|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{g}}In a gaucher times called a [[key man|key ''man'']], the [[key person]] — or people — are those in a small financial services organisation who provide the lion’s share of the brains and nowse. In a [[hedge fund]], this means the two genius ex-[[Goldman]] trading whizz founding partners. | | {{g}}{{key person capsule}} |
| | |
| As long as these two chaps — they tend to be chaps, though the revolution is coming — still show up for work for their colossal paycheques, the future of the organisation is relatively assured. Should one of them or, God forbid ''both'', gallivant off to their newly-acquired Caribbean islands to play with their respective collections of racing cars, they will leave behind a bunch of mediocre financial services hacks and bullshit artists with whom neither the fund’s erstwhile clients nor its trading counterparties will any longer wish to do business.
| |
| | |
| Hence the “[[key person clause]]”, entitling one to terminate a trading arrangement should the nominated [[key person]]s bugger off. If there is more than one nominated [[key person]] expect complications are around how many of them must leave before the clause can be triggered. Should it be ''all'' of them? ''Any'' of them? A simple majority?
| |
| | |
| Negotiating a [[key person clause]] can be a fascinating exercise. Here psychology conflicts with normal imperatives of risk management because, while [[key person clause]]s undoubtedly represent an Achilles heel for a [[hedge fund]], they play so egregiously to the principals’ egos that most will be upset the not to be asked for one. There is no better validation of one’s self-worth, after all, than to be told that without your continued personal involvement a training relationship is worthless.
| |