Taleb said that a point he had just made, which mentioned J.P. Morgan, turned out to be true with the Bear Stearns rescue.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
The second judge said resolved true; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
What would count as true or false
True if records of the March 2008 Bear Stearns rescue show that JPMorgan Chase took over or guaranteed Bear Stearns' obligations (Fed-backed bridge financing, JPMorgan's guarantee of Bear's trading obligations and its acquisition), so that counterparties trading with Bear in effect had JPMorgan as their counterparty, as of 2008-04-03. Mostly true if JPMorgan guaranteed or assumed Bear's trading obligations but there was a minor detail such as timing or a gap in the guarantee's scope. Mixed if JPMorgan took over only part of the exposure and other significant exposure stayed with Bear or the Fed. Mostly false if the Fed or another party, not JPMorgan, was the effective counterparty, with JPMorgan's role marginal. False if JPMorgan did not assume or guarantee Bear's obligations.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (4)
-
E1 JPMorgan Chase To Acquire Bear Stearns JPMorgan Chase & Co. (news release, filed with the SEC) · 16 March 2008
“Effective immediately, JPMorgan Chase is guaranteeing the trading obligations of Bear Stearns and its subsidiaries and is providing management oversight for its operations.”
-
E2 be12368022-ex99_3.txt - SEC.gov Bear Stearns Companies Inc. / JPMorgan Chase & Co. (joint press release, Exhibit 99.3, filed with the SEC) · 24 March 2008
“The JPMorgan Chase guaranty of Bear Stearns' trading obligations has also been significantly clarified and expanded.”
-
E3 Matter of Bear Stearns Litig. (N.Y. Civ. Ct. 2008) Justia Law (court opinion, 2008 NY Slip Op 28500) · 2008
“JPMorgan's obligation to guarantee Bear Stearns' trading obligations, in the event of a negative vote on the merger, was reduced from one year to 120 days.”
-
E4 Matter of Bear Stearns Litig. (N.Y. Civ. Ct. 2008) Justia Law (court opinion, 2008 NY Slip Op 28500) · 2008
“During the week, the NY Fed directly loaned the company approximately $30 billion each day and JPMorgan loaned it approximately another $13.4 billion.”
Reasoning
JPMorgan's March 16, 2008 release, filed with the SEC, states that "effective immediately" it was guaranteeing the trading obligations of Bear Stearns and its subsidiaries (E1). The joint release of March 24 says this guaranty was "clarified and expanded" (E2). That supports the claim that trading with Bear in effect meant trading with JPMorgan. However, a 2008 New York court opinion says the guarantee would run for only 120 days if shareholders voted against the merger (E3). It also says the New York Fed lent Bear far more than JPMorgan during that week (E4). These limits on the guarantee's scope, and the Fed's role in the financing, fit the "mostly true" grade rather than full "true".
Cite this claim
Nassim Taleb, “Taleb said that a point he had just made, which mentioned J.P. Morgan, turned out to be true with the Bear Stearns rescue.” (said 3 April 2008). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_9c9aa989035e, method 0.1.0+28da144b, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_9c9aa989035e
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Nassim Taleb
-
Mixed
“My point was that bike lanes contribute to IMPROVEMENT in well-being and happiness WITHOUT generating economic growth.”
-
Resolved true
“The entire article misses the point that Spitz has been bullish past 3 years.”
-
Mixed
“It is worth noting that binary options on financial”
-
Mostly true
“they are banned by most corresponding regulators, as they are”
-
Mostly false
“We know that economic forecasts work no better than astrology”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.