The Edge
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm
The Edge
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/ ... X820110204
Public anger over bank employee compensation may strip the US of an edge in recruitment of top talent.
Public anger over bank employee compensation may strip the US of an edge in recruitment of top talent.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Re: The Edge
Approves.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Re: The Edge
The only way they can maintain such high salaries over the long hall is a rigged system. If there was any substantial competition on price then the large financial institutions and investment banks wouldn't be able to make such high margins. I'm not really able to articulate exactly how it's rigged - but my gut tells me it is.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth
Goddamned slippery mage.
Goddamned slippery mage.
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: The Edge
It's rigged on the trampled dreams of the uninformed investor. Duh. Don't forget that they're really only competing over the very top talent, probably less than 0.5% of the employees in the financial industry. Everyone else are middle managers or process implementors.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Re: The Edge
I'm not talking about the markets being rigged. I'm talking about the financial industry. If I start a business.. say I'm doing kid's birthday parties.. and I have a novel idea and I'm making a lot of money, then that is a good thing. But you know that eventually I will also have competition and will end up making less money. So why isn't the same thing happening to Goldman Sachs? Why are people willing to do business with them when they are making such enormous fees? Why not find a competitor to do business with? I really don't have an answer for that. Though if I had to figure one out I would probably start by looking into why some institutions got favored 'bailout' status over others.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth
Goddamned slippery mage.
Goddamned slippery mage.
Re: The Edge
Corth wrote:Why not find a competitor to do business with?
Because to be a bank you pretty much need to start off with a large amount of money in the first place. That's a big barrier to entry, so there aren't going to be many new competitors.
Now the rest is conjecture, but... if there are only a few players, and a big barrier to entry... why wouldn't the players collude?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.
I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: The Edge
Sarvis wrote:Corth wrote:Why not find a competitor to do business with?
Because to be a bank you pretty much need to start off with a large amount of money in the first place. That's a big barrier to entry, so there aren't going to be many new competitors.
Now the rest is conjecture, but... if there are only a few players, and a big barrier to entry... why wouldn't the players collude?
There are thousands of banks.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Re: The Edge
There are thousands of banks.. and gosh if Goldman were simply paying people off not to compete that would seem like an expensive proposition.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth
Goddamned slippery mage.
Goddamned slippery mage.
Re: The Edge
Corth wrote:There are thousands of banks.. and gosh if Goldman were simply paying people off not to compete that would seem like an expensive proposition.
Thousands of banks that could handle transactions on the level of Goldman Sachs? You think?
I also never said they were paying anyone off, I said they were colluding. If there's three companies capable of offering a service it's not hard to call up the other two guys and discuss increasing your prices.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.
I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Re: The Edge
Sarvis wrote:Corth wrote:There are thousands of banks.. and gosh if Goldman were simply paying people off not to compete that would seem like an expensive proposition.
Thousands of banks that could handle transactions on the level of Goldman Sachs? You think?
I also never said they were paying anyone off, I said they were colluding. If there's three companies capable of offering a service it's not hard to call up the other two guys and discuss increasing your prices.
I've seen this happen, but I will not admit whether I was or wasn't a part of it...
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'
Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.
Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'
Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.
Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'
Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Re: The Edge
Goldman Sachs bankers make on average about a million dollars a year. As far as I can tell and having met a few, they are only slightly smarter than the average bear. I don't see why other people and banks couldn't do exactly what they do given adequate training. I honestly just don't see what is so special about them.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth
Goddamned slippery mage.
Goddamned slippery mage.
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: The Edge
Sarvis may have a point on the whole colluding thing: http://www.aflcio.org/
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 7275
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
- Contact:
Re: The Edge
Corth... its a simple bell curve. To go from 95% to 98% may be just 3%, but its a move that reduces the population from thousands to a handful. Simple supply and demand dictate that the extra 3% is worth a lot more than the 95% in terms of supply and demand.
I do agree with you that most companies... are probably better off paying a lot less for 95% of the talent than paying 100x as much for that extra 3% in terms of absolute value. Unfortunately, its not partly because of celebrity status and partly because of the importance of decisions. Mere words from the CEO of a company can instantly send the markets crashing... do you want someone who says the right thing 95% of the time, or 98% of the time at the helm of a company you've invested in?
