This one is specifically addressed at the JuiceMan, who selectively published that trash yesterday about Wall Street hiring. http://www.cnbc.com/id/25987878 Bankers and traders are bracing for sharply reduced bonuses amid one of the worst downturns ever -- and they will be the lucky ones. With more than 75,000 jobs already cut and more than $400 billion of credit losses, the proverbial blood is... [more]
This one is specifically addressed at the JuiceMan, who selectively published that trash yesterday about Wall Street hiring.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/25987878
Bankers and traders are bracing for sharply reduced bonuses amid one of the worst downturns ever -- and they will be the lucky ones.
With more than 75,000 jobs already cut and more than $400 billion of credit losses, the proverbial blood is flowing on Wall Street. And while there are still four to five months left in the year, annual bonuses representing the bulk of Wall Street pay are expected to fall by 30 to 40 percent, recruiters and compensation experts said.
Given the environment, there may be little choice but to accept the cuts and hope for a 2009 rebound.
"It's clearly a buyers' market," said Robert Sloan, head of the U.S. financial services recruiting practice at Egon Zehnder International. "The assumption going into this year is you can take your base salary or severance. That's the choice. There's a resignation in the market."
Wall Street firms typically pay out about half their revenue as compensation. Based on performance so far this year, a period that saw Bear Stearns fall off the map, payouts are poised to fall hard last month said its first-half revenue fell 28 percent, and the funds set aside for compensation dropped at the same rate to $7.03 billion. Goldman Sachs revenue fell 22 percent, with the compensation pool down 23 percent to $8.5 billion.
Last week, New York state officials estimated total bonus payments from the nation's financial hub would plunge 20 percent, removing billions of dollars from the tax rolls.
"Things have been bleak," said Brent Longnecker, chief executive of Longnecker & Associates, a compensation firm.
Actual payouts will span the range from zero to healthy increases. Some executives are refusing bonuses, notably Lehman Brothers
Others will still strike it rich. Former Goldman star Thomas Montag, who starts work at Merrill Lynch on Monday as head of sales and trading, will receive a guaranteed $40 million for five months work.
Meanwhile some firms are building up certain businesses even as they hand out pink slips at others. Morgan Stanley this week said it will redeploy some of the $1 billion of savings from 4,800 job cuts to recruit top executives.
Goldman Sachs says its headcount will rise by low single digit percentages, despite slashing 10 percent earlier this year, fueled by expansion in fast growing markets outside New York. But these are exceptions.
"Right now we see the volume of opportunistic hiring is also reduced," Sloan said.
Compensation experts also said that with firms eager to conserve cash while holding on to key employees, a bigger slice of bonuses will be paid out in restricted shares. Banks, moreover, are asking for longer hold periods -- for three or five years.
That said, last year actual bonuses proved higher than predicted as many firms paid up to avoid losing top bankers and traders, mindful of past downturns when markets quickly snapped back. Yet U.S. housing prices remain under pressure and the credit crisis continues to spread.
Many Wall Street executives say the current downturn is far worse than other recent slumps, including the post-Internet bubble period of 2002 and 2003. So until profits do bounce back, banks and their employees will be playing defense.
"It's a cyclical business," said Adam Zoia, managing partner of Glocap Search. "And the key thing during a downturn is keeping your job."
[less]
Response by stevejhx
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
"A cyclical business."
Well golly gee.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by EddieWilson
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 1112
Member since: Feb 2008
Worst downtown in a while, AND you have to wonder what percentage of bonuses will be paid in stock that can't be sold for a while...
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by stevejhx
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
It says restricted stock - 3 to 5 years to vest.
Where are all the pollyannas? Spunky, where are you? JuiceMan? vverain of "real estate is not a levered asset" fame? malraux, who claims to have flipped in 15CPW (doesn't show in the data, though). All we have left is low-level shills like Sneaky Pete and LICC, who dreams of living in Manhattan while looking at it from his bathroom window.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by uwcider
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 43
Member since: Aug 2008
I came here for some information and it seems as if there are a lot of people having conversations with themselves rather than providing good information.
stevejhx, if you posted just to respond to some other guy, why didn't you put your comments in that discussion topic instead of creating a new one for you to be three of the first posts?
