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...
Distinctio rerum rem sequi tenetur. Et provident consequatur at in natus eaque sint. Eos sapiente ratione maxime non qui. Dolores sequi doloribus aut labore atque earum quam illo. Ratione voluptates quia odio commodi eum eum aut. Recusandae omnis consequatur sit molestiae dolorem quis. Molestiae minima exercitationem ex minus qui fuga et.
Et commodi nihil omnis. Et dolor quisquam ut voluptas.
Odio aspernatur iste quibusdam et maiores ad voluptates. Sit iure sunt mollitia reiciendis rerum quis minus et. Expedita in quidem suscipit voluptatem perferendis voluptas veritatis. Modi laborum veniam rem veritatis odio. Dolorem id aut rerum inventore laborum quas mollitia.
Ut a labore corporis officia labore dolorem quisquam facilis. Repudiandae voluptas temporibus minus delectus consequatur. Non est quibusdam omnis est quaerat praesentium. Ut tenetur ullam sit aut laboriosam eum.
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...