The Wall St. Journal, Apr. 26, 1990, On What Milken Pleaded Do
He Admits Cheating Clients And Plotting With Boesky To Assist a Posner Raid
---
Teary Scene in the Courtroom
By Laurie P. Cohen
Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
NEW YORK -- He was almost at the end of a detailed
confessio
Slobodan wrote:
>I have a friend who is a rabbi and knows Milken. He is impressed with him
>because he gives lots of money to various Jewish charities apparently,
>some of which would probably not be approved of by many on this list
>because of their links to Israel. But, I gather his charitab
I have a friend who is a rabbi and knows Milken.
He is impressed with him because he gives lots of
money to various Jewish charities apparently, some
of which would probably not be approved of by many
on this list because of their links to Israel. But, I gather
his charitable giving extends w
I understand David's point about the importance of opening up finance, but the
junk bond revolution was not a good way to do it. First, it has saddled firms
with a higher level of debt, which has increased general financial fragility and
also tends (ceteris paribus) to shorten firms' planning hor
David Shemano wrote:
>As part of the 1982 banking deregulation, the Congress in its infinite
>wisdom permitted savings and loans to invest in whatever they wanted, and
>at the same time increased deposit insurance to $100,000. As a result,
>[some] depositors put their money wherever they got t
Ken Hanly wrote:
>What was "fraudulent" about the deals?
Every junk bond prospectus was freighted with warnings about how
risky the securities were (and still are). Whoever bought the things
knew that, and either thought the risk was worth it or didn't think
about risk at all.
Doug
David Shemano wrote:
>The ones who complained, as has been stated, were the old crowd. When it
>comes down to it, Milken was a new-money Jew lending money to other
>new-money Jews to takeover corporations run by old-line management.
This is an unspoken subtext of the whole affair. Rohatyn playe
What was "fraudulent" about the deals?
Cheers, Ken Hanly
- Original Message -
From: Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:21 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:7233] Re: RE: Re: Free Mike!
> When a discussion seems
id Shemano
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Perelman
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 7:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:7233] Re: RE: Re: Free Mike!
When a discussion seems to involve only 2 people on the list, I usually
suggest
When a discussion seems to involve only 2 people on the list, I usually
suggest to shut it down. So, I will respond to David and let him have
then last word.
My father met both Ron Perelman and S. J. Perelman, but neither seen to be
related to us in any way that we could discover. David's examp
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Perelman
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 5:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:7227] Re: RE: Re: Free Mike!
The most famous case was Charles Hurwitz. Pension funds were removed to
use in speculation, replaced by one provided by an insurance co
The most famous case was Charles Hurwitz. Pension funds were removed to
use in speculation, replaced by one provided by an insurance company that
flopped.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 05:38:28PM -0800, David Shemano wrote:
> Michael --
>
> Without arguing about what Milken actually did as opposed to
Doug Henwood wrote:
-
>Milken got screwed. He was not charged with, and never convicted of,
>insider trading. In fact, I bet there is not a single person on this list
>who has a clue what he was charged with and how trivial the charges
actually
>were.
Even more challenging:
13 matches
Mail list logo
