<p>To amplify hmom5s point:
Most people on “Wall Street” proper are involved with the"wholesale" originating and trading of securities, between businesses, in the primary market. The public does not really see the activities of these people directly.</p>
<p>Brokers are the “retail” end of the securities business, interacting with non-corporate individuals, in the secondary market, who trade securities most of which have already, previously been originated in the primary market. Brokerages and investment banks used to be largely separate businesses. When one thinks of "Wall Street’ you should more properly think of the central traditional business relating to helping companies finance themselves and get access to capital, provided by institutional investors. Brokerages are, to a large extent, a different beast.</p>
<p>This is starting to remind me of the investment banking board. Kids there are sure they want to be ibakers. The only problem is they don’t know what an ibaker is.</p>
<p>I don’t completely disagree with BigG either. I’m totally in favor of clawbacks. There are rogues in every business.</p>
<p>This isn’t a problem relegated to just this forum alone – this is the root of the problem in America!</p>
<p>BCEagle91, you are an exemplar of Mainstreet: you despise WS, yet you have no idea what the difference between a banker and a broker is. Is this your fault? Not wholly. Like I said in my original post, WS needs to do a better job with transparency and explaining to the general public what it is that investment banks do and how WS creates value (yes, WS does create value – just not much recently).</p>
<p>I love a debate but let’s try not to be critical. BCEagle, like many, is repeating what he reads in the press day after day. </p>
<p>Most racists who hate blacks have never sat down to dinner with a black person, in my experience.</p>
<p>And I wouldn’t be critical of Main Street in your interview. If I were interviewing you that wouldn’t be the response I’d be looking for. You will be an ambassador for our industry, it’s best to listen to the arguments at this point and take a long term view on how the image should get repaired.</p>
<p>As a banker of 30 years, I gave up explaining what I do to all but a few really interested parties about 27 years ago. There’s always been a controversy about how much bankers make, it’s just escalated. There will always be those who want to see folks on top of anything take a fall. To be comfortable in your skin as a banker you need to accept that.</p>
<p>I still work in M & A until the Fall. Glad you asked Dstark because I’ve been really wanting to ask you what branch of PE you’re in as you have an unusal outlook for a PE guy!</p>
<p>This is incorrect. I may put forth a view of the average person but
this doesn’t mean that I don’t know anything about the industry.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>In general, WS needs to stop acting like *******s. Practioners here
included.</p>
<p>“I love a debate but let’s try not to be critical. BCEagle, like many,
is repeating what he reads in the press day after day.”</p>
<p>I spend a lot of time chatting with traders. Some of these traders
and market participants have worked in a variety of areas on Wall
St. I work with a guy that used to sell systems to Wall St and he
has provided me with a number of interesting stories in the past.
I know a guy that started up a quant firm, sold it to one of the
big firms in London (he commuted to London after selling the firm)
for large money.</p>
<p>“Most racists who hate blacks have never sat down to dinner with a
black person, in my experience.”</p>
<p>Most people that call others racist are *******s. Nice analogy though.</p>
<p>“And I wouldn’t be critical of Main Street in your interview. If I were
interviewing you that wouldn’t be the response I’d be looking for. You
will be an ambassador for our industry, it’s best to listen to the
arguments at this point and take a long term view on how the image
should get repaired.”</p>
<p>Lots of great ambassadors for Wall St right here.</p>
<p>“As a banker of 30 years, I gave up explaining what I do to all but a
few really interested parties about 27 years ago. There’s always been
a controversy about how much bankers make, it’s just escalated. There
will always be those who want to see folks on top of anything take a
fall. To be comfortable in your skin as a banker you need to accept
that.”</p>
<p>I never give up trying to explain to others what I do or what people
do in my industry. And those in the industry generally try to put
forth a positive face while also being fair and balanced about the
problems in our industry and profession. There are a fair number of
checks and balances and audit trails. If someone screws up ten years
after implementing something, it’s not that hard to go and find out
what happened as there are records of what was done and who signed off
on it. When I sign off on someone’s work, it means that their work was
satisfactory in my professional opinion. It certainly is possible to
just sign off on something without really looking at it but that would
be unprofessional. Those that I work with expect a professional
opinion. What we do is extremely complex and the typical person
doesn’t have the background theoretically nor do they understand
things like project management, process, quality assurance, design,
etc. But that doesn’t stop me from trying.</p>
<p>The banker notion that all who criticize them and their professionalism are just “jealous” shows just how out of touch they really are. Another example of their blindness to their own utterly warped value structure.</p>
<p>Barrons, so good to hear from you. I feared for your health when there was a thread with Wall Street in the title and you did not instantly appear to spread hate!</p>
<p>BC, why I gave up was because of the complexity in fully explaining the industry. You describe a friend who started a “quant firm”. Not any industry terminology I ever heard so I’m assuming you also find understanding the nitty gritty of the industry tough.</p>
<p>And using someone who sold “systems” on WS as a source is stretching it, don’t you think?</p>
<p>You appear to be an engineer so I’ll ask it this way: Was every employee at dot com companies responsible for the bust?</p>
<p>Same reasons any business becomes relatively larger in GDP - pricing power, expansion of services into new financial vehicles, more M&A in American business, global expansion, greater individual participation in the financial markets (raising brokerage income), rise in valuations vs 1 generation ago.</p>
<p>Anyone else read Maureen Dowd in the NYTimes? She rivals Barrons for number one hater of Wall Street.</p>
<p>Her column today is about a MW commercial bank that got bailout money holding their typical annual customer event in LA. They had expensive food and entertainment. When called on this the bank Pres issued a press release saying his bank was profitable last year and never wanted the bailout money.</p>
<p>While the guy needs a new PR person and it was not the best idea to party like it was 2007, he was telling the truth. The government, which was the root cause of the mortgage debacle (yes, yes, banks and ibanks had roles), forced banks to take money so credit markets would not crash and half the Country would not face foreclosure.</p>
<p>I’m really unable to get my hands around why Main Street does not understand this, not to mention Maureen Dowd who seems to be half intelligent once in awhile.</p>
<p>cresent22,
Don’t forget commissions and fees related to taking the capital that took generations to form in this country and sending/giving it to foreign nations with antagonistic sociocultural systems</p>
<p>Where are the big profits for shareholders, the nominal owners of capital, from Wall Street activities?</p>
<p>I wish I had a job I could f*** up and still get paid big bucks.My customers expect my acivities to make money for them.</p>
<p>“The government, which was the root cause of the mortgage debacle (yes, yes, banks and ibanks had roles), forced banks to take money so credit markets would not crash and half the Country would not face foreclosure.”</p>
<p>hmom5, I’m interested in hearing your thoughts on this. My belief is that Main Street really DOES know that Wall Street is not the only party at fault here, but it is much more convenient to point fingers at the gaudy monstrosity that is a Goldman Sachs than it is to blame years and years of fiscal irresponsibility by the government. And, surely, no one would ever blame Jane Doe or Joe the Plumber of Main Street for taking out mortgages when they had no reason to be doing so in the first place!</p>
<p>Wall Street was, is, and always will be the easy scapegoat. It’s easy to get angry when you turn on the news and see bailout money going to banks. It’s easy to get mad when you see investment bankers walk around with large compensation packages. Stop taking the easy way out! Wall Street is just the tip of the iceberg; the larger problem is much deeper. When will Main Street look in the mirror and realize that they too had a hand in this mess?</p>