it's run by an executive who was regarded, until the london whale incident, as being one of the best risk managers in the financial industry. so if he loses the chairman title, a lot of other companies that are facing similar votes, are likely to go in the same direction. it will be harder for them to justify consolidating two titles with a single person. > >do you think this is punishment or is it something beyond that? > >i think this is part of a broader movement toward stronger assertion of shareholder rights at publicly traded companies around the country. as i said, there's a lot of companies where it's been proposed to separate the chairman and ceo title and it is an important way for shareholders to get more control over the companies that they own. > >interesting trend and not yet fully played out. joe cahill, thank you so much. > >thank you. still ahead why star athletes often find themselves on the losing end of a battle with finances. that's next. pro athletes can become millionaires overnight... and in some cases-- lose the money just about as quickly. joining us now via

year as as bloomberg to provide confirmation of its controls allegations are swirling that the london whale story itself what the bloomberg broke last year may have been a result of an improper delivering of the data and goldman is using the opportunity to turn the screws on bloomberg broker dealer operations will be discussing bloomberg gave a link to day in a special segment and in a live interview with christopher chambers how do you remember credit default swaps they were at the at the center of the a.r.g. goldman sachs bailout and pay off in two thousand and eight yeah the market for these insurance contracts and corporations and government is undergoing a make over a new proposal by the international swaps and derivatives association would change the rules about when the contracts pay out and the government tries to bail out a bank by forcing losses on bond holders instead of tax payer and the insurance contracts on the bonds or the bank would pay out basically is an escalation of too big to fail so get out your popcorn as the players of the sixteen trillion dollar market duke it out

so it's not as if the bank hasn't escaped the problems of the past, london whale, those kinds of issuesd dimon even brought that up. liz: you look at what's happeeed with the risk assessment side of all this, and remember, they came under fire for not having checked the risk problems that jpmorgan had and, of course, that led to the errant trade. lost about $of billion. in the grand scheme of things, it's not a lot of money. but you look at the three-year performance of company, and save for 2012 where there was a bit of a problem there, you can see -- that's from the london whale, april of 2012 -- how well the company has recovered. all we've heard day, it's been roughly a $16 billion bill in fines and litigation and in settlements3 going back to 2009 for in this bank. liz: adam shapiro live on the scene in tampa where the vote has been put to a test, and jamie dimon passes with flying colors. here's a question for you guys, can you actually put a price on jamie dimon's value to jpmorgan's stock? matt mccormack has done it. he's going to give you the figure he's come up with and later

morgan case i mean they were looking at the london whale game where they lost a billion dollars i mean could it possibly be that it was a good thing that they caught as far got any bigger before it turned out to be a failure well you know there's always that question i mean you know the ends justify the means or something good came of this well yes something good came of it but when you look at the balance of this it's it's almost like with the administration and the. packing of the phone records of the subpoena the phone records yes they were trying to protect against leaks that possibly could endanger americans with in terms of yemen and terrorism but i mean come on i mean that's that's that's basically the kind of bridge. will shield they put up yes they found out about the london whale but think of all the other abuses that we might still find that are potentially i mean if it's going to scare citibank the bank of england ok j.p. morgan it's going to scare them and the treasury department there's something it's not a smoke and fire thing it's a real structural weakness that has to

for instance last year as salt was ending we had the london whale trade announcement. and $43 a share in the after hours. what we did, since we trade on the listed markets rather than the over the counter and credit derivative markets, we brought jpmorgan, we shorted deutsche banc against it. when they reverted back, as they played catch up, as jpmorgan more or less held that level, it drifted down collectively as a group towards about $33 in jpmorgan terms. and then things just went on fire. warren buffett stepped in, bought a bunch. you were in the same trade. just not in those names. maybe if you could tell people how you do that without giving up the secret sauce. >> you made money betting against the london whale. >> our business is pretty simple. we're always looking across the debt markets, the interest rate markets, and looking for cheap options. where we can find cheap options. whether it's -- whether it was the subprime short or cheap options on the housing recovery. in this case, it was a cheap option that was being artificially depressed by a trader in lond

