Jamie Dimon

I've often heard people praise Jamie Dimon as being one of the better leaders on Wall Street and helping JP Morgan pose a serious challenge to Goldman Sach's dominance.

Can anyone enlighten me on why people like him so much?

WSO Elite Modeling Package

  • 6 courses to mastery: Excel, Financial Statement, LBO, M&A, Valuation and DCF
  • Elite instructors from top BB investment banks and private equity megafunds
  • Includes Company DB + Video Library Access (1 year)

Comments (40)

Apr 19, 2011 - 8:14pm

2 reasons:

1) J.P. Morgan greatly strengthened its relative position during his reign. He was and remains very focused on the "fortress balance sheet" and strong risk management, which limited and helped manage MBS exposure during the crisis. He bought Bear Stearns and WaMu for pennies - again because he had the balance sheet for it.

2) His look and personality. Have you ever seen him speak? The guy is highly entertaining and relatable. He is very blunt and direct and has a great sense of humor. People love him. He's gives off that "anti-Wall Street" vibe with his willingness to openly discuss anything.

The first reason gives him respect. The addition of the second reason makes him a Wall Street celebrity. I'm sure Blankfein is a brilliant CEO, but even before the SEC scandal, you didn't really see Blankfein around that much.

Learn More

300+ video lessons across 6 modeling courses taught by elite practitioners at the top investment banks and private equity funds -- Excel Modeling -- Financial Statement Modeling -- M&A Modeling -- LBO Modeling -- DCF and Valuation Modeling -- ALL INCLUDED + 2 Huge Bonuses.

Learn more
Apr 19, 2011 - 8:39pm

Blankfein doesn't participate in their earnings calls, Viniar handles the whole thing. Enjoyed the pounding the stock took today despite beating projections, looks like the shine is coming off that penny. In all fairness JPM appears to be heading to this method as Braunstein's role has greatly increased on each call since be became CFO to where he basically handled last week's solo.

Also, not sure WaMu has exactly been a total success. A countrywide-lite perhaps.

Jamie's background is sick though, has been involved in the creation/demise of several wall street institutions. Doing his best now to beat back poorly thought-out aspects regulatory reform.

Apr 19, 2011 - 11:44pm

1) The man consistently takes controls on backwater companies and turns them into financial juggernauts
2) Completely down to earth personality, but gets shit done

"Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, for knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."
May 6, 2011 - 3:23pm

Honestly it has always surprised me that GS and MS get so much love on this board an not much is given to JPM. They're a great fucking company, great management team, great people, very intelligent, and they put so much focus on their employees to help them succeed. Maybe it's because everyone on here wants to move on to KKR/PIMCO/Citadel/[insert big buyside name here].

JP Morgan is by far my first choice if I were going to work for a bulge bracket.

"You stop being an asshole when it sucks to be you." -IlliniProgrammer "Your grammar made me wish I'd been aborted." -happypantsmcgee
May 6, 2011 - 3:24pm

Jamie Dimon for President? (Originally Posted: 08/11/2011)

So yesterday I was out with some friends for dinner and the economy came up as a topic. That lead to politics and the election. Rick Perry's name got thrown around a little then someone mentioned Jamie Dimon's CNBC appearance yesterday. I doubt the US would ever allow a banker to become President but still... it got me thinking. He is a bright guy, well spoken, and smart as hell. Would he have a shot?

This is all purely hypothetical of course and I have no idea what his beliefs are but I woke up with the idea. What do you guys think?

"Ambition and education is first and talent is second"- T.I.
May 6, 2011 - 3:25pm

I would love to see a competent banker to become the president, at least once. Lawyers do it all the time, there is no reason bankers should hold back, if they are competent of-course.

EDIT : I Googled his name and there are only speculations about him running for the elections. There is nothing concrete.

May 6, 2011 - 3:27pm

I'm thinking that this is the wrong period of history for a banker to run for office. In a few years maybe. I'd vote for him.

