Wall Street is full of the young and the jobless

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#1
Business Times - 23 Nov 2011

Wall Street is full of the young and the jobless


Headcount of financiers aged 20-34 falls 25% from 3Q08 to 3Q11

(NEW YORK) Steve Ferdman celebrated getting a recent job offer from Credit Suisse in the usual Wall Street fashion. Over expensive oysters and dark rum cocktails at a trendy Manhattan restaurant with his parents, he toasted landing the full-time position after working six months as a consultant without benefits.

A week later, Mr Ferdman, 28, sat alone at the same place and ordered a gin and tonic to lament getting laid off by the bank, for the second time since 2008. When he told the bartender about his misfortune, his next round was on the house.

'I did everything right. I came into work every day, I put in long hours, and I still got punched in the face,' Mr Ferdman said. 'People shouldn't want to work in this industry anymore.'

Being young on Wall Street once meant having it all: style, smarts, and too much money to spend wisely. Now, 20-somethings in the finance industry are losing both cash and cachet.

Three years after the global financial crisis nearly brought Wall Street firms to the brink, the nation's largest banks are again struggling. As profits wane, layoffs have claimed thousands of jobs, and those still employed have seen their compensation shrink. These problems are set against the morale-crushing backdrop of the Occupy Wall Street movement, which has made a villain of a once-lionised industry.

Much of the burden of Wall Street's latest retrenchment has fallen on young financiers. The number of investment bank and brokerage employees between ages 20 and 34 fell 25 per cent from the third quarter of 2008 to the same period of 2011, a loss of 110,000 jobs from layoffs, attrition and voluntary departures.

By comparison, industry headcount dropped 17 per cent in the same period, according to an analysis by The New York Times of data for New York City provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The number of staffers older than 55 decreased only 11 per cent.

Young financiers have experienced setbacks in the past. Bankers and traders who rushed wide-eyed to Wall Street in the halcyon days of the 1980s were waylaid by the stock market crash of Oct 19, 1987, known as Black Monday. Then they got pummelled in 2000 by the dot-com collapse and the recession that followed.

But unlike previous downturns, today's doldrums are here to stay, experts say.

'A lot of the positions that are being cut right now aren't coming back,' said Leslie Hild, a vice-president with the recruiting firm Right Management. 'It's an emotional roller coaster for almost everyone.'

The industry's imbroglio has also affected the plans of undergraduate and graduate students at the nation's top colleges.

At Harvard Business School, where a relatively high 39 per cent of this year's graduates went into finance, compared with 34 per cent last year, there has been a 'heck of a lot more anxiety' about next year's hiring season, according to William Sahlman, a professor of business administration there.

'People used to think of some of these organisations, like a Morgan Stanley or a Goldman Sachs, as safe career bets,' he said. 'Those firms are not going away, but they're going to hire half the people they hired before.'

Any sympathy for Wall Street's aspiring rainmakers - its huddled masses yearning to get rich - should be tempered by the fact that financial sector recessions often deal a soft blow. Laid-off financial workers typically receive large severance packages, which include the use of outplacement services. During their job hunt, many can draw on substantial savings built off past bonuses, on top of collecting unemployment. But for those laid-off Wall Street workers whose golden tickets have vanished, the disillusionment is real.

Sam Meek, 27, who was laid off in September when his Connecticut hedge fund decided to downsize, used to spend US$500 on charity dinners and lavish golf outings. Now, it's home- cooked meals and beer on the sofa. Recently, Mr Meek and his roommate, another unemployed banker who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to jeopardise his job search, sat together in the kitchen filing for unemployment and drinking a bottle of champagne.

'I'm scraping by right now,' he said. -- NYT

My Value Investing Blog: http://sgmusicwhiz.blogspot.com/
Reply
#2
(23-11-2011, 04:19 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: [b]... sat together in the kitchen filing for unemployment and drinking a bottle of champagne.

'I'm scraping by right now,' he said. -- NYT

While the rest of us get wasted on Tigers, unemployed bankers get wasted on Dom. Scrapping by seems to be a different definition.
Reply
#3
(23-11-2011, 08:48 AM)LionFlyer Wrote: While the rest of us get wasted on Tigers, unemployed bankers get wasted on Dom. Scrapping by seems to be a different definition.

But we must not forget - in some countries wine is cheaper than water! Tongue
My Value Investing Blog: http://sgmusicwhiz.blogspot.com/
Reply
#4
(23-11-2011, 09:32 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: But we must not forget - in some countries wine is cheaper than water! Tongue

My guess is that's quite difficult for champagne. Champagne producers very cleverly used legalese to create a halo effect and prevent other sparkling wine producers from competing with them.