after what have come to be known as the "london whale" trading losses last year, totaling $6 billion, some had argued the chairmanship role should go to an outsider. "if he had lost his chairmanship and gotten an independent chairman, that would've been a huge broadcast to the entire industry that too big to fail, too big to jail issues are coming back. but basically what this says is investors have pretty much forgotten about the catastrophes we've been through and the game plays on now." a proposal to split the job in two got 40% of shareholder votes at last year's annual meeting. in oklahoma, damage is being assessed from one of the worst tornados to rip through the u.s. in years. in its first survey, the national weather service says winds clocked in at more than 200 miles per hour, indicative of an ef-5 tornado. at least 24 people were killed in the storm's path, including 9 children. today, storms move to another section of the u.s. "the severe weather is going to be up in ohio and pennsylvania, and storms should calm down from what we saw monday and tuesday." that was accuweath

trader was still employed -- liz: they broke the london whale story. >> reporter: essentially,ing is, too, goldman sachs complained about this as well. the usage of the terminal to track down bank employees. i'll tell you something, the fact remains that bloomberg was doing this up until goldman sachs complained. liz: if i had that resource, that would be amazing to have that. and yet, so to me i look at it, and i say, well, that's not really fair because the clients wouldn't want that. >> reporter: yeah. if you pay $25,000, $35,000 a year, do you want to feel like a bloomberg reporter's looking at your usage of the terminal? they favored news over confidentiality of their climates. liz: liz macdonald working the bloomberg story. it's a big deal. we'll be watching. i mean, the banks are telling us, no, no, we're fine with it. they're not. i'm comparing natural gas prices to some type of heating oil complex, listen, it's proprietary information. closing bell ringing in 17 minutes. we've got an all-star market guest coming up right now. get ready for this. the last time he was on

. >> but it was also under dimon's watch that we saw last year that $6 billion lost in the london whalede, and that's prompted proxy adviser glass lewis to recommend jpmorgan shareholders vote for splitting the chair and ceo roles in the interest of corporate governance. on "squawk box" this morning, bar barry diller called it the wrong move. >> jamie dimon is as good as an executive, if you searched high, low, for however much time you wanted to you and you landed on jamie dimon, you would have do anything to have him take care of, let's call it, your banking enterprise. >> nonetheless, the proxy advisory firms reportedly have up to about 48% support. dimon has reportedly, meantime, been meeting with major shareholder, ahead of that may 12st meeting. and even if, maria, they suffered a disappointing vote for a split, it's not exactly binding. so then it might actually put the firm in even more of a bind. >> amazing developments, bertha, really. thanks so much. bertha coombs. jamie dimon and jpmorgan came out of the financial looking pretty good. years later, they are under siege, big-t

global so that the london whale from j.p. morgan all went through london and of course that j.p. morgan is the biggest bank in the world more last with the derivatives contracts and those are all going through life masters if she goes down will this have any impact at all on j.p. morgan stock will it go the way that of enron as i've been predicting for many years or will they just simply print another trillion dollars worth of funny money and try to paper over the whole thing here or the it's definitely the last scenario the will print you know all that a lot of money you know just to save the morgan. let's let's point out something else which is extremely interesting again in the biz is that you have a so i said previously bernie madoff them but you have also another one and ron you know this is you know quite interesting because they did it's kind of a new story you know it's a new eleventh of september preparing a g.p. morgan i hope i hope sincerely. but i am unfortunately i'm sure that they will let her down and the only banker who will come through her help will be anguished

resulting from alleged money laundering violations and risk management issues from the london whale debacle in response to j.p. morgan is diverting hundreds of people to its oversight and control group and cutting costs from several new programs that were just wondering and mark your calendar on the day that it happens exactly when you were hired shadow regulator promissory financial group to rubber stamp its initiatives and finally according to the wall street journal the world is running out of u.s. treasury bonds. you might think that's an extraordinary claim considering the trillion dollar deficit but the forty five billion dollars per month of purchases by the fed are removing a key source of quadrille for the shadow banking system hedge funds are banks. and hedge funds and banks traded treasury securities for cash and the process continues thanks to rehab population now love it or hate it as well greece is the whale the wheels of our modern financial system and the fed is siphoning the greatest time for unintended consequences. all right here's what's in your prime interest. this week

year has as bloomberg to provide confirmation of its controls allegations are swirling that the london whale story itself what the bloomberg broke last year may have been a result of an improper delivering of the leader data and goldman is using the opportunity to turn the screws on bloomberg broker dealer operation we'll be discussing bloomberg gave a link today in a special segment and in a live interview with christopher chambers how do you remember credit default swaps they were at the at the center of the a.r.g. goldman sachs bailout and pay off in two thousand and eight yeah the market for these insurance contracts and corporations and government is undergoing a make over a new proposal by the international swaps and derivatives association would change the rules about when the contracts pay out and the government tries to bail out a bank by forcing losses on bond holders instead of tax payer and the insurance contracts on the bonds or the bank would pay out basically is an escalation of too big to fail so get out your popcorn as the players of the sixteen trillion dollar market do get

year has as bloomberg to provide confirmation of its controls allegations are swirling that the london whale story itself what the bloomberg broke last year may have been a result of an improper for a lifting of the data and goldman is using the opportunity to turn the screws on bloomberg broker dealer operation we'll be discussing bloomberg gave a link today in a special segment and in a live interview with christopher chambers how do you remember.

year has as bloomberg to provide confirmation of its controls allegations are swirling that the london whale story itself what the bloomberg broke last year may have been a result of an improper or lifting of peter data and goldman is using the opportunity to turn the screws on bloomberg broker dealer operation we discussing bloomberg gave a link today in a special segment and in a live interview with christopher chambers as you remember credit default swaps they were at the epicenter of the a.r.g. goldman sachs bailout and pay off in two thousand and eight now the market for these insurance contracts and corporations and government is undergoing a make over a new proposal by the international swaps and derivatives association would change the rules about when the contracts pay out and the government tries to bail out a bank by forcing law.

money at the time, as you say the bank, financially, certainly righted the ship and a loss on the london whales for with the overseas tread, not a bad bet do you think there were issues created of corporate governance had there been better oversight or risk control so something like that could be prevented? >> obviously. connell: talking to the ceo would that have helped? >> no. the failure was well below the chairmen or c e l's level, the risk was taken and failure of the risk oversight committee, i presume they corrected that, it is not occurring again to some degree i look at the bright side, glass being half full because the big issue as an economy is whether the financial institutions can survive significant hits and will function effectively creating credit and capital but -- in the post 2008 period and they did it. they basically took a pretty big hit here and continue to make money and stockholder value went up and that shows we are getting stronger in our financial structure. >> your role as we zoom back out after zooming in on jpmorgan, too big to fail, something being debated, being

we begin with the london whale story. explain that for viewers. guest: there was a unit in london whose job was to manage the banks' risks. instead it builds up a hugely risky position in credit derivatives. people might recognize that phrase from the financial crisis. it's one of the instruments that was wild. , it was so big that other traders started referring at the londonader whale. that name helped people see what was going on. $6.2 billion now that jpmorgan has lost. jamie dimon has complicated the issue for himself when he dismissed it as a tempest in a teapot, which he quickly realized how stupid that was. boeing $6nks that billion on a risky trade, massaging the number so it looks like you've lost less, nobody thinks that is a tempest in a teapot. it's a much bigger deal that tells us some of the stuff that went wrong in 2008 could go wrong again. that you also right about the company is being investigated for manipulating energy markets. what happened? guest: the federal energy regulatory commission are investigating whether jpmorgan's e

even with the london whale trading loss they made $20 billion.nside jpmorgan they believe they will win the vote. that's what they believe. they come to the conclusion. i think initially they thought it was close. i think what they're saying now, what the general feeling is, this is what they feel, i'm not saying this is what's going to happen. they feel it will be close but dimon will retain both roles. they basically say that major shareholders have not made up their mind just yet officially. blackrock, fidelity, t. rowe price, i think those are the major shareholders. they will make up their mind on friday and monday but based on what they're hearing they will likely win their votes. they very the -- voted for keeping the role together the last time last year. melissa: 40%. >> 40% this year. we should point out if larry fink's blackrock would back sort of a split role, you would ask yourself, larry fink, why are you out there with a combined role? there is an issue here. here is the interesting thing. what happens if he loses, still a possibil

