I don't know if this will really go through, but given that they just recently shifted everything under one brand umbrella, separating things on the operating level would probably be somewhat of an overkill. But then again, after LIBORIBD/S&T really took a huge hit on the reputation side of things, so I guess to "save face" for the retail arm, it may make sense to spin-out Investment Banking.
Any ideas if a competitor may try to take over IBD?
I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player. Or nothing.
See my Blog & AMA
Yes it is. But clearly the issue remains and seems to be gaining popularity. FT reports that 30 of Barclays biggest shareholders were pushing for this in investor meetings over the last few weeks.
Yes it is. But clearly the issue remains and seems to be gaining popularity. FT reports that 30 of Barclays biggest shareholders were pushing for this in investor meetings over the last few weeks.
Obviously Barclays doesn't like the idea of spinning off a key part of it's business model, but I don't think the shareholders are going to be able to persuade management to go through with it. Do they realize the spinoff wouldn't bode well for their investment in the firm? UBS probably shouldn't get their hopes up on this one.
I think that article was more geared towards the actual Investment Bank itself and not just the Investment Banking Division (IBD). Just wanted to clear that up so people don't see your original post and get scared about their IBD when the article is really not about it specifically.
And also the logic seems a question of more of the fit of commercial banking and investment banking together rather than a straight-up assessment that the Investment Bank should not be continued.
orangebullI think that article was more geared towards the actual Investment Bank itself and not just the Investment Banking Division (IBD). Just wanted to clear that up so people don't see your original post and get scared about their IBD when the article is really not about it specifically.
And also the logic seems a question of more of the fit of commercial banking and investment banking together rather than a straight-up assessment that the Investment Bank should not be continued.
Quod nulla in qui rerum quos tempora odit. Sit quas distinctio dicta nam est voluptatem culpa. Dolore dolore enim dolores eveniet atque quo.
Voluptatem est sunt consectetur distinctio qui numquam molestiae ipsa. Et temporibus distinctio itaque sed.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
Sorry, you need to login or sign up in order to vote. As a new user, you get over 200 WSO Credits free,
so you can reward or punish any content you deem worthy right away. See you on the other side!
Barclays seems to be doing fine, so for the time being I think that this is all just talk.
I don't know if this will really go through, but given that they just recently shifted everything under one brand umbrella, separating things on the operating level would probably be somewhat of an overkill. But then again, after LIBOR IBD/S&T really took a huge hit on the reputation side of things, so I guess to "save face" for the retail arm, it may make sense to spin-out Investment Banking.
Any ideas if a competitor may try to take over IBD?
Very old news.
Yes it is. But clearly the issue remains and seems to be gaining popularity. FT reports that 30 of Barclays biggest shareholders were pushing for this in investor meetings over the last few weeks.
I think that article was more geared towards the actual Investment Bank itself and not just the Investment Banking Division (IBD). Just wanted to clear that up so people don't see your original post and get scared about their IBD when the article is really not about it specifically.
And also the logic seems a question of more of the fit of commercial banking and investment banking together rather than a straight-up assessment that the Investment Bank should not be continued.
Yeah, let me change the IBD to investment bank...
.
Quod nulla in qui rerum quos tempora odit. Sit quas distinctio dicta nam est voluptatem culpa. Dolore dolore enim dolores eveniet atque quo.
Voluptatem est sunt consectetur distinctio qui numquam molestiae ipsa. Et temporibus distinctio itaque sed.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...