City Unemployment Rises to 10.3 Percent

Actually, if we use the same calculations we did prior to 1978 (those same calculations we used in determining that the unemployment rate during the Great Depression was 25%) before changing the criteria to make the Carter administration look good, our national unemployment rate of about 9% would really be closer to 18%.

I hope things get better.

tick, tick, tick

steve only has a few more weeks / months before all his silly predictions come crashing down on him.

mutombo, so do i. but i think, in the short term, that would require government aid to states, and i don't see that happening unless unemployment hits 10.5ish%, nationwide. some targeted aid may become available, but not what i think is necessary.

AR,

I agree with you.

Which silly predictions are those, JuiceMan? That prices would crash? Let's see, even Jonathan Miller says they're down 30% from the peak....

tick, tick, tick

tock, tock, tock.

Cheaper Manhattan apartments draw buyers

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE5910MA20091002

"Since peaking in the first half of 2008, Manhattan apartment prices have fallen an average of 25 percent to 30 percent."

For whom did the bell toll, Juicy?

does anyone even know what JM is looking for/hoping to achieve? does he rent? own? want to trade up?

he talks about family apartments, i believe on the UWS. but i can see how it would be hard to be a botanist and afford something out of the ordinary, which is what he says he wants at least in terms of size and maybe this market, unless of course the wife is a banker, attorney, doctor?

Poor steve, forgot his predictions already. tick, tick, tick

"does anyone even know what JM is looking for/hoping to achieve?"

To move from western Pennsylvania so I don't have to live this lie about living in NYC when I really don’t. I hope you won’t hate me.

Juicy thinks Manhattan is special, and impervious to market forces. LICC thinks the same about Long Island City.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

That's why they never post anything meaningful, or even a single point of data. Just spew garbage, declare victory, and [insert grotesque action here].

"50%" - stevejhx

JuiceMan, your point seems to be that prices are now increasing, and the process is over. For a guy who has been wrong about everything else, I don't know why you insist on making a fool of yourself time and time again. Need I find all your predictions about what would happen to real estate in Manhattan: rents to rise, prices to fall by no more than 10%, etc., etc., and so on and so forth?

When prices start to rise and continue to rise, then we'll have hit the bottom. However, there is still a 1+ year of inventory on the market, and equal amount of shadow inventory, rents are still falling, unemployment is still rising, credit is almost impossible to get.

It's absurd that you try to declare victory when you've been wrong on every count. But then of course, after spunky and malraux, you are the last permabull left on earth.

Juicy, no rejoinder?

how long do people collect unemployment for now??????

jm, as it's not new jersey i won't hate you.

"Juicy, no rejoinder?"

That would assume that my position was on the defensive, which it is not.

"how long do people collect unemployment for now??????"

till they can begin to show up in the BLS numbers are either dead or retired.

I run a staffing firm and I can tell you that firms are hiring a lot more aggressively than they have at any point since August '08. I am seeing this (and others in the industry that I speak with are too) across most industries and in most disciplines. Law is still in the toilet and I wouldn't expect that market to come back until 2011.

Just to be clear, I don't think unemployment will go right down to 5% tomorrow, but companies are hiring, talking about hiring and planning on hiring...all things they haven't done much of for the past year.

Also, understand that the unemployment numbers are going to continue to go up for another 6-9 months, but the economy is getting better. It will be slow and bumpy, but there is definite improvement.

waverly, states and local gov will have to begin to undo their increases in employment during the bubble compensating for this private sector hiring. public payroll is still bloated and tax revenues are coming below expected across the board.

btw, small biz are generally not adding jobs (and they are the ones providing most of employment in usa). are you talking about mid and big size companies hiring through your firm?

pfizer, 19000.

waverly, many companies haven't yet finished their cuts announced earlier. some cuts will be prevented, at least temporarily, due to improvements in certain areas. but from the people i know in advertising, media, education, law, not-for-profits, and even health, it's still very bumpy. of course some companies are going to find themselves needing certain people/talent after such huge cuts. it's kind of like inventory restocking. the state and local govts are missing revenue projections at a pace that shocks even me. the amount of public sector layoffs/wage and benefit reduction that has occurred and has yet to occur will likely be massive.

when m&a picks up, as it will, you're going to see more situations like wyeth/pfizer.

i don't know if you saw it, but the Fulbright-sponsored survey for prospects for litigators is calling for a fairly robust improvement there. of course they did last year, and we know how that turned out, so take it with a grain of salt, and there is so much slack that i doubt it will affect hiring. also, it's just litigation/bankruptcy/regulatory, not corporate.

