http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/trea…-Lazard-to-advise-on-a-g-m-i-p-o/
Lazard's been killin' it with their high profile advisory mandates - all of which make perfect sense. They're perhaps (one of) the top advisory shop on the street, but their capital markets platform is fledgling compared to bulge brackets...
How on earth did Lazard get this mandate? IMO - it would make more sense that a bulge bracket with a established/trusted advisory team and a full fledged capital markets team should have gotten lead left. Am I downplaying Lazard's capital markets capabilities?
I was putting money that Citi would have gotten lead left since the government has a stake in em...
Some insight into this would be helpful
well lazard advised the uaw union...so they have goodwill in this client relationship. millstein (former lazard banker) is also in the treasury. but it was def surprising that they didnt go with a BB.
Not really, the government is running GM, giving the IPO to Lazard avoids the political issue of giving it to a BB - no one is sitting around worrying about Lazard causing the financial crisis, or front-running clients, or taking TARP.
It makes perfect sense
It would appear that Lazard is actually advising the Treasury on the underwriting process, not actually underwriting the deal - it's not a very common structure here, but apparently is moreso in the UK. Another US deal that had a financial adviser separate from the underwriters was the QuinStreet IPO, where Qatalyst advised and CS/BAML/JPM actually did the ECM activities.
They haven't announced who is underwriting yet - Lazard has a capital markets team, whereas Qatalyst does not, so they could underwrite this if Treasury wants them to.
This is true - I'm just saying that one can't say (yet) that Lazard is lead book on the IPO.
i don't think LAZ CM has the same relationships that BB CMs do. the buyside client relationships during syndication is what makes or breaks the deal. I'm not a LAZ insider but I highly doubt past LAZ lead left pot lists can even compare to BB's. LAZ simply cant underwrite as many mega deals and therefore don't have the buyside firepower.
Then again, they coulda done what DaCarez said and break up the advisory/underwriting roles...
Aut quibusdam asperiores aspernatur consequatur est sequi nesciunt. Quae maiores adipisci facilis amet. Inventore omnis aut eum molestiae vel occaecati aliquid. Est reiciendis aliquam et et maxime corporis minima. Sint non accusamus expedita ut.
Quos atque quod voluptatem culpa aut. Ut debitis molestias sint sit sed dolores vitae asperiores. Voluptatum pariatur nobis ipsa. Consequatur id esse quibusdam harum qui quia.
Est doloribus molestiae et nesciunt excepturi est. Harum et quisquam assumenda distinctio labore. Ducimus expedita molestias sed nam et ratione praesentium.
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...