage match unfortunately. Plus I highly doubt Matan would show, but feel free to call or email him.
617-694-7786
[email protected]
Those who can, do; those who can't, teach
I have had lot's of great teachers both in school and professionally and I think people teach for lots of different reasons, lifestyle, they enjoy helping people etc. I worked for very smart, capable bankers and PMs (am on buyside now) who could not mentor or teach what they know at all. Either they lacked the patience or the interest in developing someone else. I started as analyst at a firm that used all internal resources including 2nd year analysts and senior associates for training, no outsourcing to the boot camp companies and it makes a huge difference. When I was an associate at another firm, where it was all outsourced there was a noticeable difference in the development process.
I actually started as a restructuring lawyer, that is why I said Bk law is boring. But I can say in law there is much more emphasis on developing associates and continuing education. Partners and senior associates were expected to mentor associates and it was part of what helped you make partners. When I went to Rx advisory I saw there was little interest on the part of senior associates or senior level staff to mentor and develop junior talent. It is much more mercenary and they viewed staff as an infinite resource that could be burned through. I am a desk lawyer now at a bank so not sure how much that has changed with the analyst revolts and the war to retain talent. But long term the beast never changes, it needs to be fed young bodies to devour and its all social Darwinism survival of the fittest.
Agree with a lot of what you are saying JT, law is definitely more concerned about developing its associates into partners and there is much more of a mentorship and continuing ed culture given that lawyers are required to get CPE credits. I also agree with Grace about people teaching for different reasons. I do my seminars because I enjoy it and I found there were only a few firms, such as Lazard back in the day at least, that had really good training and development back in the day. Now they worked their analysts to the bone, but when they finished their two years they were equivalent to MDs at some of the shlock places. I would actually love to do more training, but it is hard to fit in to my schedule and I have found that at lot of the Rx firms today just use the boot camps for finance/excel etc and then just a few days at the end of training on restructuring (which means it takes them longer to get up learning curve since so much is sink or swim on the job learning) . Analysts going to M&A gets more training then Rx ones do from what I have seen and I view Rx and M&A as very similar, with Rx being M&A via the BK Code with the acquirers being either the prepetition creditors in a Ch 11 reorg, or new investors in a 363 or Ch 11 plan sale. Matan didn't even know what a 363 sale or stalking horse bidder was until he stole my slides and incorporated them into his presentation. Anyone interested in setting up a free session, send me a screenshot of a text or email to Matan asking him where he "got" his restructuring information from and we will set up a 2hr zoom call for free!
[email protected] or 617-694-7786
I would call or text him because I hate people like that, but I am pretty sure our bank uses WSP for modeling training and banks today are run by HR compliance drones. Nevertheless, you should just go directly to firms or set up your own webpage to deliver content, I went on the WSP site and looked at some of the free stuff, does not seem that hard to do. Sounds like from some of the responses there is definitely and interest/need so make it happen. If you message me I can see about getting you in to train some of the junior people on the HY/Distressed desks.
Certainly as a former lawyer, very few people on the desks who were not lawyers themselves or who have been around for 10+ years understands how credit docs and covenants work. I hear all the time form people, even MDs, there are no covenants anymore! Which is just plain ignorant, it is shocking that they are allowed to put 100s of millions of the banks capital to work. There are very few MAINTENANCE COVENANTS. But negative covenants related to RP/PI baskets, IE baskets, reloads of builder baskets are more complicated than ever and, yes they are very permissive, but you have to understand what transactions they are permitting.
I actually hear "there are no covenants anymore" line all the time. And you are right it is scary how little people know about credit who have come up over the last 10 years. I did a year and half in Restructuring Advisory in the 90s out of school and then went to Solomon Brothers at the very tail end. They actually had incredible training resources for credit and fixed income and they put out internal and external Phd level research on topics. Also, after the Citi merger there was an integration of the leveraged finance group with Citi's Lev Loan group and I did their associate training which really taught you credit and covenant analysis, because as a bank they had held a good portion of their loans. The syndicated loan TLB market was not nearly as developed back then and banks still did large TLAs and IBs underwrote HY bonds for LBOs. Now LBOs are all TLB and very little HY bond or 2L cushion. Would love to do some training for your desk and thanks for the offer will send you a message.
Definitely do, and I wouldn't just give out all your work for free even if it is not your main source of income just to show up WSP. Hire someone to market you and build a web platform. I am sure you can pay WSO to advertise, since I do not think they do restructuring and there are probably thousands of interested people on WSO. I will say this, WSP knows how to market and they do a slick presentation, but ultimately people who pay hundreds of dollars to get ahead want to learn from people who actually know what they are doing and do it for real. Modelling is one think, but M&A or Rx, you cannot just have been an analyst 20 years ago and haver real credibility teaching others the process. Plus, I always find that providing insight form real world examples of your actual experience is the most valuable. Not some case study where you reformat the Ch 7 best interests of creditors test from the disclosure statement. Not real value added. I see that he does use a lot of similar titles to some of your old slides that are still available on the web. Actually, your presentations are also on Scribd. I found the one you did on Trade Claims, which is a super interesting area and very topical with AMEX bk going on right now. We have traded a lot of claims in Aeromexcio BK.
I agree with JT, why give out all your stuff for free just to show up WSP. But would certainly love to see your deck. I guess the difference is that the WSP is a recorded webinar, so you need to record yours and market it. I am sure there are plenty of people on WSO and other finance /IB sites you can run adds on as long as it doesnt compete with one of their offerings.
Fair points Grace. The whole point of partnering with WSP was to avoid the marketing, setting up a website, creating a paywall to access content etc. I looked into it and it is fairly involved once you start housing multi hour videos that require a password and paywall to access, then you have to market people to your site. I am not sure if you can run adds on WSO I do not see any. But point taken it is possible. It is just a hassle and the build it and they will come philosophy has never been my style. I am a distressed person by background. They said that about a lot of projects like Lake Las Vegas!! If anyone remembers that one. Feel free to message me for slides. Thx for support!!
Update for you Grace. I called Matan and he called me delusional and hung up. I sent him a Lit Hold notice that litigation would be pending if he refuses the public Rx IB analyst jury trial by Zoom.
Well I guess I can see how being called delusional when someone steals all your work can be incredibly frustrating. I hear your point that it is not the money and you just want vindication, but better to just have your lawyer work it out and get paid, I highly doubt Matan will agree to your Trial By Zoom, even though it sounds like a great opportunity to get the truth out there, do your really think Rx and Ib analysts have the time to watch?? Doubtful, and honestly, most could not care less. Once they learn the stuff from the training firms, they have no regard for them and think they are losers who could not hack it in the real world, Which is ironic, since they do train the vast majority of analysts and associates today and most trainers are former analysts, but you know how the street is. Keep up the good fight and hope you win.
First off, this sounds very fishy. If true, WSP should release a statement, redact all said materials, and provide a path forward to control for this type of behavior in the future. I'm sure $399 x Q isn't as important as saving their reputation. To be fair, I'm assuming everything you said is accurate and there is--beyond a reasonable doubt--guilt on WSP's side. To speculate, however, I have no reason to believe why anyone would make up such a thing.
Second, I would be very interested in seeing these materials, OP (for personal use only).
Lastly, please keep us posted on how this plays out and/or if a public meeting with WSP takes place.
Will message you a link. It is totally not the $399 per that he gets, although I would take a royalty since that is a tacit admission. So it is very hard to copyright something explaining the bankruptcy code. He obviously makes some changes to so he can claim it is his own creation. However, he would never have know how to organize a presentation and structure along the BK timeline. Once he had a copy of mine his eyes were open and he just decided to rip me off. Now, I do have a breach of contract claim, which I intend to pursue against him if he refuses the public hearing, which I prefer, with Rx and IB analysts who are his customers as his judge/jury.
