This really depended on what their role was. Many star traders or analysts were able to get re-hired almost immediately or start their own firms without a problem. Here's an example:

https://books.google.com/books?id=qwDFL2xIX4kC&pg=PA88&lpg=P...

That's a pretty good book, btw...

Why would you lump these two together? I'm genuinely curious.

Is it not obvious? They're practically identical in every respect, right down to corporate culture, grandiosity and being propped up on a titanic and imaginary valuation which is all that empowers them to carry out their activities.

I don't see much similarity except ridiculous valuation and the consequent financial threat level between a company that used to be normal, developed an infection of criminal behaviour on the part of a small group and collapsed because of epic law-preaking, and a company that began as a hugely funded startup, behaves badly from day 1, appears to be openly run by assholes for assholes, and hasn't broken the law on a catastrophic scale yet.

> hasn't broken the law on a catastrophic scale yet

Debatable?

Enron and Parmalat vaporized billions of stock value; that's what I call catastrophic scale. Note that on paper Uber is even bigger.