it was an internal investigation and 2012 regarding the london whale problem. it did not go back before 2012. is that a problem? >> it is about putting a government structure going forward. there is a precipitous loss of regulatory confidence. >> we had talked earlier about the grand fisher report. why is that problematic? >> i think jpmorgan has been subject to more regulatory functions. they are very clear. it costs the bank both in dollars and reputation. there are significant weaknesses that are putting their business at risk. we have not seen the board take those issues on in terms of the composition of the board or its leadership. >> michael garland, thank you. coming up at 2:00 p.m., we will hear from mike myope. what is the plan for succession going forward after jamie dimon? should there eventually be a split if there is someone stronger? lori: news that we can all use. thank you, adam. breaking news. the latest comments from william dudley. saying that the current fed exit plan is "stale and needs a revision." he says there is a risk markets will over

the bank resulting from alleged money laundering violations and risk management issues from the london whale debacle in response j.p. morgan is diverting hundreds of people to its oversight and control group and cutting costs from several new programs that were just wondering and mark your calendar on the day that it happens exactly when dave you were hired top shadow regulator promissory financial group to rubber stamp its initiatives and finally according to the wall street journal the world is running out of u.s. treasury bonds. you might think that's an extraordinary claim considering the trillion dollar deficit but the forty five billion dollars per month of purchases by the fed are removing a key source of quadrille for the shadow banking system hedge funds are banks. and hedge funds and banks traded treasury securities for cash and the process continues thanks to rehab propagation now love it or hate it greece is the way all the wheels of our modern financial system and the fed is siphoning the greatest time for unintended consequences. all right here is what's in your prime interest.

the bottom lines that despite whether it is london whale, robosigning, chairman, ceo, makes no differencethe bank is executing. the largest bk in the world and a net income of 205% of the last three years. the stock is gone nowhere. i encourage viewers at home, the bottom line, no one likes the banks. everyone loves t banks. but if you can't beat and you have to join them. now we're looking at some of these banks. they're well-capitalized on taxpayer dollars. they're making money hand over fist because they can borrow it for nothing. the bottom line is this. jpmorgan has gone nowhere in 13 years. the stock yields 3 percent and it is going to go much higher from here because even though all of these have lazar there, you're going to write a check which isot even going to come close to their 20 billion in net income and they're going to move past it. nicole: ten seconds to respond. he took all the time. >> no problem. understood. the real problem, it is like the old line goes, if you lost your reputation ready to go to find it? i understand you could let the stats from about a field of a cu

>> it's know as though they haven't gone through a very rough time lately and the london whale and acurring there. >> do you think he had to include himself? >> i don't necessarily believe that, but it has been a rougher road for jpm. >> but i think he talked aggressive action. i still believe -- >> one of the things we know about this business -- >> you can be in a job for a long time. >> right. >> we do know this is a failure to supervise by someone. you can't gain fraud. i have learn individual my career, there are people who can commit fraud and you do not know it, and you have to pay for it? may i just say he's the best in the business and that would be a shame, and i've been critical of him with the whale, but he is the best in the business and i don't think any of us will disagree with that. >> yeah. cramer's about to put monday under the microscope. we'll get "the mad dash" after the break and one more look at futures as we keck off the first opening bell of the week. more "squawk on the street" live from the nyse straight ahead. are you still sleeping? just wanted to check a

i don't think you could say the london whale --.iz: that was the trade that went south, that involves criminality. that involves a screw-up. maybe there is minor criminality. i see that raising systemic issue with the bank. people say this is very well-run bank, makes a lot of money, record profits. if jamie dimon should leave, the stock might go down. there is chance he might lose. we don't know exactly on tuesday, it may be a buying opportunity because this is a bank that will just make a lot of money. if shares go down 10%, you're still getting something with return on equity better than just about any other bank in, on wall street. so you should buy it. guy named, guy from wells, one. analysts from wells fargo, my producer about this today. and it makes a compelling argument. if the shares go down 10%, given you've got like a cas cash-generating machine. point out when citigroup before it blew up in 2006, it made a lot of money. it made like $20 billion a year. it made money. liz: this is a case of not just the jockey but also v