"the state and local govts are missing revenue projections at a pace that shocks even me. the amount of public sector layoffs/wage and benefit reduction that has occurred and has yet to occur will likely be massive."

i guess that had to happen eventually. remember this was the other top source of new employment together with RE since 2003 (through health and education). so clearly, it was not sustainable. what the new normal in public employment would be? no idea. but it might even overshoot to the downsize given the huge unfunded liabilities on public pensions that on many cases is making counties considering filling for bankruptcy to get rid of. baby boomers are retiring... and in the public sector they can often retire earlier. so this is gonna be a preview of what's about to come (pension and entitlement headache across the board).

there are market rumors that Citi has huge losses coming that they may not be able to handle. 4th Q is going to be a true test.

Point 1. Is the economy really recovering or are we just on a sugar high at the moement;
point 2. How much of the hiring is re-arranging the decks with lower cost/ hungrier ppl bf another round of cuts of 2nd tier workers.
Point 3. 10.3 % is still 10.3% with an under count of 10% (conservatively). Let's just stop the bleeding bf we throw a party for the amputee.

"there are market rumors that Citi has huge losses coming that they may not be able to handle. 4th Q is going to be a true test"

For all the acris searches on apartments I've been interested in, the worst ones (underwater) seem to be Citi.

"That would assume that my position was on the defensive, which it is not."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

What about your prediction of increasing rents?

Your prediction of no more than a 10% decline in property values?

If you're not on the defensive, you're delusional.

The economy is improving W67th. It was so wounded that it is going to take time to recover, so we will see a month or two of good news in one facet and then a month where we take a step back. It is going to be that way for most of the pieces that are used to evaluate the economy (jobs, manufacturing, retail, consumer sentiment, etc).

A good number of mid and large companies are starting to hire, but the unemployment numbers will not improve for another 6-9 months. Why? Historically, when we begin to come out of a recession, staffing firms will see an uptick in business 3-6 months before there is a change in unemployment numbers. With the severity of this recession it is more likely 6-9 months before there is a change in the unemployment numbers.

AR - reading your posts you would think there is absolutely no good news at all and that there will not be anything positive happening for another 10 years. I know the unemplyment numbers suck. I know the states are down on tax revenue. Things will improve...very slowly, but very soon. The same way everything goes to hell on the way down, they all get better on the way back up.

we've been having this discussion/argument for months. What is the good news besides the stupid stock market?

waverly, do you think i enjoy my beliefs? really? i don't. but i'm not going to cheer for this falsely induced recovery that some people are calling, not when un/underemployment is so high and rising. what is the engine for recovery? the only thing i see is governmental spending. can't lower interest rates, that's usually where growth is found. free money hasn't greatly encouraged lending, except when guaranteed by the taxpayers. just about every bit of good news i hear is directly the result of government intervention, not systemic improvement. nothing is fixed, in fact now much is worse. sorry, but i'll be more optimistic when i believe the situation warrants it.

i know reich is partisan, but i have tremendous respect for his intelligence. this is where i'm coming from, and i hope he and i are both wrong.

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-dow-broke-10000-and-why-you-should.html

Waverrly. Flmao. If u went from 10 to 7% next month it would go to 15% the month after. It's called 'not looking' to 'lookong' status. There are so so so many ppl who have given up, any slight uptick would get so many asses off the couch as to 'discourace' once again.

Waverly- damn is okay cause it is still holding
w67 - damn has a structural flaw. It's gonna take more than spartite to fix the damn.
Seriously our economy was built on housing, what is gonna take it's place?

Txting while driving sucks except I'm crawling at 2 mph. Dam iPhone!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"free money hasn't greatly encouraged lending, except when guaranteed by the taxpayers."

what? did you miss the SIVs? they weren't holding conforming loans. anyway, i guess imho the question of what normal will look like is still a guess work. how much of this "recovery" is just due to gov support which is unsustainable imho. what happens when it's withdrawn?

can a democratic society that uses home ownership as a tool for econ growth and markets it as a dream withdraw credit? given that that would mean lowering the price of the main asset for 70% of USA households? buying a home is in part having a long position on cost and availability of mortgages. where would be prices now if (imagine) we would go back to 5 year mortgages (as it used to be less than 100 years ago).

admin, i'm talking post lehman.

Companies here in NYC are hiring and planning on hiring more people as we move forward. AR - I don't know how else to explain it to you. You keep saying the UE #'s are going up and I am telling you that there is more to what is going on than just those numbers.

You say now is worse???

Than what??? A year ago when Lehman collapsed, ML buckled and went by the wayside, AIG, Fannie, Freddie and Citi all looked like they might not make it to January 1st + there was no end in sight for the job losses (there is now, whether you want to admit that or not) + credit markets were completely frozen (not great now, but definitely better) + it was going to take over a year for a significant portion of the stimulus money to find its way out (most of that money flows out in 2010).

I think that unless everything turns around at the same time you are unable to see the signs of improvement. I have said for months that this is what the improvement is going to look like at the beginning...fits and spurts...a step forward and then a 1/2 step back...slow...but there is improvement.

W67th - Can you repost? I didn;t get what you were saying.

companies here in nyc are hiring? so...somewhere someone got hired? the longer we kid ourselves into thinking that the patient is getting better, the longer it will take to find a real cure.

yes, i think our financial system is now stable, but in terms of the end-game, i think there is a huge potential to the downside.

yes, waverly, there is a lot more to it than just the UE numbers. where is the long-term demand for even today's level of goods and services going to come from? people in india? when? as fewer people have jobs, others have jobs paying less, and others exit the job market via early retirement or just giving up, they most assuredly will be buying more. we have price and wage deflation. if that doesn't scare you, then i don't know how else to explain it to you.

per CR, in terms of rate of flow of stimulus money, we're close to the peak right now. it will be a net negative in the not too distant future. i'm hoping for a state rescue package, but i'm not holding my breath.

No

waverly name 5 companies that are adding jobs in NYC that are higher paid then the jobs being lost? I think you are smoking crack

1. Crack sales person

Oh yeah, 5 companies...
1. Crack corp.

Crack be us

2. Borker porn video production is hiring and are $15 hr plus benefits ie more than borkers are making now

crack'r barrel

And you don't have to pay for your own dildo. It's a great gig but only. 50 openings

Ignore the Power of cheese at your own peril

waverly what sort of staffing firm do you run? I think we all want to know who is hiring in NYC?

Not that it helps much (though this thread is taking a turn for the worst), but I can speak a bit anecdotally about hiring in healthcare - notable uptick recently, though it tends to be specialized areas (ie: long-term care, VNSNY, etc.).

three hospitals in NYC are about to be auctioned. one, cabrini, will probably remain in health care because its neighborhood competitors may want it. i think i read the other two would not.

Guys, take a look at this: http://tipstrategies.com/archive/geography-of-jobs/

It will dispel any idea of "recovery". I am no economist, but in my mind "recovery" starts when the red blobs disappear and are replaced by green blobs.

Bjw you think nurses are going to fill up all the 3500 a month 1 bed rentals the laidoff bankers and lawyers are fleeing? Even most doctors under 35 cant afford a 3500 a month rent

I have the kiss of death when it comes to the stock market, I generally stay away.
And I am hopeful our country, our city has turned a tide but any layman can see it's just not there.

The sceptic in me tells me this runup on stocks in only to widen the gap for the shorters to make more money on the next major dip.

aboutready, many hospitals are in trouble (and frankly have been for a long time). Reducing supply of unused beds was the impetus for the Berger Commission. It's painful, but necessary.

"Bjw you think nurses are going to fill up all the 3500 a month 1 bed rentals the laidoff bankers and lawyers are fleeing?"

samadams, of course not (though VNS is not just hiring nurses - they do much more than that). I have no idea how you read that in anything I said. Like waverly, I'm still amazed that even a marginally positive comment here is immediately browbeaten with these kinds of remarks.

OK, we're down 25%.

How much lower are we headed?

bjw, i know. but illness is in all likelihood increasing, the elderly population certainly is. health care is doing what other areas are doing, slashing costs. telling RNs that they have to be moved into other areas as openings permit, and replacing them with lpns. etc., etc.

it's not just unemployment, it's wage deflation. a job is better than none, but it isn't the fuel for a robust recovery.

Topper. We were up 300% from 1995 to 2007, so put that into the 25% question.

And the actual % is irrelevent, it's the result of people's willingness and ability to pay for NYC re.

"it tends to be specialized areas (ie: long-term care, VNSNY, etc.)."

long-term care ... you mean minimum wage workers with back pain after a year in the job but barely having their own health insurance?

you mean, nursing home workers?

samadams - I would rather keep the exact firm private (as I am sure you can understand), but we have several different divisions and work with clients of all sizes/industries. There is a noticeable difference in our business today and this is across all segements.

The jobs being added are not lower-paying positions than jobs that were previously eliminated. There is growth in a number of firms. There are plenty of people here that think they know a lot about the employment situation that don't really know too much. This is my business and I am confident that the information I share is accurate.

The fact that you don't think there are 5 companies in NYC that are adding higher paying jobs to their firm shows how little you actually know about this. I don't mean this as a knock. There is a lot more to the jobs situation than what AR waxes on about. There is real improvement. Agencies are a leading indicator of job growth, so I should experience this before you see it in any numbers.

waverly, you've been saying that improvement is on the way for ages. tell that to the millions of people who are unemployed.

and yes, it is about much more than just employment. as i repeatedly mention. WHERE IS THAT ENGINE FOR GROWTH, WITHOUT GOV'T SUPPORT?

if this was just a confidence game where people actually had money and incomes but were just afraid to spend, i'd be all for it. but people don't. they have been helped into spending themselves to near-death. i have no positive interest in a system that is encouraging them to buy homes whose values are still inflated, etc.

As someone who the SE regulars know has borne the brunt of this crisis in a highly personal way, I have seen no meaningful change at least at seniority levels that are likely to impact the RE market. (I'm in one of those non-financial, non-big law, non-consulting fields where you have to be fairly senior to afford to buy an apartment unless you have very generous--and rich--parents). Maybe these junior online gigs will rent a few apts in W'Burg but at least in the advertising/publishing/communications world, there is still more shit on the field than green shoots.

waverly so name the 5 companies that are hiring if its so easy? I want t know and my buddy sleeping on my couch really wants to know.

No offense but I am calling bullshit on you here until you can name 5!

i believe there is a robust demand for traders. they're needed to sell lots of things, including of course, gov't debt.

waverly: you've said the exact same thing months ago--almost verbatim. so out of the 100,000's of jobs in nyc, how many do you have your eye on? hye--if you're business is up, that's great for you and i wish you well. but i still don't see what that has to do with the well documented macro picture.

"advertising/publishing/communications world, there is still more shit on the field than green shoots. "

this is a sector going through a huge non-cyclical transformation per se. not useful as a guide imho. it would be in trouble even with in an ok economy.

5 companies in nyc, that's a joke, right? 50 will be a joke too unless they are really hiring like there's no tomorrow.

samadams - I don't have to prove myself to you at all. Doubt what you want to doubt. Here are several, if it makes you happy:

JPMorganChase
Bristol-Myers
Morgan Stanley
Siemens
Mcgraw-Hill
American Express
Goldman Sachs
National Grid

National Grid sounds like the more stable and tempting at this point. lol

hey--you left out BAC; they're going to fill ken lewis's job, no?

this is as of last december:

"Bristol-Myers Squibb will be handing layoff notices to another 10 percent of its 37,000 remaining workers, likely due to weak pipelines, increasing regulatory burdens, looming generic competition and (do we even need to say it?) the economy. This, along with a 10 percent cut the company announced in July of this year, will bring the total to 8,000 layoffs.

Read more: http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/bristol-myers-will-layoff-yet-another-10/2008-12-17#ixzz0U8HzFlNZ"

are they hiring back anywhere near 3,700? or is it closer to 37?

waverly being that Bristol Myers moved all its jobs to NJ from NYC years ago how is that possible?

no company can go on forever without having hiring needs. people die, retire, move because the spouse was relocated. there may or may not be some need to hire a replacement, although most companies probably prefer to move people around at this point. there are short-term needs that can be quite large, such as when the administration tells an industry that it needs to modify 500k mortgages or they're going to in trouble. i'd bet that led to quite a few hires at the banks. and of course if you fire too many highly paid people, there may come a time when you feel like picking up a few new ones, probably with less seniority so that they're making less pay.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/earnings-disaster-at-ge-profit-drops-45.html

In reference to the sale of NBC entertainment, Immelt said GE has no need for cash. Of course GE has a need for cash. GE has a total debt of over $500 billion.

Instead of buying back shares at totally ridiculous prices over the years, GE could have and should have been retiring debt. The panic low earlier this year below $6 was on concerns GE would not be able to refinance that debt.

The good news is GE has "90% completed its plans" to refinance its debt.

That relieves the short-term problem, but what about the long-term problem of getting rid of all that debt? Look for GE to continue to sell assets just as announced: Reducing GE capital and NBC universal.

As that happens, one can expect more layoffs and/or voluntary staff reductions by attrition. There is no driver for jobs anywhere as companies and individuals alike seek to reduce leverage and pay down debt.

I don't totally disagree with you admin, certain areas of communications will never be what they were (primarily print media) but I have also been around long enough to have seen prior structural change (4 channels to 600 for example) and to have been mentored by "Mad Men" who witnessed the tsuanmi of television destroy the cozy world of radio and "Look" magazine. These changes weren't necessarily easily but did not involve the mass displacements the agency world has endured recently. Advertising has always been fluid, layoffs were a constant as accounts came and went but upswing agencies usually picked right upfrom those that were downsizing. THe difference now is many are or have been laying off, and virtually no one is hiring unless you are 23 and have "5 years experience in social media".

GO YANKEES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

UNEMPLOYMENT is a lagging indicator.
Always have...always will.

Hiring will start early 2010.

"Even in 2008, the most tumultuous year in modern Wall Street history, Goldman employees reaped rewards that most people can only dream about. Goldman paid out $4.82 billion in bonuses last year, awarding 953 employees at least $1 million each and 78 executives $5 million or more. The rewards for 2009 will be far greater."

http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/107974/bonuses-put-goldman-in-public-relations-bind?mod=career-salary_negotiation

just the tip of the iceberg.

we've had really bad unemployment pretty much the whole year, so i guess the economy was doing fine and we just didn't notice it.

cc, and maybe they're just picking up some talent that's become available because of the pfizer merger, where 19,000 positions are expected to be eliminated.

ericho if Goldman gives out bonuses greater they will be vaporized by the federal gov. faster then you can say Government Sacks

Look, you can choose to believe what you want to believe.

Noah gives you front-line knowledge of the RE industry and it is quite helpful. I am trying to give you some front-line knowledge of the jobs situation. Heck, RE #'s are what, 3-4 months back-logged? What I do is a leading indicator and, as such, I am telling you that things are much better than they were. At no point did I suggest that the troubles are behind us. In fact, several times I said the opposite. I cautioned that improvement would be slow, that there would be bumps & setbacks along the way, but that things were actually getting better even though you may not be personally experiencing it and even though it won't show up in the UE #'s for another 2-3 quarters.

Take what you want from this information. I just find it interesting what some people choose to acknowledge and what they refuse to acknowledge. Especially when it doesn't neatly fit into the narrative they are used to.

Oh, and lizyank, I agree with your sentiment about the Yankees!

waverly kind of weird that you place people at BMY and did not know that they are in NJ now?

Where's the 20-30% collapse on NYC housing forecast by the bears here in Spring of this year?

MOST OF YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE.

If they couldn't see a V-shape recovery how the heck can they see a recovery in jobs when it's a 'lagging' indicator!

samadams - A big piece of Bristol was here in NYC until very, very recently (and some is still here).

waverly Bristol moved to NJ about 5 years ago. Bristol does not even have a confer. room in NYC office it is s small ! I am not sure how much hiring they could be doing in NYC but since you are the "expert" I must be wrong.

waverly, i have yet to see proof in print that there is any large-scale hiring (other than temporary). i see the opposite daily. i'm not looking for evidence to support my narrative. i'm looking for proof of corporate long-term planning that includes increased investment in capital and employees, in this country. don't even get me started on small and mid-sized businesses and their access to credit.

the dollar situation will eventually help exports. but services and sales provide close to two-thirds of the jobs in this country, not manufacturing. and there's a lot of slack in employment.

there is just as great a risk that due to unemployment reaching these levels, without a means of further jump starting the economy, that we enter a period of stagflation. after all the stock market is considered a leading indicator.

AR,
Have you ever worked or ran a company before?
You think they layoff and hire folks like walking into burger king and have it your way?

Budgets are set in August most of the time for the upcoming year.
Hiring will begin in January 2010.

no but my husband does. and the budget is pretty fluid. and he can hire whenever he has a legitimate business need.

samadams - I am not going to waste any more of my time explaining it to you. Yes, Bristol moved much of their operations to Princeton and Plainsboro several years ago, but not all of it. Much of what remained here moved very, very recently.

AR - These firms wouldn't be hiring permanent employees if they didn't have long-term plans. It would be too expensive and disruptive. Access to credit is also better for small and mid-sized companies than it has been in close to a year. Again, this is the beginning of improvement and will take time.