Would you play a game where you have a 99% chance of winning $1 and a 1% chance of losing $150? At 1% you lose 50%, reducing your 1% risk by 0.5% would be worth 25% profit while swinging the other way will result in a loss exceeding 100%. With "thin" margins and massive amounts of market capitalization, being 1% better might make the difference between a BP that was irrevocably harmed by the Obama administration, or a BP that salvages some sort of continued US based operation...
The answer to the question of what the problem is I think is in why it makes that big of a difference to have the 98% talent vs the 96% talent... which would be the size of the companies, the speed with which valuations change, speculation and human emotion. With more, smaller companies, you'd still have people compensated at the same rates, but the aboslute figures would be smaller. For example 1% of a 1 billion a year company vs 1% of a 100 million a year both as compared to the floor of minimum wage. With a slower valuation change (media + market), you'd have more tolerance for mistakes or time to remedy mistakes which would also reduce speculation and temper human emotion.
I enjoyed this article. Its about how superstar pay causes income inequality and a reduction in motivation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/busin ... cerpt.html
I do agree with you that most companies... are probably better off paying a lot less for 95% of the talent than paying 100x as much for that extra 3% in terms of absolute value. Unfortunately, its not partly because of celebrity status and partly because of the importance of decisions. Mere words from the CEO of a company can instantly send the markets crashing... do you want someone who says the right thing 95% of the time, or 98% of the time at the helm of a company you've invested in?
Would you play a game where you have a 99% chance of winning $1 and a 1% chance of losing $150? At 1% you lose 50%, reducing your 1% risk by 0.5% would be worth 25% profit while swinging the other way will result in a loss exceeding 100%. With "thin" margins and massive amounts of market capitalization, being 1% better might make the difference between a BP that was irrevocably harmed by the Obama administration, or a BP that salvages some sort of continued US based operation...
The answer to the question of what the problem is I think is in why it makes that big of a difference to have the 98% talent vs the 96% talent... which would be the size of the companies, the speed with which valuations change, speculation and human emotion. With more, smaller companies, you'd still have people compensated at the same rates, but the aboslute figures would be smaller. For example 1% of a 1 billion a year company vs 1% of a 100 million a year both as compared to the floor of minimum wage. With a slower valuation change (media + market), you'd have more tolerance for mistakes or time to remedy mistakes which would also reduce speculation and temper human emotion.
I enjoyed this article. Its about how superstar pay causes income inequality and a reduction in motivation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/busin ... cerpt.html
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: The Edge
Corth wrote:I'm not talking about the markets being rigged. I'm talking about the financial industry. If I start a business.. say I'm doing kid's birthday parties.. and I have a novel idea and I'm making a lot of money, then that is a good thing. But you know that eventually I will also have competition and will end up making less money. So why isn't the same thing happening to Goldman Sachs? Why are people willing to do business with them when they are making such enormous fees? Why not find a competitor to do business with? I really don't have an answer for that. Though if I had to figure one out I would probably start by looking into why some institutions got favored 'bailout' status over others.
It doesn't happen with Goldman Sachs because they keep finding, buying, or developing the novel ideas and banking on it. They're very active in looking into small ideas that they can throw their weight behind and profit on.
That's why Goldman Sachs has such an interest in protecting their ability to continue to have the best access to the top 0.01% of financial industry workers - they want their visions, ideas, and leadership.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Re: The Edge
I dispute that one two counts. First I dispute that the quality GS is getting is really that high. And second, even if they really are getting the top .01% of the brightest people out there, I really don't think there is any substantial difference between the top .01% and the top 10%.
As I mentioned earlier, I'm familiar with several GS bankers and former GS bankers. One of them got his job by virtue of a close relationship with a very well known politician (top .01% huh?). Basically, they were bright people, but there was nothing earth shattering about them. I think if you take just about any guy or girl who graduates from a decent school, you can train them just as well as any GS banker to do the same job.
Which does not mean they don't deserve to make a zillion dollars. If they can do it (legitimately - not by virtue of the government bailing out their counterparties), then god bless them. BUT, what I don't get is why, given the enormous profit margins, nobody is really competing with them.
