Merrill soon to be the next top bank on the Street?

#1 GS, #2 JPM, #3 ML, #4 MS in the short, mid and maybe long-term. #3/#4 may be a bit of a battle. How do you expect ML to outshine GS?

===
23yr old Associate

Interesting that you place ML above MS... many (including myself) would disagree, but I didn't start this thread with the intention of creating another dumb "rank these banks" pissing contest. I agree that in the current and short-term, no one can touch GS. I'm more curious what people think about the medium- and long-term (2-5 years down the line) prospects of Merrill, given the foundation that Thain has put into place. With so many celebrities being overpaid to join the firm (how does Merrill afford this shit?? Hiring's supposed to be on ice!) the firm is sure to bring in more mega-cap deals once things pick up...

Also, not sure that Merrill needs to outshine Goldman, since Merrill is becoming Goldman. Has Thain yet changed the MER ticker to GS2? ha...

Interesting that you claim to have a "crazy hardon for Thain."

b2--not to be an ass, but I have to ask: "top 1-2 bank" in what??? M&A, debt underwriting, asset management, capital markets, etc. Your statement is pretty broad....

prestige.

I haven't seen ML do anything major in a while. They seem to be the fourth pure-play that no one cares / talks about. Mind you, LEH's press over the past 6 months has been anything but positive. Just my opinion, and I am sure a lot of people will disagree, but I would place GS, MS, JPM, C, DB, and CS all above ML.

ML claimed that they had raised all the capital they needed. That was true for about 3 weeks. More dilution

ML insured some preferred stock against significant loss - boom, the price fell below the threshold - there is another write-off.

And most notoriously, they sold off 30.6 billion of debt at a one fifth the face value. 20% of bloomberg is gone as well.

How can you be anything but flaccid for Thain?

I would never put Deutsche Bank above anyone. Talk about ZERO prestige.

GS, MS, JPM, CS, UBS/ML/Citi, Lehman (if they survive)

Credit Suisse 4th in the world for prestige? Wtf?

Prestige (exc. boutiques etc) - GS, MS, JPM, ML, C, LEH, DB, CS, UBS, BofA...

===
23yr old Associate

you would never place DB there? Funny, considering they dominate the FX market with a 22% share and the fact that almost every bank tried to poach Anshu Jain but no one could afford him. I would never rank banks at all but speaking from the perspective of which bank I would choose in the current market, I would go for GS first, MS second and DB third but that's probably because I'm a trader.

in the second quarter of 08 so they do deserve some credit for that.

CS is a bit too conservative, but they have been consistent in avoiding the big losses thus far. I would put them in the bottom of the top 5. I'm loving slickmac's comment -

CS is a solid bank and I would consider them top 4 according to this ranking:

GS / MS / JPM / CS

this is funny. This is like a yankees redsox argument. But better.

Fuck them both!

...as I mentioned, this thread was not created as another dick-measuring contest by insecure college kids. I'm curious which banks will emerge stronger during the recovery period of the subprime, and I still believe that Merrill is best poised to do so.

...and it's very obvious who here has no idea what they are talking about or are just purporting a completely biased opinion -- prestige has nothing to do w/ subprime losses or current performance, rather, it's the level of respect that outsiders give your firm -- to a degree correlated with the recognition and performance of your MDs. This is why I think the hiring of certain superstars, such as Thain, Montag, and Woody, will significantly bolster Merrill's post-subprime credibility.

Citigroup fifth?

Ok, I'm talking U.S. prestige. Just plain old reputation...

GS, MS, JPM, ML, LEH, Citi, CS, UBS, DB, Barclays, BofA

reputations are not set in stone they change after major events....

To continue my baseball analogy.....

Sammy Sosa
Mark Mcquire
Roger Clemens (what a dick)
Barry Bonds (ok he was always an asshole)

or how about Music....

Britney Spears
Rick Astley
Michael Jackson

You get the point.

Or how about in more general business/finance

Kenneth Lay...

or dare i say half this boards idol....

John Meriwhether! That kook blew up not once but twice...

Subprime/credit crisis will have a major impact on many of these banks long term reputations.

Personally I think ML can slide itself into 4th but it faces competition from barclays and YES CS/DB. UBS C and LEH have possibly permanently altered their reputation from this fiasco.

Historically, it has always been generally accepted that the top three banks were the three pure-plays - GS/MS/ML. LEH was never really very strong, and is still considered extremely weak by many people on the Street - I think the inflated reputation of Lehman is propelled by ignorant college kids spreading word based on Lehman's ridiculously out-of-place #4 (#3 excluding Blackstone, which is also misplaced) Vault ranking. (Lehman also sponsors Vault, fwiw...)

Since the late 90s, however, ML took a huge reputational hit because of its heavy involvement with dot-com scandals, so now many people consider GS/MS in a league of their own... only recently has JPM bolstered its image, partly because it was able to avoid much of the subprime.

I think the rankings are as follows... there are 4 types of banks, and within each type, there is a generally accepted ranking, but it's not really fair to compare banks of one type to another - which business model you think is better is more personal preference:
1.) Pure-plays - GS/MS/ML
2.) Universals - JPM/Citi
3.) Europeans - CS/UBS/DB
4.) Lehman

Some might argue that Lehman should be #4 in the pure-plays, but I think it's too crappy a bank and should be listed by itself...

In the states, I would consider BB banks to be the pure-plays, the universals, and Lehman... because somehow Lehman was able to trick enough people into thinking that it's a reputable shop

At this point, I think that many people would say that ML is weaker than banks such as JPM, maybe CS, etc. The original post was more inquiring whether Merrill would be able to make up for lost ground due to dings in its reputation, and somehow "catch up" to GS/MS so that the three pure-plays will again distinguish themselves from the rest of the banks and return to the trifecta of untouchableness seen in the early-/mid-90s.

I personally would argue that MS has also lost a lot of ground, especially in the past year.

i would personally argue that you dont know what the fuck your talking about

Here's my take

GS, BX, LAZ, MS, Moelis, C, JPM, MER, LEH, UBS, CS, DB

but all this is pointless what anyone thinks

I mean... you're like 12 and upset that your potential employer is going under (and probably that I'm one of the biggest detractors of your potential employer on this board), so hopefully you'll excuse me while I take your opinion with a grain of salt...

I mean... I do apologize that you weren't able to land anything better than lehman... but it's really not my fault!

In a sense doesn't ML come off as second rate when they are paying all this money for top Goldman talent, but Goldman often times doesn't pay to keep these people instead they opt to promote from within? any thoughts?

LOL b2.. you have no idea what you are talking about... im going to the buyside you stupid fuck

yeah.. 12 as in 12x your level of intelligence

i dont give a shit whether or not you are a "big detractor"

ML is not second rate but not near the top... many other firms people would rather work for

peace bitch

a college junior born in 1989 "going into the buyside"... your even dumber than I thought! keep amusing me...

b2... i changed my birthdate to 1889... u trust everything you read? u must be well trained from being told what to do all your life.

trust me. i know where im going better than you

One of my initial questions was how Thain can afford this talent. The terms of the hiring weren't disclosed (other than Montag's contract, which was ridiculously expensive) but I'm assuming that Thain is paying a buttload of money to get these guys (and Merrill paid a buttload of money to get Thain...) I know that every single bank (including Goldman) put in enormous efforts to recruit Fares and Woody, so I can only imagine the premium that Thain paid for these dudes. Nonetheless, I think that Thain is taking the firm in a solid direction; he's putting in a large up-front investment for sure, but I've been a fan of Woody since he was at Lehman so I personally think that the investment will pay off.

re: being second rate from over-paying for these dudes - Thain has stated that his first priority for the Americas as CEO was to implement a solid management team. When there are new hands at the helm, he'll inevitably want his own lieutenants beside him when he goes to battle -- same thing happened with Vikraim at Citi. What impresses me about Thain versus Vik, however, are the celebrity names that Thain's been able to attract, and his dedication towards getting this talent (by willing to pay for it).