. >> i wonder if there was another episode like the london whale, some blowup in credit default swapsleaves. a qualitative argument, and it's great to take a moral stand, not sure you can actually manage money professionally that way. >> also, it would say a lot of ne negative about this board if they put jamie in a position where he said i'd told you i would leave if you did this. and now i'm leaving. same thing at apple when steve jobs was there as founder the first time. if they did that i would sell the stock, just based on that the board would be nuts to lose jamie. >> shares of u.s. airways flying high. up 40%, and they see the airline taking off to new heights. what about the options pits today? >> yeah, it was interesting. obviously, lcc chashares go hig, important for the stakeholders in the merger with american airlines, a lot of those who will be satisfied as part of the rising share price are unsecured claim holders and equity holders of the american airlines holding company. and a big positive for them. and a lot of market participants think this could continue, obviously

the libor scandal, the infamous london whale, the fourth quarter foreclosure fraud. attorney-general holder -- said they could not do this without factoring in potential systemic fallout. there are parts of dodd-frank there to address the problem, even federal reserve chairman bernanke says it is not yet over. i know you're elsewhere during the dodd-frank debate, but i like to read you something from a "new yorker" article on what a senior treasury official said about the brown-kaufman and too big to fail amendment. "if we, the treasury department, would have been for it it would have happened. but we were not, so it didn't." the opposition of the treasury is an important reason that my colleague, senator brown's amendment did not pass. are you still opposed to capping the size? >> i have tried to indicate that ending too big to fail is in our policy already today. >> at the question is specifically about capping the size of the largest financial institutions. it was the treasury opposition that killed off breaking up the big banks and i want to note the treasury has

saying he didn't know what was going on with the london whale scandal didn't get him out of trouble. what do you think? >> i think there's a real problem here. first of all we don't know why he has recused himself. that's number one. second of all, there is a difference between dealing with the substance of these matters and actually engaging in conduct that violates first amendment rights. that's something that he isn't recused from and he should be very concerned about, and take a real interest in. so i think there's a lot of explaining to be done here but there's no transparency coming out of the administration right now. melissa: jack, they must strategy because this is certainly -- >> i wish i could screw up that big and play it that cool. i mean it's amazing. this is all kinds of dumb. what comes out of this is that this, there are always conflicts of interest between the press and the government. the press is trying to uncover more information. sometimes the government wants to keep things out of the public view for a while. melissa: yeah. >> relationship works only because th

we saw just a year ago right now jp morgan chase and the london whale those banks are taking on big,isks as we saw with the scandal, big financial institutions out there rigging the market on interest rates so it is not as if the big financial institutions said, hey, we admit it. we get it. we understand and are backing up. we dial down the risks. instead we're caught in this back and forth. too big to fail and taking on risks and sucking up profits. leaving the american taxpayer on the hook if something goes wrong. i think that is fundamentally wrong. we've got to fight back against it. >> senator, i want to definitely have you back to talk more about wall street. before you go i want your thoughts on being a massachusetts senator, having represented boston. the house held its first hearing on boston today and we know the boston police were not informed of the russian, the russian government flagging tamerlan tsarnaev. does that concern you? >> of course it does. you know, this is what we have to do whenever there is a tragedy. we have to go back and look and see if there was someth

the london whale, i fail to see where they promulgated new rules. the qe program, nothing that ever even mentions that. at what point are you going to support winding it down? are you going to continue to support the quantitative easing program? my concern is, in response to some of the questions, you said it needs time. mr. secretary, it is kind of like a doctor waiting for the cancer to take over the patient. if we don't start something pretty soon on some of these things, it's not going to happen at all. >> briefly, mr. secretary. >> i think if you look at the report and the recommendations, it identifies the areas that fsoc believes of greatest risk. it lays out in the next year things we should be looking at and it should be in evolving list. take wholesale funding. that is a big risk. i think we do identify the big systemic risk. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota, mr. ellison. >> thank you, mr. secretary, and the chair and ranking member. i just want to make a comment. first of all, whenever you are dealing with institutions