Get busy living
May 6, 2011 - 3:28pm
UFOinsider:
I'm thinking that this is the wrong period of history for a banker to run for office. In a few years maybe. I'd vote for him.

This is the perfect time for a banker to run for elections and drive the economy out of gutter and prevent a double dip. People with background and experience in economics ,Finance, will able to think more clearly about the economy and less about politics.

Economy should be the Number 1 priority for the president right now, not taking expensive trips around the world.

May 6, 2011 - 3:32pm

there's absolutely no way a banker has even a remote chance of becoming president. with as much hate as there is out there, dimon (as loved as he is here), would only have a slight advantage over someone like lloyd or some shit

May 6, 2011 - 3:38pm

Uhmm, nothing against Dimon (smart guy) and bankers. There is a reason a President has a council of economic advisers. If we talk finance experience, Mitt Romney has the chops as well. Bain Consulting + Plus Bain Cap + Harvard MBA/JD. Regardless, there is no silver bullet to fix the economy. What makes an effective Bank Holding company CEO does not translate into an effective president. Besides nowadays, it's not REALLY about the president, its his/her administration, advisers, etc.

Just like a CEO does not need to be a financial whiz, as long as he/she has a brilliant CFO. Neither does a president need to be brilliant "finance" guy. Weather people like or dislike Larry Summers, no one can doubt that guy is crazy smart. His area of expertise, if I remember correctly is labor economics. That didn't pan out. Bernake is another brilliant economist with the education and background, still not working all that well. Doing M&A deals, reading balance sheets, analyzing income states, etc. does not equate to macro economic brilliance.

Guys, there are enough smart people at the top (though many may have differentiating views on what people here feel). There really isn't much of a solution unless U.S. invents another "game changer" like the mass-production of automobiles, the rise of the Internet, or seriously lower salaries to compete on the less knowledge intensive jobs. If we use Game Theory, politicians are doing exactly what they should be doing, to Win. Does it equate to actually helping the nation? For a few yes, many No. It's not the players. It's the rules of the game as it is written.

----------------------------------------------------------------- Hug It Out
May 6, 2011 - 3:39pm
Ari_Gold:
Uhmm, nothing against Dimon (smart guy) and bankers. There is a reason a President has a council of economic advisers. If we talk finance experience, Mitt Romney has the chops as well. Bain Consulting + Plus Bain Cap + Harvard MBA/JD. Regardless, there is no silver bullet to fix the economy. What makes an effective Bank Holding company CEO does not translate into an effective president. Besides nowadays, it's not REALLY about the president, its his/her administration, advisers, etc.

Just like a CEO does not need to be a financial whiz, as long as he/she has a brilliant CFO. Neither does a president need to be brilliant "finance" guy. Weather people like or dislike Larry Summers, no one can doubt that guy is crazy smart. His area of expertise, if I remember correctly is labor economics. That didn't pan out. Bernake is another brilliant economist with the education and background, still not working all that well. Doing M&A deals, reading balance sheets, analyzing income states, etc. does not equate to macro economic brilliance.

Guys, there are enough smart people at the top (though many may have differentiating views on what people here feel). There really isn't much of a solution unless U.S. invents another "game changer" like the mass-production of automobiles, the rise of the Internet, or seriously lower salaries to compete on the less knowledge intensive jobs. If we use Game Theory, politicians are doing exactly what they should be doing, to Win. Does it equate to actually helping the nation? For a few yes, many No. It's not the players. It's the rules of the game as it is written.

Thank you - I was wondering when someone was going to mention Mitt Romney. I frankly don't see Jamie Dimon having the chance to look towards politics - Bankers are just too hated right now, and Dimon will be past his prime. I have a friend who works at the Washington Post and although they won't say it, with all the rumors of Geithner wanting to get the heck out of Treasury, Dimon might jump ship for Secretary of Treasury, if he got the offer.

May 6, 2011 - 3:41pm
Ari_Gold:
Uhmm, nothing against Dimon (smart guy) and bankers. There is a reason a President has a council of economic advisers. If we talk finance experience, Mitt Romney has the chops as well. Bain Consulting + Plus Bain Cap + Harvard MBA/JD. Regardless, there is no silver bullet to fix the economy. What makes an effective Bank Holding company CEO does not translate into an effective president. Besides nowadays, it's not REALLY about the president, its his/her administration, advisers, etc.

Just like a CEO does not need to be a financial whiz, as long as he/she has a brilliant CFO. Neither does a president need to be brilliant "finance" guy. Weather people like or dislike Larry Summers, no one can doubt that guy is crazy smart. His area of expertise, if I remember correctly is labor economics. That didn't pan out. Bernake is another brilliant economist with the education and background, still not working all that well. Doing M&A deals, reading balance sheets, analyzing income states, etc. does not equate to macro economic brilliance.

Guys, there are enough smart people at the top (though many may have differentiating views on what people here feel). There really isn't much of a solution unless U.S. invents another "game changer" like the mass-production of automobiles, the rise of the Internet, or seriously lower salaries to compete on the less knowledge intensive jobs. If we use Game Theory, politicians are doing exactly what they should be doing, to Win. Does it equate to actually helping the nation? For a few yes, many No. It's not the players. It's the rules of the game as it is written.

Those economic advisers are good but NOT the best else they would be making Billions of dollars in the market, not advising the president.

What I am suggesting is people like Warren Buffet and George Soros should step in, they have proved decades after decades that they are capable investors. So they can bring in some $$$$ for the people of USA by allocating the resources in the bets possible way.

But the dillema is that these kind of people cant play politics and hence dont generally get votes.

May 6, 2011 - 3:43pm

The US has never had a legit CEO, industrialist or prominent banker as president. But US presidents often sought the advice of ex-CEO's, ex-bankers, etc on economic matters. There have been a couple of treasury secretaries with backgrounds in finance/industry: Hank Paulson, John Snow, Rob Rubin, Paul O'Neil, etc etc. The careers of many spanned over both Republcan and Democratic terms.

And some of the most prominent industrialists and bankers of their time served as treasury secretaries during the most volitile economic disasters: Andrew Mellon during the Great Depression and Hank Paulson duing the Financial Crisis of 2008. Food for thought.

Would a guy like Jaime Dimon fix the economy and the US's fiscal policy? I doubt it. Bottom line, the POTUS and his avisors don't control the economy. The economy is a function of supply, demand and productivity.

Man made money, money never made the man
May 6, 2011 - 3:44pm
RE Capital Markets:
The US has never had a legit CEO, industrialist or prominent banker as president. But US presidents often sought the advice of ex-CEO's, ex-bankers, etc on economic matters. There have been a couple of treasury secretaries with backgrounds in finance/industry: Hank Paulson, John Snow, Rob Rubin, Paul O'Neil, etc etc. The careers of many spanned over both Republcan and Democratic terms.

And some of the most prominent industrialists and bankers of their time served as treasury secretaries during the most volitile economic disasters: Andrew Mellon during the Great Depression and Hank Paulson duing the Financial Crisis of 2008. Food for thought.

Would a guy like Jaime Dimon fix the economy and the US's fiscal policy? I doubt it. Bottom line, the POTUS and his avisors don't control the economy. The economy is a function of supply, demand and productivity.

I got a question for you. Do you think a guy like Warren Buffet, do real good for the economy if he hypothetically be the president?

May 6, 2011 - 3:46pm

This has taken some wild turns. Never thought I'd be learning about India and its leaders today. I gotta brush up on my Indian politics haha

"Ambition and education is first and talent is second"- T.I.
Start Discussion

Total Avg Compensation

June 2021 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (9) $911
  • Vice President (35) $364
  • Associates (202) $234
  • 2nd Year Analyst (115) $151
  • Intern/Summer Associate (97) $145
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (27) $145
  • 1st Year Analyst (420) $131
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (338) $82