Jump to content

Talk:Bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

duplication

[edit]

since the recent creation of this sub article, there is now quite a bit of duplicity between it and the main Lehman Brothers article as the story continues to unfold.

since i'm rather new at this wiki stuff, i am not in a position to have strong experience about what belongs in a "main" article and what belongs in a "sub" one. however, i believe some coordinated effort is needed between the 2 articles. as a reader, i don't expect to read a sub-article that primarily regurgitates what is covered in the main article.

thoughts?--68.173.2.68 (talk) 10:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, the best solution is to remove most details of the bankruptcy from the main article. I'll try to start this. Superm401 - Talk 23:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

question inclusion of Damien Hirst auction paragraph ("Impact of bankruptcy" section)

[edit]

"Among economic indicators prompted by the announcement, on the first day of a two-day auction, Sotheby's earned commission on USD $15 million above estimates in London when fine artist Damien Hirst bypassed his representatives, Gagosian Gallery and White Cube, which is located in the UK and was invited to participate in the auction. Some buyers received six months to pay.[29]""

To begin, I can't understand the lengthly sentence as a stand-alone thought. Who was invited to participate? Who are Mr. Hirst's representatives?

More importantly, I am unable to grasp notable relationship of the auction and the bankruptcy announcement by Lehman.

I recall seeing this paragraph in an much earlier draft of main Lehman wiki article and it was later excised. I am unable to access easily the source referenced (NYTimes) because the site requires (albeit free) registration (not an option for my situation).

Perhaps someone can elucidate?--68.173.2.68 (talk) 14:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mini Bonds

[edit]

Could someone please explain what mini-bonds are?

THANKS -- Michael Janich (talk) 03:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Should there be a separate wiki page about the LBIE administration currently going on in the UK. It seems like it is at quite an advanced stage. Thoughts welcome. 127rahmat (talk) 02:47, 8 November 2012 (UTC) Just to add that the (obvious fact) that the bankruptcy had wide reaching consequences; there is mention of Hong Kong but there were also long queues of people in Singapore hopeing for fund redemptions. The role of the UK is also only mentioned by way of an external link (a good one I have to say). Anyone else feel like a separate wiki page is warranted to shift away from a US focus?127rahmat (talk) 14:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Just to add that the (obvious fact) that the bankruptcy had wide reaching consequences; there is mention of Hong Kong but there were also long queues of people in Singapore hopeing for fund redemptions. The role of the UK is also only mentioned by way of an external link (a good one I have to say). Anyone else feel like a separate wiki page is warranted to shift away from a US focus?127rahmat (talk) 17:04, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undue US focus

[edit]

This article (like many on Wikipedia) has undue focus on the US aspects of this story and ignores important aspects in other countries and regions. For example, there is significant controversy about the transactions between Lehman Brothers Inc and its UK/European subsidiary late on 12 September 2008 - the parent company ordered substantial cash transfers to occur. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.34.218.209 (talk) 20:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Should there be a separate wiki page about the LBIE administration currently going on in the UK. It seems like it is at quite an advanced stage. Thoughts welcome.127rahmat (talk) 02:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Influence on 2008 election?

[edit]

Is there proof that the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy directly influenced the election by causing Obama to take the lead over McCain? Which poll? Did the poll demonstrate the connection between Obama's taking the lead and the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy? Did it prove voters were more likely to support Obama? I'm simply asking questions; we shouldn't draw conclusions based on an assumption. Foreignshore (talk) 20:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Foreignshore[reply]

I think not; not only do I have no memory of such phenomena, but I doubt any reliable source for such speculation could be found. User:Fred Bauder Talk 13:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Given the significance, this article is woefully inadequate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.173.78 (talk) 01:22, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Citation for inclusion

[edit]

All Lehman Brothers current court documents are stored here: http://dm.epiq11.com/LBH/Project# Might be useful for additions for someone with the werewithal to go through and add. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LegalTech (talk • contribs) 04:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fed notes

[edit]

Fed notes released in February 2014 may be helpful in explaining failure of the Federal Reserve to save Lehman. User:Fred Bauder Talk 13:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As may this NYT's analysis User:Fred Bauder Talk 06:39, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A letter from Barney Frank. User:Fred Bauder Talk 08:58, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:55, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:30, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comma after 2001

[edit]

In the source,

"The bankruptcy triggered a 4.5% one-day drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, then the largest decline since the September 11, 2001 attacks. It signaled a limit to the government's ability to manage the crisis and prompted a general financial panic."

There should be a comma after 2001. I put it in, and it was removed. Why?

Do a web search for

comma after year when date is adjective

and you will see that even when the date is an adjective, there should be a comma after the year if it's in the middle of a sentence.

Yes, there is one "authority" that doesn't use the comma, but it appears that all others, if not the vast majority, do. I recommend it be put back.

Or it could be rephrased as

"the attacks of September 11, 2001" Betaneptune (talk) 16:31, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bankruptcy_of_Lehman_Brothers&oldid=1205778749"