We've all been hearing about the downsizing of the IB arm at the combined UBS-CS entity, but what about the areas that UBS would likely strengthen? Possibility to increase strength in Advisory and Capital Markets particularly in US?
| +236 | UBS Healthcare | 49 | 10h |
| +68 | UBS MDs Treat Employees like Dogshit, Data to Prove it | 11 | 2h |
| +61 | Shana tova - happy new year | 12 | 3h |
| +59 | More diversity needed in the industry | 11 | 2d |
| +48 | NYC Wall Street Run Club | 13 | 2d |
| +33 | Lost all ambition / don’t care at all anymore | 12 | 9m |
| +25 | What is the role of an analyst at your firm? | 3 | 2h |
| +21 | Feeling a bad pattern forming. I need some help | 3 | 4d |
| +19 | Reaching out to interviewer who rejected me | 2 | 3d |
| +17 | "Don't include firm in Cover Letter's file name" | 6 | 3h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
bump
Bump
bump
I believe that the US advisory and capital markets will experience the smallest reductions compared to other franchises because these divisions do align with UBS's capital-light model. UBS has clearly outlined that it is not acquiring CS's IB to completely wind it down. for example, although the current market is struggling and capital markets revenues have decreased, the ECM division has consistently been a successful franchise at CS, so it would be wise to keep it for the long-run
Agree with this
Following
I really think you guys are underestimating the mismatch of risk tolerances between the two. I think UBS is going to considerably inhibit the type of transactions that CS has done so well for so long. Less LBO work means less sponsor work, less sponsor work at your firm means they’ve taken their business elsewhere, less M&A for the firm, less underwriting etc.
Don’t underestimate how many M&A mandates are awarded from financing, especially when your firm is willing to underwrite risk the way sponsors need them to.
I imagine this is on the M&A side, what do you think about the capital markets side
Won’t underwrite the risk that CS would —> Less M&A mandates. CS’ bread and butter was LBOs
Yes the logical reduction will be on the leveraged finance / financial sponsor side. Hearing a lot of the seniors there are looking to jump ship. Its interesting that UBS keeps hyping the TMT team at CS...the remaining TMT seniors are meh after all the good seniors left last year
A dolorem sit ullam necessitatibus. Exercitationem accusantium dicta consectetur sed quia aliquid. Facilis et aliquam rerum occaecati minima explicabo laudantium. Nulla sequi numquam totam et veniam. Vero voluptatem nostrum eius tenetur voluptatibus eos beatae corporis.
Quisquam sequi voluptatem dolores velit consectetur. Id error quas consequatur doloremque est. Eius deserunt corrupti ad aspernatur. Occaecati officia esse dolores accusamus quo. Qui error eaque libero incidunt qui ipsam ipsam.
Deserunt eligendi atque reprehenderit et nihil. Debitis voluptatem ullam fuga fuga expedita numquam doloribus. Ex reiciendis eveniet dolorem qui ut minus. Mollitia at sit similique quidem repellendus quisquam.
Ipsum voluptas quia ex. Excepturi est illum sint ducimus. Dolorem non rem repellendus veniam.
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...