Unless the writer used the term very loosely to describe sparkling wine.

Wikipedia Wrote:Champagne appellation law only allows grapes grown according to appellation rules in specifically designated plots within the appellation to be used in the production of Champagne. Through international treaty, national law or quality-control/consumer protection related local regulations, most countries limit the use of the term to only those wines that come from the Champagne appellation. In Europe, this principle is enshrined in the European Union by Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) status. Other countries, such as the United States, maintain a legal structure that allows domestic producers of sparkling wine to use the term "Champagne" under limited circumstances.[3] The majority[citation needed] of US-produced sparkling wines do not use the term "champagne" on their labels and some states, such as Oregon, ban producers in their states from using the term.[4]


Reply
#5
not only wine is cheaper In countries like russia a bottle of vodka can cost less than $5. Usually alcohol tax is very low in many countries or non-existent .. except in singapore. Can you believe a can of tiger beer is cheaper to drink in thailand than in singapore which I find to be an embarassment
Reply
#6
(24-11-2011, 09:11 AM)sgd Wrote: not only wine is cheaper In countries like russia a bottle of vodka can cost less than $5. Usually alcohol tax is very low in many countries or non-existent .. except in singapore. Can you believe a can of tiger beer is cheaper to drink in thailand than in singapore which I find to be an embarassment

Hi,
Yes, when we were in Peking about 3 years ago, a big bottle of CHING TAO cost only Sing 50 cents. i were shocked. Imagine beer from CHING TAO all the way to Peking still cost so little. i suspected the beer was subsidised by their YAMEN. Ours try all sorts of ways to "take" from your pockets. Or to give you as little benefit as possible.

Example:
(Another thing i will never forget.) Quite long ago, when we were back from an oversea trip we were allowed to buy 6*330ml can of any duty-free beer. Now we are allowed only 3*330ml can of beer. How petty can you get? How much can PAPAYA really "save"? It's as if everyone return from oversea will buy beer. From all this "small little things", Singaporeans should realise how PAPAYA really treated us. Don't hope anything bigger from PAPAYA. FAT HOPE PAPAYA will give you. Squeeze you like making lemonade juice. That's how.

And at Peking our tour guide treated us to beers at every meals. Of course we gave him a "handsome farewell tip". Do you think our tour guides can treat tourists to beer at every meal? Go and ask our PAPAYA.
WB:-

1) Rule # 1, do not lose money.
2) Rule # 2, refer to # 1.
3) Not until you can manage your emotions, you can manage your money.

Truism of Investments.
A) Buying a security is buying RISK not Return
B) You can control RISK (to a certain level, hopefully only.) But definitely not the outcome of the Return.

NB:-
My signature is meant for psychoing myself. No offence to anyone. i am trying not to lose money unnecessary anymore.
Reply
#7
(24-11-2011, 10:05 AM)Temperament Wrote:
(24-11-2011, 09:11 AM)sgd Wrote: not only wine is cheaper In countries like russia a bottle of vodka can cost less than $5. Usually alcohol tax is very low in many countries or non-existent .. except in singapore. Can you believe a can of tiger beer is cheaper to drink in thailand than in singapore which I find to be an embarassment

Hi,
Yes, when we were in Peking about 3 years ago, a big bottle of CHING TAO cost only Sing 50 cents. i were shocked. Imagine beer from CHING TAO all the way to Peking still cost so little. i suspected the beer was subsidised by their YAMEN. Ours try all sorts of ways to "take" from your pockets. Or to give you as little benefit as possible.

Example:
(Another thing i will never forget.) Quite long ago, when we were back from an oversea trip we were allowed to buy 6*330ml can of any duty-free beer. Now we are allowed only 3*330ml can of beer. How petty can you get? How much can PAPAYA really "save"? It's as if everyone return from oversea will buy beer. From all this "small little things", Singaporeans should realise how PAPAYA really treated us. Don't hope anything bigger from PAPAYA. FAT HOPE PAPAYA will give you. Squeeze you like making lemonade juice. That's how.

And at Peking our tour guide treated us to beers at every meals. Of course we gave him a "handsome farewell tip". Do you think our tour guides can treat tourists to beer at every meal? Go and ask our PAPAYA.

When it comes to citizens, PAPAYAs are 斤斤计较. The classic is "how much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court, or restaurant?" Confused

When it comes to foreigners, they are 慷慨大方, to the extent of being made the fool.



Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)