How does this message board get to providing good information? Its ok if you think prices are going down or up or down a lot of whatever, say it, but why say it and then get all angry about it and keep saying it over and over just in one morning.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by stevejhx
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
uwcider, judging by your other lame posts you must be a real-estate agent. I'm not angry about anything, but all those people who a year ago said Wall Street was propping up the market now deny that the demise of Wall Street will have any effect on prices.
If there's no income or leverage, what, pray tell, will prop these prices up?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by uwcider
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 43
Member since: Aug 2008
stevejhx you misjudge, even if you do pray and tell.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by uwcider
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 43
Member since: Aug 2008
by the way, so what if all those people said something last year, they are wrong, but why are you having a conversation with yourself? If you had a rebuttal to people from a year ago or Juce recently, why did you post here?
and what makes my posts lame?
Also you didn't answer the question - have you ever been in the military or served your country, or do you just go and protest?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by JuiceMan
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 3578
Member since: Aug 2007
uwcider, if steve didn't argue with himself and post on this board incessantly, steeteasy wouldn’t need half of the servers it has. I'm surprised streeteasy hasn't bounced him as a cost reduction opportunity.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by uwcider
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 43
Member since: Aug 2008
ok, well, 3 of the top discussion topics are about Wall Street, not about real estate, which is why I came here. And should probably go out and play with my daughter now.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by stevejhx
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
uwcider, "pray" has many meanings: pray justice be served.
"if steve didn't argue with himself"
I never argue with myself, JM. I argue with people who don't post a single number, a single theory, a single concept, except to cross their fingers and hope that real estate prices don't fall.
"3 of the top discussion topics are about Wall Street, not about real estate"
Funny that. When Wall Street was ablaze, real-estate was ABOUT Wall Street. Now it's not.
Enjoy your daughter.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by uwcider
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 43
Member since: Aug 2008
alright everyone here
I think there should be a rating system or something that says if the discussion topic is going to be helpful to others or is just some nonsense about irrelevant topics or a repeat of other discussions like 3 or 4 about Wall Street.
I'm off, we'll see if I come back. Some of this is more juvenile than the kids.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by EddieWilson
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 1112
Member since: Feb 2008
uqcider, you chose the 3 wall street posts to comment on, and that's why they're on top. BTW, the point is talking about WS's effect on th emarket. WS had the biggest effect going up, and will clearly have the biggest one going down...
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by ootin
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 210
Member since: Jul 2008
stevejhx said: When Wall Street was ablaze, real-estate was ABOUT Wall Street. Now it's not.
and also was the guy who said that it was better to put money in the S&P than in real estate
with this 300 discussion topic
REAL ESTATE IS A BAD INVESTMENT
stevejhx
about 3 months ago
No matter how you slice it, renting is ALWAYS financially more beneficial over time than owning.
Let's make some financial assumptions that are borne out by decades of empirical evidence:
1) Real property prices and rents increase at the rate of income, or 0.7% per year adjusted for inflation.
2) The S&P 500 increases at a real rate of 8.0% per annum.
These being true, it is ALWAYS better to rent property than to buy, if you invest the down payment in the S&P 500.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by EddieWilson
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 1112
Member since: Feb 2008
Ootin -
Had someone put their money into NYC real estate 3 months ago with 20% down, do you think they'd actually be ahead at this point?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by stevejhx
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
"and also was the guy who said that it was better to put money in the S&P than in real estate
with this 300 discussion topic."
That is absolutely, positively, 100% true in the long-term. You - ootin - confuse short-term volatility with short-term illiquidity. You seem to believe that real estate never falls in value because in the past 10 years it hasn't. But in the 10 years before that it swooned.
Owner-occupied residential real estate - what I was discussing - is NOT an "investment" with a "yield." It is a prepaid expense. How on god's green earth do you expect property prices to keep on rising when incomes and leverage don't.
It is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE. If your income goes up by 3% per year, and leverage terms do not change, you can afford precisely 3% more per year for real estate. No more, no less. These 20% per annum increases over the past 10 years are FALSE, and they will be taken back.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by dco
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 1319
Member since: Mar 2008
If wallstreet contributed to the bubble in NYC RE., then it will contribute to the fall. I can't see how people don't understand this. Every discussion about wallstreet is DIRECTLY related to NYC RE.
Try and remember, you don't have to lose your job, to decide not to buy RE. Just feeling that you "may be layed off", will prevent people with jobs currently to refrain from a future RE purchase.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by stevejhx
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
"if the discussion topic is going to be helpful to others"
That's novel - know in advance what someone else will deem to be "helpful."
What would be helpful to you uwcider? Prognosticating that granite countertops will increase the value of your overpriced condo by 150%?
Or that if you are going to invest a huge amount of money in Manhattan real estate, you need to take into account the risks?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by wpsst
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 18
Member since: Aug 2008
I'm on Wall Street, made a ton of money the past 6 years, and have been doing the rental thing. Although things definitely went way up in price, it didn't make sense for me to buy because to go and buy a studio when I started or a 1 BR when I was a couple years in wouldn't have made sense. Anyway, now I have enough to buy a 2 BR pad, and so I won't get paid much this year in bonus, still prices are softer, so it works out quite evenly and I'm still going to get the apartment I've been wanting even in a down Wall Street market.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by ccdevi
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 861
Member since: Apr 2007
uwcider, you nailed it. too many unpleasant people talking to themselves on this board. oh well, now and then there's an interesting thread.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by stevejhx
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
ccdevi: pot - kettle - black
OR
"unpleasant" = "doesn't agree with me."
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by EddieWilson
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 1112
Member since: Feb 2008
I think this one sums it up...
"Many Wall Street executives say the current downturn is far worse than other recent slumps"
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Victor1
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 5
Member since: Aug 2008
Eddie, blood in the streets means a great time to buy, right? Or have you never heard of the Rothschilds, one of the world's longest legacies who are still in business on Wall Street.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by EddieWilson
almost 18 years ago
Posts: 1112
Member since: Feb 2008
"A bargain about to be a bigger bargain is no bargain at all".
I think blood in the streets might apply to the stock market. In terms of Manhattan RE, no panic has set in at all. Hell, you still have folks on this board arguing it will go up..
"A cyclical business."
Well golly gee.
Worst downtown in a while, AND you have to wonder what percentage of bonuses will be paid in stock that can't be sold for a while...
It says restricted stock - 3 to 5 years to vest.
Where are all the pollyannas? Spunky, where are you? JuiceMan? vverain of "real estate is not a levered asset" fame? malraux, who claims to have flipped in 15CPW (doesn't show in the data, though). All we have left is low-level shills like Sneaky Pete and LICC, who dreams of living in Manhattan while looking at it from his bathroom window.
I came here for some information and it seems as if there are a lot of people having conversations with themselves rather than providing good information.
stevejhx, if you posted just to respond to some other guy, why didn't you put your comments in that discussion topic instead of creating a new one for you to be three of the first posts?
How does this message board get to providing good information? Its ok if you think prices are going down or up or down a lot of whatever, say it, but why say it and then get all angry about it and keep saying it over and over just in one morning.
uwcider, judging by your other lame posts you must be a real-estate agent. I'm not angry about anything, but all those people who a year ago said Wall Street was propping up the market now deny that the demise of Wall Street will have any effect on prices.
If there's no income or leverage, what, pray tell, will prop these prices up?
stevejhx you misjudge, even if you do pray and tell.
by the way, so what if all those people said something last year, they are wrong, but why are you having a conversation with yourself? If you had a rebuttal to people from a year ago or Juce recently, why did you post here?
and what makes my posts lame?
Also you didn't answer the question - have you ever been in the military or served your country, or do you just go and protest?
uwcider, if steve didn't argue with himself and post on this board incessantly, steeteasy wouldn’t need half of the servers it has. I'm surprised streeteasy hasn't bounced him as a cost reduction opportunity.
ok, well, 3 of the top discussion topics are about Wall Street, not about real estate, which is why I came here. And should probably go out and play with my daughter now.
uwcider, "pray" has many meanings: pray justice be served.
"if steve didn't argue with himself"
I never argue with myself, JM. I argue with people who don't post a single number, a single theory, a single concept, except to cross their fingers and hope that real estate prices don't fall.
"3 of the top discussion topics are about Wall Street, not about real estate"
Funny that. When Wall Street was ablaze, real-estate was ABOUT Wall Street. Now it's not.
Enjoy your daughter.
alright everyone here
I think there should be a rating system or something that says if the discussion topic is going to be helpful to others or is just some nonsense about irrelevant topics or a repeat of other discussions like 3 or 4 about Wall Street.
I'm off, we'll see if I come back. Some of this is more juvenile than the kids.
uqcider, you chose the 3 wall street posts to comment on, and that's why they're on top. BTW, the point is talking about WS's effect on th emarket. WS had the biggest effect going up, and will clearly have the biggest one going down...
stevejhx said: When Wall Street was ablaze, real-estate was ABOUT Wall Street. Now it's not.
and also was the guy who said that it was better to put money in the S&P than in real estate
with this 300 discussion topic
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/3410-real-estate-is-a-bad-investment
REAL ESTATE IS A BAD INVESTMENT
stevejhx
about 3 months ago
No matter how you slice it, renting is ALWAYS financially more beneficial over time than owning.
Let's make some financial assumptions that are borne out by decades of empirical evidence:
1) Real property prices and rents increase at the rate of income, or 0.7% per year adjusted for inflation.
2) The S&P 500 increases at a real rate of 8.0% per annum.
These being true, it is ALWAYS better to rent property than to buy, if you invest the down payment in the S&P 500.
Ootin -
Had someone put their money into NYC real estate 3 months ago with 20% down, do you think they'd actually be ahead at this point?
"and also was the guy who said that it was better to put money in the S&P than in real estate
with this 300 discussion topic."
That is absolutely, positively, 100% true in the long-term. You - ootin - confuse short-term volatility with short-term illiquidity. You seem to believe that real estate never falls in value because in the past 10 years it hasn't. But in the 10 years before that it swooned.
Owner-occupied residential real estate - what I was discussing - is NOT an "investment" with a "yield." It is a prepaid expense. How on god's green earth do you expect property prices to keep on rising when incomes and leverage don't.
It is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE. If your income goes up by 3% per year, and leverage terms do not change, you can afford precisely 3% more per year for real estate. No more, no less. These 20% per annum increases over the past 10 years are FALSE, and they will be taken back.
If wallstreet contributed to the bubble in NYC RE., then it will contribute to the fall. I can't see how people don't understand this. Every discussion about wallstreet is DIRECTLY related to NYC RE.
Try and remember, you don't have to lose your job, to decide not to buy RE. Just feeling that you "may be layed off", will prevent people with jobs currently to refrain from a future RE purchase.
"if the discussion topic is going to be helpful to others"
That's novel - know in advance what someone else will deem to be "helpful."
What would be helpful to you uwcider? Prognosticating that granite countertops will increase the value of your overpriced condo by 150%?
Or that if you are going to invest a huge amount of money in Manhattan real estate, you need to take into account the risks?
I'm on Wall Street, made a ton of money the past 6 years, and have been doing the rental thing. Although things definitely went way up in price, it didn't make sense for me to buy because to go and buy a studio when I started or a 1 BR when I was a couple years in wouldn't have made sense. Anyway, now I have enough to buy a 2 BR pad, and so I won't get paid much this year in bonus, still prices are softer, so it works out quite evenly and I'm still going to get the apartment I've been wanting even in a down Wall Street market.
uwcider, you nailed it. too many unpleasant people talking to themselves on this board. oh well, now and then there's an interesting thread.
ccdevi: pot - kettle - black
OR
"unpleasant" = "doesn't agree with me."
I think this one sums it up...
"Many Wall Street executives say the current downturn is far worse than other recent slumps"
Eddie, blood in the streets means a great time to buy, right? Or have you never heard of the Rothschilds, one of the world's longest legacies who are still in business on Wall Street.
"A bargain about to be a bigger bargain is no bargain at all".
I think blood in the streets might apply to the stock market. In terms of Manhattan RE, no panic has set in at all. Hell, you still have folks on this board arguing it will go up..