Actually firings are usually before christmas(bonuses) as are bankruptcies (after the christmas revenue horde).

If the market does another tumble in the next month, it's going to be ugly. Everyone in the city doesn't work for Goldman Sachs.

"Access to credit is also better for small and mid-sized companies than it has been in close to a year."

another tricky statement. less year access was zero. zilch. nada. across the board.

how can it not be better than that?

"long-term care ... you mean minimum wage workers with back pain after a year in the job but barely having their own health insurance?"

No, I mean managed long-term care (for seniors and special needs), which can be very good. The state has put a lot behind this and reimbursement levels (and therefore margins) have been incredibly high. It won't last forever of course, but there's a lot going on there.

edit "as bankruptcies are up" after the..........

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009/10/truth-about-jobs-that-no-one-wants-to.html

Unemployment will almost certainly in double-digits next year -- and may remain there for some time. And for every person who shows up as unemployed in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' household survey, you can bet there's another either too discouraged to look for work or working part time who'd rather have a full-time job or else taking home less pay than before (I'm in the last category, now that the University of California has instituted pay cuts). And there's yet another person who's more fearful that he or she will be next to lose a job.

In other words, ten percent unemployment really means twenty percent underemployment or anxious employment. All of which translates directly into late payments on mortgages, credit cards, auto and student loans, and loss of health insurance. It also means sleeplessness for tens of millions of Americans. And, of course, fewer purchases (more on this in a moment).

...

So why is unemployment and underemployment so high, and why is it likely to remain high for some time? Because, as noted, people who are worried about their jobs or have no jobs, and who are also trying to get out from under a pile of debt, are not going do a lot of shopping. And businesses that don’t have customers aren’t going do a lot of new investing. And foreign nations also suffering high unemployment aren’t going to buy a lot of our goods and services.

And without customers, companies won't hire. They'll cut payrolls instead.

cc - That is ugly, yet true. But it is better. Lenders are also not watching over firms on a daily basis the same way as they did 6 months ago because they see business picking up. Even if it's not great, it is moving in a positive direction.

ericho - hiring and firing are both difficult. Cutting headcount can happen whenever a company must do that. It is the quickest way to preserve capital. We are also moving out of the period when every hire had to be approved by the god and departments have a little more ability to bring in talent. Again, a little bit at a time.

AR - Many companies have trimmed headcount so low and cut costs so low that they don;t need the same production to turn a profit. That doesn't mean all of our problems are over, but it means that we are closer to things being better.

waverly, i can only say that i hope that you are right. this is fugly.

but i can't see how just having low costs will support growth without increased demand. i truly can't. and if they (multinationals) just intend to rely on foreign demand, that has it's own set of severely negative implications, i'd think.

I need to run....good weekend to all!

waverly, have a good weekend.

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200910160914dowjonesdjonline000515&title=bristol-myers-reduces-abilify-sales-force-by-about-25

aboutready
we have done business with Bristol and they have not had an operation in NYC for 5 years. Waverly does not know what he is talking about! When we met with them we needed to meet in our conference room being that they no longer had one in NYC. But I am sure Waverly is hiring big time for them at there non existent NYC office! :)

samadams - Again, you are wrong. Some of the people based in the NYC office travel a lot, which is why they were in that office. However smart you think you are, you are wrong. My firm has worked with them for almost 20 years.

Morgan Stanley
American Express
Goldman Sachs

These are the kinds of firms where you show up after being hired and find you don't have a desk even though you're being guaranteed $500K a year. The guy who hired you is fired a week after you join and a month later your entire business unit is closed down.

The details of what drives hiring through "executive recruiters" at Wall Street firms is something I am aware of from a first hand point of view, from both sides of the equation. It's a part of life that Kafka would love.

That was a completely useless post with zero facts supporting it...very helpful.

"These are the kinds of firms where you show up after being hired and find you don't have a desk even though you're being guaranteed $500K a year. The guy who hired you is fired a week after you join and a month later your entire business unit is closed down.

The details of what drives hiring through "executive recruiters" at Wall Street firms is something I am aware of from a first hand point of view, from both sides of the equation. It's a part of life that Kafka would love."

it's not uncommon for financial firms (including hedge funds) to fake hiring as a proof that they are not under distress. they were doing it across the board after the dotcom crash. they were willing to pay tickets, hotel rooms and the like... boosting image and extraction of information are reasons why sometimes they claim they have an opening when they don't.