MACH, As I said before, if you counted a failed internet company that debuted on Nasdaq between 1999 and 2000 as a serious mark on an attorney's record, you'd probably have to consider the vast majority of top securities attorneys in the country as "stained". That was all the rage, where all the big money was going, and at the time, was considered the future of the entire economy. If you weren't in on one of these companies, you might be missing your chance to be involved with the future economy entirely! Of course, it didn't turn out that way. So, no, Roger's representation of First Ecom (which became Brek) should not be a disturbance based on the company's failure. For the record, from 1999-2000 associates' salaries at law firms jumped some 50-75% because of the internet boom. San Fran hired all the good attorneys by offering ridiculous cash to the top attorneys. New York had no choice but to match or outbid them else they would lose all their best attorneys. This bidding war then trickled down to all markets. An associate making $95k in 1997 suddenly found themselves making $150k+ in 1999-2000. Such was the "gold rush" to internet companies. Many large law firms such as Brobeck Phleger built themselves on these internet companies and their billings from that business. Subsequently, in 2001 it all fell apart. Lawyers were laid off en masse in San Fran. Brobeck fell apart. It took some time for the market to reabsorb the overhead in attorneys that had happened. Oddly, salaries did not drop. But they did level out.
Back to my point, most everyone got burned by the internet boom, including the law industry. Roger's counsel to bring First Ecom public is of no concern to me personally.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