Goldman's penchant to underpay top performers has led to an exodus of talent in the past... names escape me, but I often hear of very strong guys leaving Goldman (i.e. the dude who was the #1 prop trader of Asia Pac or something... just started up his own fund b/c of undercompensation - raised billions immediately). What makes Thain different is that he pays these guys a lot of money, but it's based off of what he thinks they are worth and how much revenue they can generate. Keep in mind that Thain was #2 at Goldman for a long time and left for NYSE at a fraction of the pay Goldman was giving him...

Disclaimer: I'm not working for Merrill, but I had considered an offer from them a few months back, which is why I created this thread.

yea, and all your threads about sophomore internships and "help! i can't land any positions because i'm a sub-par candidate!" really convince me that you're 12x more intelligent than I am!

Generally I agree with you, I'm quite bullish on ML's future prospects and would happily switch there now, are at the very bottom this year and these structural shifts will turn them around into a solid #3 player in the mid-term. However, I think GS' reputation as the #1 is completely unattainable for anyone, and despite in the 80s and 90s top firms going under I can't see this happening to GS. Also JPM is surely a massive winner in this with the BS takeover, thus I feel they have potential to become a #2 player to GS in the mid-term. MS has been very silent in this whole debacle and could lose some mkt share.

===
23yr old Associate

"yea, and all your threads about sophomore internships and "help! i can't land any positions because i'm a sub-par candidate!" really convince me that you're 12x more intelligent than I am!"

yeah a sophomore who last year landed more offers than you have ever landed in your life
again.. commenting with guesses

lol.. this idiot's still talking... so funnnyyy.... classic example of the ignorant college retard on WSO who thinks that he's hot shit. if you ended up with even a single half-decent offer, there's no way you'd be so enamored with Lehman at this point! lolllllllll!!!

kingbling's comebacks are priceless.

Anyone look at MLs stock today?... looks like they're on their way to becoming the next Lehman (soon to be the next Bear)... next top bank on WS? right.

b2, no one is "enamored" with lehman
i am rather enamored by how much of a fag you are
you series of retarded posts indicate your own insecurity about your social status as a wall street blogger that constantly falsifies claims about one's employment

I like how kingbling puts into quotes all the big words that I use that he can't understand... "detractor", "enamored"... I mean, dictionary.com is just a stone's throw away - I'm sorry that your tier-2 education didn't provide you with English classes!

No need to falsifly claims, as it's very obvious to anyone who's in the industry that I know my shit and that I'm gainfully employed at a very top BB.

I'm with sickofBB, is this thread some kind of joke??

the market has viewed ML as the next potential LEH for weeks

You speak as Lehman is crap, and 2nd-tier blah blah blah etc. Yet your whole point is discussing a former heavy hitter at Lehman, so how can this bank you think is so crap, have employed the main person you think can help save Merill?

You go on to further say this thread is not about prestige ranking etc....Yet you say your whole point is that Merill is going to increase in "prestige in 5 years". Not discuss if Merill's stock will rise, if their balance sheet problems will be fixed, if their hiring freeze will end.

So basically the only thing you care about it seems is prestige and that is what makes a good bank. I am sorry but hiring a couple heavy hitters is not magically going to make Merill turnaround, they still have alot of issues, and all the short sellers out there are betting against them.

Lastly,
You say, "but I didn't start this thread with the intention of creating another dumb "rank these banks" pissing contest". But then later on add, "that I know my shit and that I'm gainfully employed at a very top BB."

You are full of contradictions, do you care so much about prestige or not, which is it?