year has as bloomberg to provide confirmation of its controls allegations are swirling that the london whale story itself what the bloomberg broke last year may have been a result of an improper delivering of peter data and goldman is using the opportunity to turn the screws on bloomberg broker dealer operations we discussing bloomberg gave at length today in a special segment and in a live interview with christopher chambers how do you remember credit default swaps they were at the epicenter of the a.r.g. goldman sad.

the london whale, i fail to see where they promulgated new rules. the qe program, nothing that mentions that. at what point are you going to support winding it down? are you going to continue to support the quantitative easing program? my concern is, in response to some of the questions, you said it needs time. ofthe secretary, it is kind like a doctor waiting for the cancer to take over the patient. >> briefly, mr. secretary. >> i think if you look at the report and the recommendations, it identifies the areas fsoc believes of greatest risk. it lays out in the next year things we should be looking at and it should be in involving list. take wholesale funding. that is a big risk. i think we do identify the big systemic risk. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota, mr. ellison. >> thank you, mr. secretary, and the chair and ranking member. i just want to make a comment. first of all, whenever you are dealing with institutions that involves human beings, things go wrong. something went wrong with this situation. probably onwho is the lib

i mean, we're talking about the london whale trade, but they had $8.5 billion of regulatory settlements between 2009 and 2012, which is about 12% of their net income. >> and he's one of the legacy ceos from the crisis who is still in his job today. jessica, you got to spend some time with mr. dimon last summer. you wrote an caller and asked him the question, did he ever consider resigning and he said, no. people in companies will make mistakes. i guarantee we'll make a mistake next quarter. so what? businesses make mistakes, hopefully smaller and fewer. unfortunately, they've made a few more mistakes during that time. but how do you think this unfolds for him? >> i think one of the things that we really liked about jamie dimon during the crisis and one of the reasons that he was sort of elevated was that he seemed like this very reasonable person. and we haven't seen that from him in a long time. he's sort of become unreasonable. and this whole now threatening to leave because of this largely like titular change, it seems not only not becoming of a ceo, but not adult in a lot of -- >> h

from earlier this year, but he promised more, like posts on the hard lessons learned from the london whalee state of the global economy, and how jpmorgan hires and manages. should be interesting to follow jamie dimon on linkedin, which is largely a job posting board, but if its first day, dimon's post has been viewed more than 2,500 times, it has more than 161 comments. a lot of them are job seekers asking dimon to hire them. >> i bet. kayla, thank you. >>> well, not everybody shares dimon's optimism about the potential here in the u.s. our own jeff cox has some concerns that we are squandering our future, you say, jeff. he joins me now along with wells fargo's adviser chief equity strategist, stewart friedman, who is on board with what dimon wrote. jeff, let's talk about your concerns. >> good afternoon, maria. i liked actually a lot what he wrote. i thought he was on point with a lot of things. one of the best points he made in the whole letter, he said america does not have a define right to success. and he makes a number of points in there that i actually was in agreement with. he caut

the past year involving the trading losses, the $6 billion trading losses that their -- >> the london whale. >> gretchen morgenson: -- their chief investment office is what got people a little bit alarmed. is this bank as well managed as mr. dimon says it is? and so the idea among some shareholders was, you really ought to have a check and balance here on this chief executive. we don't want the imperial ceo who also is the chairman of the board. because there was some risk management issues that we really need addressed. there obviously was not adequate oversight of the chief investment office if you're going to have $6 billion in losses. and yet the shareholders that turned down that proposal to separate the chief executive office from the chairman title, and so mr. dimon continues on as both. >> bill moyers: since he wears both hats, does this mean that jamie dimon, chairman of the board, gets to decide whether jamie dimon, ceo is doing a good job? >> gretchen morgenson: pretty much. i mean, he is essentially overseeing his own performance. which, you know, is a conflict of interest. so i