– Alexander Smith is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own –

Michael Jackson’s will is bound to be as bizarre as the rest of the singer’s turbulent life. But one thing is for sure, the arguments over his deeply flawed financial legacy will keep lawyers busy for years.

Top of the list will be sorting out Jackson’s sell-out comeback tour, which was due to kick off next month. There are bound to be losses, insurance claims and the prospect of an empty London O2 Arena for 50 nights during the peak summer period.

Music industry bible Billboard reckons promoter AEG Live could lose as much as $40 million if its insurance is insufficient to cover what has already been spent on the production. That’s assuming they have to give refunds to the 750,000 fans who have paid big money for tickets. And that doesn’t count the cost of hotel reservations and flights from across the world.

Then there’s the small issue of the $500 million in debts that Jackson is reported to have left behind.

Bizarrely, Sir Paul McCartney, the super-rich former Beatle, could be one of the beneficiaries of Jackson’s will. Reports earlier this year said Jackson had left McCartney his stake in the Beatles’ song catalogue. But given that this share already has a $200 million loan secured against it, there could be a few court hearings before the former Beatle gets the songs back in his own collection.

Some estimate that Jackson’s top assets, including copyrights to his own songs and the Beatles song catalogue stake, are worth more than $1 billion.

No doubt Jackson’s family, his creditors, and partners such as Los Angeles-based real estate investment trust Colony Capital LLC and music catalogue joint venture partner Sony Corp, will all be laying claim to some of these assets.

The self-styled King of Pop’s music will live on in his recordings, but its a fair bet that the legacy of his high-spending lifestyle will be around for a good few years too.

– At the time of publication Alexander Smith did not own any direct investments in securities mentioned in this article. He may be an owner indirectly as an investor in a fund.–

– Alexander Smith is a Reuters columnist. The views expressed are his own –

Investment banks are going to have a lot of explaining to do. After the lows of 2008, and despite the mauling they’ve had from politicians and the public, 2009 is going to be a bumper year for those that lived to tell the tale. The banks have pocketed an incredible $16 billion in fees in the second quarter, according to Thomson Reuters first half data on deals and fee income, released on Friday. Click here for related news.

True, this is down from Q2 2008, when fees were almost $24 billion. But it should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been watching — often in disbelief — the huge amount of capital raising that has been going on in both the equity and bond markets.

Take the bond markets, where total first-half issuance — excluding financials — has already reached $598 billion, outstripping previous records for an entire year. If anyone pretends it has been tough selling these bonds, don’t believe them. The sales teams have been pushing at an open door, with fund managers buying anything they could get their hands on. The fees are good and so far this year, the risk has been limited.

The ones to suffer have been the loan desks, with syndicated lending hitting a 13-year low. But since this market has always been seen as a loss-leader to help sell other products, there are probably fewer tears being shed at the top of the banks involved.

The real star of the show, however, has been equity capital markets. Traditionally the poor cousins to the sexier and higher profile “rainmakers” in mergers and acquisitions, ECM desks have raked in underwriting fees of $7.6 billion in Q2 alone, almost half the industry total. As with bond issues, lead managing or underwriting such deals does carry a risk, but so far this year that has been limited as shareholders have lapped up the rights issues.

There’s no denying that many companies badly needed capital and that the banks have the expertise to get these deals done. The question that will increasingly be asked is whether the fee structure can still be justified. True, rights issues can fail, as underwriters of the 4 billion pound offering by British bank HBOS last year no doubt recall. But with banks charging bigger fees and pricing offerings at larger discounts, the rewards currently outweigh the risks.

One area of investment banking which is still in the doldrums is M&A, despite the best efforts of some of the brightest minds in the game to get dealmaking back on track.

The Thomson Reuters data shows global M&A revenues declined for a third consecutive quarter, with fees on completed deals down some 66 percent on the same period last year at just $3 billion. M&A activity — measured by the value of deals done — is down almost 45 percent so far this year, the lowest figure since 2003 and the sharpest fall since 2001. Click here for related news.

Of course, it is possible that these big fees will be wiped out by continued losses on the toxic assets that some investment banks still have on their balance sheets. But for an industry that was teetering on the brink last autumn, investment banking appears in rude health. With a second backlash already beginning as salaries rise and bonuses come back into fashion, the big investment banks — particularly those which still owe taxpayers money or government shareholders — will need to make sure their lines are well rehearsed.

– At the time of publication Alexander Smith did not own any direct investments in securities mentioned in this article. He may be an owner indirectly as an investor in a fund.–

– Alexander Smith is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own –

New regulations may be cooked up to curb the excesses of its bankers but London will always attract those who believe its streets are paved with gold.

Some predict that the financial crisis spells the end for London as a major global financial centre, arguing it has thrived on lax regulation and a quasi-tax haven status and that the regulatory backlash which inevitably follows such a catastrophic economic debacle will suffocate the innovation and the financial incentives which have driven the growth of services in the British capital.

But these doomsters are overlooking key factors which have made London a world hub for centuries. London’s geographical position — most notably Greenwich Mean Time — has served it well as a bridge between the time zones, its almost unrivalled cultural diversity, its global outlook, the advantage of English as the common language of finance and not least the trading and financial heritage it has built up since Roman times.

Throw in the advantages of maintaining its own currency during a period of downturn (particularly when a weaker pound gives it an economic advantage) and London is well served alongside New York and Singapore, Hong Kong or Tokyo when competing with other centres which have harboured global ambitions such as Frankfurt, Paris or more recently Dubai.

The City of London, also known as the Square Mile, which immodestly by British standards bills itself as “the world’s leading financial centre” also clings to a host of antiquated traditions whose quaintness, including the appointment each year of a Lord Mayor, remains a tourist draw if nothing else.

Another factor in London’s immediate favour is the infrastructure spending which is taking place to coincide with the Olympics in 2012. The massive Crossrail project will link the capital’s east and west, while despite constant carping from its users, the underground “Tube” network is undergoing a major upgrade to bring it into the 21st Century. The lure of the capital’s arts and culture, its shops, restaurants and pubs all combine to keep people coming to visit and to live and work.

Mayfair’s hedge funds, the mammoth City bonuses and the days of light-touch regulation may be a distant memory, but London still has the trading infrastructure, the expertise and the confidence to reassert its position at the heart of the financial system. Given its dependence on financial services, London is far from immune from the global downturn, but with huge volatility in the markets it has traditionally dominated, including foreign exchange and commodities, as well as booming equity and debt issuance, its prospects are nothing like as bleak as its detractors would have us believe.

London’s streets may be paved with less gold than before, but that won’t stop people finding new and inventive ways to make money on them.

– At the time of publication Alexander Smith did not own any direct investments in securities mentioned in this article. He may be an owner indirectly as an investor in a fund.