1. Lehman is crap - which is why it saw the large talent outflow that it had; anybody who was moderately successful in Lehman leaves the bank to bigger and better things.
2. I didn't ask for a ranking of prestige - which is what I knew college idiots would immediately provide (see above) -- I asked for views regarding one specific bank - perhaps you can't comprehend the difference, but those of us who broke 125 on the LSAT probably can.
3. Just because I am employed by a top bank doesn't mean that this thread was started as a ranking contest... I don't even see the correlation.

wow. that was quite possibly the dumbest post ever? your logic skills are basically zero... so many 65ths on this board.

b2... it is obviously that you know nothing. you spend your day thinking of prestige comparisons like a fucking clown. also, no one gives a shit where your employed.

the fact that you feel the need to publicly post that you "know your shit" demonstrates the level of your inflated ego

please put an end to this thread please?
thx

Why? This thread is awesome. I'm dominating kingbling; too bad his idiotic attempts at a comeback are completely limited by his state-school education! It's actually quite fun... and his theory that Lehman will be going up? Wow, talk about retarded!

guess what, kid? everyone in banking has an inflated ego, and those not in banking but desperately dying to get in have major chips on their shoulders... which one are you? Ha! No reason not to be cocky - I know that I'm the fucking shit, and I'm not afraid to admit it!

When will you people realize that the only people who give a shit about "prestige" are students...and maybe 1st year analysts and associates....

The rest of the street cares about one thing--money. There isn't a single MD at Goldman or anywhere else who wouldn't leave their firm and go to a smaller, "less prestigious" bank in a heartbeat if it meant the opportunity for significantly more money and/or the opportunity to create or run their own desk or group.

"Prestige" only matters to students looking for your first job. What really matters is the strength of individual groups or desks, and the opportunity for profit.

why do you think people (especially entry-level people) care about prestige? b/c it offers better exit opps, and thus more money. GS --> KKR means making half a mil by 24, whereas LEH --> no name PE means making 200-300k (?).

is the fact that people were trying to claim that Lehman was a better bank than Credit Suisse as of this week. You really had to have your head in the clouds to think that, any bank trumps a nonexistent bank.

Merrill Lynch may very well be next on the chopping block...and we're talking about it becoming a top bank?

Hilarious...

Merrill is a speck in the dirt compared to Goldman Sachs when it comes to prestige and rank. Goldman consistently outranks Merrill in Investment Banking, blows it away by miles in Capital Markets and even in Asset Management Goldman outranks Merrill.

Furthermore, Merrill has been hit very hard compared to GS and MS in the credit-crunch.

Recruiting a few big names from rival banks does not mean Merrill is more prestigious. If Merrill were the number one bank, or even soon to be number one bank, the top talent would go to Merrill first, but that is not the case. Top talent goes to Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs. Merrill needs to get leftovers by providing more compensation.....

Thain has done well so far, but Merrill has a long long way to go before it can shore up its balance sheet to compete with Morgan Stanley or Goldman Sachs.

Wow b2...

The main point you are making: ML is a historic powerhouse, pureplay, etc. etc. Lehman is shit (for some unspecified reason). Prestige is important for exit opps and Lehman people do not have good exits opps while presumably ML people do.

-You don't have a single good reason why Lehman is "shit".
-If you have ever done a single round of buyside interviewing, you would know that Lehman has just as good exit opps as anyone else.

What are you trying to prove here? What is your goal with this thread? Get confirmation that ML (where you obviously work) is going to become a great bank? You realize the bank is going under right? That if it survives another earnings release without being bought out, it will be a minor miracle?

b2, how many Merill banker dicks have you sucked?

I work at Merrill? funny, because many people on this board already know via PM where I work, and it's one of the places that people on this board worship -- think GS PIA, SSG, TMT, MS M&A, etc.

If you had worked in banking, you would know that the entire street has a very low opinion of Lehman... guess the consultants didn't get the word.

New trade idea! Fade b2 For The Win!

Lol...lets wait another month or 2 and see if this topic will even be relevant anymore...