WALL STREET JOURNAL FEATURES BAIRD v. RED GRANITE
WALL STREET JOURNAL Front-Pages R. W. Baird
“Brokerage Houses Attack,” Screams Headline
Purcell Portrait on P. C1
Baird Spokesperson Claims Defendants Untruthful
By Michael Horne
The ongoing dispute between Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc. and Red Granite Advisors, LLC has made its natural progression to page C1 of today’s Wall Street Journal. In an article entitled, “The Breakup: When Brokerage Houses Attack,” staff writer Susanne Craig recounted the charges and countercharges swirling in a lawsuit filed by the old-line Baird against startup Red Granite, a story Milwaukeeworld has followed from the beginning.
In the Wall Street Journal story, readers were introduced to Baird CEO Paul Purcell with these words, “For years, Paul Purcell operated in the shadow of his brother Phil, the former head of Wall Street giant Morgan Stanley.” The Journal article, on the front page of the “Money & Investing” section, includes a portrait of the smiling Purcell. His brother had likewise been immortalized in the Journal’s distinctive stippled-line portrait style. Now mom has a pair of them to hang in her parlor.
Baird is introduced to us as being “a player in the Midwest, but dwarfed by New York firms like Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group.”
[“You hear that? Wall Street says we’re a player!”]
The article recounts Baird’s take-no-prisoners approach to former employees who split from the firm this spring to form Red Granite. The defection resulted in a loss of many highly desirable institutional clients at Baird, some of which followed the former employees to Red Granite, also based in Milwaukee. Funds under management at Baird dropped precipitously in the wake of the turmoil caused by the defection.
The Journal article goes on to note “the tactics firms use as they try to keep lucrative clients when top employees depart. In this case, rather than quietly file an arbitration claim, Baird filed a lawsuit in state court, throwing its allegations into the open.” (Boy, did they ever, with over 60 items in the case file thus far.)
We hear once again that the Red Granite defendants had warned, while still at Baird, that some employees there did not have the required securities licenses. The Wall Street Journal readers read, as milwaukeeworld.com readers first did, that an angry Purcell told them “…it would have been much better to discuss this before you start papering the file for the regulators.”
[[It did not go on to continue the quote, as milwaukeeworld did back in August. The remainder of Purcell’s warning read:
“and they [the regulators] rotate backwards with great precision and then some of those words in there, if they ended up in the front page of The Wall Street Journal or the New York Times, you wouldn’t feel good, and I guarantee I wouldn’t feel good and you would be very sorry that you had ever said them, I believe, because it wouldn’t be good for your business. In any event a much better way to get our attention, which was to talk to me.”
You can be assured that Purcell, his fear granted, does not feel good today —Ed.]]
The article also quoted Purcell’s dismay at the lack of “team play” by the future Red Granite defendants.
(Readers did not learn that the focus of the defendants’ concern was Mary Ellen Stanek, Baird Advisors Managing Director and Chief Investment officer.)
The article had this to say about Baird’s response to the charges :
“John Rumpf, a Baird spokesman, says the former employees left Baird because of a compensation disagreement and that they have made false allegations to divert attention from their misconduct.
“Mr. Rumpf says allegations that the firm [had] inadequately licensed employees on staff are false.”
(Rumpf did nothing to support his charge against the Red Granite partners such as giving an example of their alleged falsehoods or any evidence whatsoever to back up his claim. There had been no prior accusations that the defendants lied prior to the publication of this story. Mr. Rumpf may have reason to regret his words if the facts are adjudged otherwise.
It would be quite a different matter to say, “we disagree on fundamental points,” or there remains question as to the facts of the case,” or any other appropriate circumlocution, but calling the Red Granite defendants liars might not be adjudged a prudent move in the fullness of time.)
Finally, the article says Purcell had “encouraged each of the employees to talk with the firm’s in-house lawyer to discuss the issue fully.”
As has been mentioned in another posting on this website, Baird’s general counsel, Glenn F. Hackman, who may or may not be the “in-house lawyer” mentioned in the story, is among a number of General Counsels for Wisconsin-based firms who lack Wisconsin law licenses.
Next up in the case: Injunction hearings scheduled for November 16th and 17th. A pretrial hearing is scheduled for May 8th, 2007.
