If trading revenue down again, shouldn’t bank lay off more Trading Managing Directors? Shouldn’t traders hold accountable for their P&L? Shouldn’t those expensive trading MDs who don’t make money be fired? Back when trading make money, only traders benefit. But when trading incurred big loss, entire bank suffered and other division paid. Not to mention many trading managing directors are here because of nepotism rather than business results. If they can’t bring more revenue, why don’t bank replace them with cheaper hardworking Directors?
48 replies (most recent on top)
After rates cut happen, Q3 trading earning will be better?
Try harder. Time to get rid of all those overpriced trading managing directors doing politics not work.
Don’t give up. What you want will come true.
I like your persistence/motivation and the fact that you have a goal.
Keep it up. You will reach your goal.
Bank of America equities trading down more than any of its competitors. No excuse for not laying off expensive incompetent equities trading managing directors.
DB’s cut, Citi’s earning all pointed to one thing: cut should start from equities trading. Look how much Citi’s equities trading down YTD. I bet BAML is not much better
B should be ashamed that the stock is under $30. Wells Fargo robbed people blind and are still well ahead of BAC. The senior leaders should be embarrassed. Stop the corporate window dressing and CSR b/s value and comp your people...the ones who are doing the hard work.
Why wait until Q3 earning? Bank management should start to take action after Q2 earning next week. Trading managing directors need to create more revenue. Otherwise, why do they get paid so much? Their compensation should link to their P&L. There are too many Trading Managing Directors good at playing politics not making money in the bank.