For instance in my credit and BK slides I use the term Determinants of Credit Quality, he changed it to Determinants of Priority (you can go to his TOC on the Rx course on WSP site and see section titles for each video). He also used the title Competing Stakeholder Interests, where I used Competing Creditor Interests, he uses Distressed Investor Perspective, I give a breakdown of Distressed vs Par buyer perspectives on restructurings etc. He has a section on Credit bidding and Stalking Horse Bidding, things he knows nothing about. I have a published article on the topic from 2010. These he all took after he say all my decks and stole it all for himself. I urge anyone who thinks this is low down dirty and unacceptable to call him 617-694-7786 or [email protected]
Yes I would attend the public Zoom call. But as I replied Maud'Dib, most analysts have neither the time nor the interest to go through a 2 hour Zoom Trial where you compare slides. I did get Maud'Dib's link and you can tell that the slides he posted have been around for years, There are dates on them, so pretty open and shut
I agree Zeta sounds suspect. Clearly Maud’Dib is convinced and JT Marlin sent me a link to his slides which clearly have been around for a long time. They go back over 10 years, so sound like he has a legit beef. I say get royalty, zoom trial sounds funny and all for optics but Matan will never show. I did text him from a burner, just because it’s really annoying to see someone steal people’s work.
Agreed. I took a look at the primers and the case studies. At best, this is highly coincidental and/or WSP needs to cite primary sources. As you pointed out, the timing of OP's publications--and their content--seems to be pretty strong evidence. The fact there was some kind of previous/current relationship with WSP is also supportive evidence.
So Maud'Dib obviously you are a Dune/Frank Herbert fan. New movie was horrible btw. I love the David Lynch one, it sounds like you have been around a while so maybe you say the original in theaters. While a public showdown with Matan is very much in character with Maud'Dib, I assume Matan is Fade Rautha, played by Sting, I agree with the others get a lawyer and get paid. Matan will never show up for this. I will text him and tell him to take the Zoom Trial option, just because I hate thieves and liars and it would be kind of interesting at least for about 15mn, but unlikely to ever happen. Clearly he got under your skin and I hope you do take him down. Sounds like a real @#%&*!!
Thanks for the message and the links Maud'Dib. And yes, I can see exactly what you are talking about just looking at the Table of Contents headers on WSP site that he clearly is using your slides and tweaking the titles. I was not a copyright lawyer, but I am pretty sure that is infringement so you should hit him with a cease and desist.
So it does look very similar just from looking at the TOC on WSPs site. Do not see why Maud'Dib would make it up, he obviously has been doing this for a long time an he has a lot of material. Not sure why he makes so much public if he trying to sell it, but maybe there is more information in the for pay versions.
Hey JT can you message me the link you are talking about, thx
Sent you a private message
Et rerum et voluptatum provident autem. Eum hic ipsam sapiente placeat qui quibusdam libero aut. Minima et officia et cum odio eos eveniet consectetur. Iure libero numquam consequatur quam dicta est. Excepturi accusamus provident cumque qui.
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...
Doloremque repudiandae eos omnis omnis. Enim in eos facere nulla necessitatibus aut magnam voluptatibus.
Ipsum dolores consequuntur accusantium. Dolore ea doloremque veniam ipsum fuga voluptas velit quis. Reprehenderit laudantium recusandae quis odit. Ullam corporis rerum consequatur. Recusandae nihil mollitia nulla suscipit iste voluptates et commodi. Sint tempore ut delectus iure voluptatem et.
Maxime ut sed labore non. Et ut doloribus assumenda rerum repudiandae suscipit quo. Et expedita distinctio quam officia expedita est. Dolorem iusto autem optio in.
Officiis alias fugiat pariatur accusamus et accusamus iure. Veritatis enim eligendi non.