Wachovia Securities

www.Wachovia.com

Thanks datdude...but unfortunately I've already read through the website. I'm thinking about more inside information...what is it like to work for the company? management? pay? deal flow?

Thanks pitchmonkey...what about their structured products group?

Pitchmonkey's analysis, as disheartening as it may seem, is dead on.

I am curious to know more about where they are heading as opposed to wear they are today. In your opinion do you think Wachovia will be on par with BofA and JPM in 4-5 years? They seem to have an "underdog" mentality...so I've been told...which seems to be the premise for their aggresive mentality, rough culture, and hard charging work ethic.

an analyst "stint" is 2 year, no? why do you want to bet your career on them suddenly changing the ib landscape within that time period?

Obviously, no one can be 100% sure about the future, however, if I was a betting man . . . no way they are on par with JPM or B of A in 4-5 years. As I mentioned above, the firm has no plans to expand abroad, whereas JPM is already there and B of A is working hard to get European and emerging market exposure. This means that, over the next 4-5 years, Wach will fall further behind in terms of global work. Meanwhile, they may have an aggressive mentality and hard charging work ethic, but so does every other BB bank. They can't really differentiate themselves that way - everyone works hard and is aggressive in banking. Finally, I've mentioned this before in other posts, but league tables are meaningless because they give every bank full credit for every deal regardless of the actual role the bank plays in the deal, so while Wach may be moving up the league tables by throwing money at deals, getting a co-manager role, and then claiming to be part of the deal, the truth is, no one considers them a major part of Wall St., in fact, Wach trying to catch the BBs is kind of a running joke at the other banks.

Wachovia is struggling with the same issue that several of the Universal Banks (i.e. Citi/JPM/BofA) have struggled with since the repeal of Glass-Staegal - mainly that they need to convince their clients that they are more than just credit and have valid advisory capabilities, as well. Where the aformentioned have succeeded and Wachovia is still struggling is that they realized that in this highly competitive industry there is no time for growing an Ibank organically. If you are a traditionally commercial bank and would like to enter the IB market as a major player, you must essentially buy market share (either acquiring/merging with a respected IB, poaching entire teams from other banks, or both).

My friend's older brother was an analyst around the '99-'00 and around that time there was alot of talk about Wachovia merging with one of the pure-play BB's like ML/MS (in fact, he worked in a Euro-BB FIG and pitched the idea). It obviously never materialized and Wachovia bought Southtrust, instead. As a result, Wachovia is still struggling to make a name for itself in advisory. Their M&A has poached a few senior bankers from BB, but even more mid-level bankers have left for BB. FSG poached a few senior BB guys(most notably Jonathan Weiss from JPM last year). But all in all, their industry groups are lacking.

Anyone who tells you Wachovia is sticking to the middle market is a bold faced liar. Wachovia is trying to compete with the BB's, and results in what was mentioned above as "hail-mary" pitches that never see the light of day. Not being an insider I'm not sure if Wachovia simply is not willing to spend the money to bring in more talent or if they feel they have a good current platform. I do know that if they stay in the middle market than their structure as a Universal, "one stop shop" bank remains unbalanced. Doing M&A for middle market banks (JPM, and even BofA.

...(less than 1bn TEV) in the hopes of gaining ancillary fees through debt and equities holds little water because smaller companies have much less need for large syndicated credit facilities, high yield, or even public equity. Until Wachovia can make a match with their advisory capabilities by acquiring talent, they will always fall behind the likes of Citi, JPM, and even BofA.

is exactly right. I'll even go one-step further. When Wachovia poaches top bankers from other places, those guys tend to take those packages and basically retire on the job. So, the bank may go around and say, "we have the top Industrial Group guy from Lehman here now," but the truth is, that guy just moves down to Charlotte, buys a huge mansion, goes along for his contractual 3-years (at $10 million guaranteed) and sails off into the sunset.

Very true. They call it a "lifestyle move" but you can't be a lifestyle-banker and win big deals at the same time.

To add a little value to the original poster:

Last year Wachovia paid street for 1st year analysts. Top was 80K. However, that's slightly misleading because a friend told me only ONE analyst got the top bonus, with the majority of analysts getting between 65 and 75. In their entire analyst class, only one person got a top rating/bonus and as far as exits were concerned I think the person made it to final rounds at MDP but no offer in the end so I believe ended up at Code Hennessey.

gametheory and pitchmonkey......you guys just raped this post

gators13.....you should have to pay for info like this!!

This really is quality info, don't come by nuggets like this everyday.

SLP has at least one Wachovia guy

but he wasn't an associate like people from bulge.