As I mentioned earlier, I'm familiar with several GS bankers and former GS bankers. One of them got his job by virtue of a close relationship with a very well known politician (top .01% huh?). Basically, they were bright people, but there was nothing earth shattering about them. I think if you take just about any guy or girl who graduates from a decent school, you can train them just as well as any GS banker to do the same job.
Which does not mean they don't deserve to make a zillion dollars. If they can do it (legitimately - not by virtue of the government bailing out their counterparties), then god bless them. BUT, what I don't get is why, given the enormous profit margins, nobody is really competing with them.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth
Goddamned slippery mage.
Goddamned slippery mage.
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: The Edge
Corth wrote:I dispute that one two counts. First I dispute that the quality GS is getting is really that high. And second, even if they really are getting the top .01% of the brightest people out there, I really don't think there is any substantial difference between the top .01% and the top 10%.
First and foremost, there's a substantial difference between the top 0.01% and top 10% in anything and everything. 4/10ths of a second may not seem to make much of a difference, but it does mean that your slow ass ain't going to the Olympics for the 100m dash.
Corth wrote:As I mentioned earlier, I'm familiar with several GS bankers and former GS bankers. One of them got his job by virtue of a close relationship with a very well known politician (top .01% huh?). Basically, they were bright people, but there was nothing earth shattering about them. I think if you take just about any guy or girl who graduates from a decent school, you can train them just as well as any GS banker to do the same job.
Connections are equally important as intelligence - this is how many top law firms make their money.
Corth wrote:Which does not mean they don't deserve to make a zillion dollars. If they can do it (legitimately - not by virtue of the government bailing out their counterparties), then god bless them. BUT, what I don't get is why, given the enormous profit margins, nobody is really competing with them.
No one deserves to make a zillion dollars - no one likes a rich guy. But that's not the point. If people can't get fabulously wealthy, it indicates a society that has very poor freedoms and liberty for its people.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Re: The Edge
A few hundredths of a second, as you correctly state, can be the difference between a gold medal and mediocrity - since it's a race. But I fail to see how the incremental difference in talent makes much of a difference in banking.
I'll concede the point on connections. I suspect that connections are a lot more important to GS and it's profit margin than the difference in talent between the top 1% and the top .01%.
And I further suspect that is where the rigged part comes into play as well. How many former GS bankers end up as cabinet secretaries?
I'll concede the point on connections. I suspect that connections are a lot more important to GS and it's profit margin than the difference in talent between the top 1% and the top .01%.
And I further suspect that is where the rigged part comes into play as well. How many former GS bankers end up as cabinet secretaries?
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth
Goddamned slippery mage.
Goddamned slippery mage.
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 7275
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
- Contact:
Re: The Edge
Good point tef/corth.
connections are an important driver of profits
which is why we need to keep government out of business.
connections are an important driver of profits
which is why we need to keep government out of business.
Re: The Edge
Well yeah - if government doesn't wield much power then influence and connections aren't nearly as important. Why do you think lobbyists get the big bucks...
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth
Goddamned slippery mage.
Goddamned slippery mage.
Re: The Edge
Corth wrote:Well yeah - if government doesn't wield much power then influence and connections aren't nearly as important. Why do you think lobbyists get the big bucks...
Corth... really? You really think like that? You don't think connections are "important" in the business world too?
Hell, if there were no government connections would probably be even more important.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.
I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
-
- Sojourner
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: The Edge
Corth wrote:A few hundredths of a second, as you correctly state, can be the difference between a gold medal and mediocrity - since it's a race. But I fail to see how the incremental difference in talent makes much of a difference in banking.
I'll concede the point on connections. I suspect that connections are a lot more important to GS and it's profit margin than the difference in talent between the top 1% and the top .01%.
A new messaging server that was milliseconds faster than anything out there recently hit the market - allowing people to submit their trades just hairs before the other guy. This messaging system you could get installed for a few million per site.
Honestly, investment is a competition and a race, which is why I find that seemingly small difference to be important.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Re: The Edge
Sunamit group-says 'imrex west, tibek backstab touk i think his name is on entry'
// Post Count +1
// Post Count +1
Return to “Current Events & Politics”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests