Banks in the firing line (The Economist)
In the firing line
Oct 4th 2002
From The Economist Global Agenda
&&&
In a week when prosecutors have finally charged
the former chief financial
officer of Enron, New York’s feisty attorney-general,
Eliot Spitzer, is
joining forces with the Securities and Exchange Commission
to root out
corporate wrongdoing in America. Investment banks beware
AP
Spitzer sues again
THE might of Wall Street is under attack from all
sides. In filing charges
alleging fraud, money laundering and conspiracy against
Andrew Fastow, the
former chief financial officer of Enron and the first
of the company’s
“inner circle” of senior executives to be indicted, federal
prosecutors
have also pointed the finger at Merrill Lynch. A criminal
complaint, filed
in a Houston court on October 2nd, alleges that the investment
bank helped
Enron to conceal debt and hide its true financial position.
One of the
charges against Mr Fastow, who was given bail of $5m,
involves a Nigerian
company which Enron is said to have sold to Merrill and
then repurchased in
order, it is claimed, to inflate Enron’s earnings. The
transaction was a
“sham”, say prosecutors, in which Merrill assumed no risk.
Such allegations, which have been vehemently denied
by Merrill, are an
example of the whirlwind of claim and counterclaim that
is engulfing Wall
Street’s finest and many of its former clients. On the
day that Mr Fastow
gave himself up to FBI agents, a Congessional committee
was chipping away
at the reputations of Goldman Sachs and two other investment
banks. The
House Financial Services Committee accused Goldman, Credit
Suisse First
Boston and Salomon Smith Barney, part of Citigroup, of
making preferential
allocations of shares in sought-after initial public offerings
(IPOs) to
their favoured clients, so that the latter could make
a quick profit by
selling the shares on. In return, the banks are said to
have received
lucrative banking mandates. Among the executives named
was Kenneth Lay, the
former chief executive of Enron. The committee concluded
that the practice,
known as “spinning”, had not only led to the false pricing
of IPOs but
had harmed ordinary investors. “There is no equity in
the equities
market,” lamented the committee’s chairman, Michael Oxley,
the
Republican member for Ohio.
Congress is not the only body making accusations
about the cosy
relationship between investment banks and their clients.
On September 30th,
Eliot Spitzer, New York's attorney-general, filed a lawsuit
seeking that
once high-flying telecoms executives return over $1.5
billion in profits
allegedly obtained illegally thanks to their links with
bankers at Salomon
Smith Barney. Most of the money was made when the executives
sold stock in
their own companies that was inflated by overly optimistic
reports from
Salomon’s recently departed star analyst, Jack Grubman.
The executives
also pocketed some $28m when they sold shares they were
allocated in IPOs
of “hot” technology clients of Salomon's, allegedly as
a payback for
giving investment-banking business to Salomon.
The executives involved include Bernie Ebbers, the
disgraced former boss
of WorldCom, which filed for bankruptcy in July and which
has admitted
overstating profits by $4 billion; Philip Anschutz, former
chairman and
founder of Qwest Communications; and Joseph Nacchio, Qwest’s
former chief
executive. Neither Salomon nor Mr Grubman were named,
but correspondence
that embarrasses them has been included in the evidence.
In one e-mail, Mr
Grubman wrote to the head of research, explaining why
certain stocks had
not been downgraded: “Most of our [investment] banking
clients are going
to zero and you know I wanted to downgrade them months
ago but got huge
pushback from banking."
&&&T and United Technologies, “as part
of our continuing effort to
assure that our corporate governance reflects best practices.”
On the
same day, Citigroup announced that Michael Masin, currently
vice-chairman
of Verizon, a regional telecoms firm in the north-eastern
United States and
a Citigroup director, would become chief operating officer.
Mr Masin is to
chair a committee reviewing Citigroup's business practices.
Citigroup is also in negotiation with both Mr Spitzer
and the Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) over new arrangements that
would remove
conflicts of interest inherent in having analysts and
investment bankers
under the same roof. The SEC worries in particular that
analysts are being
rewarded on the basis of investment-banking mandates they
help their bank
to win rather than the quality of their research.
Citigroup is reported to have already offered to
create a separate company
to house its investment-banking research, though this
would still be within
the Citigroup empire. The spin-off would serve mainly
institutional
investors as well as the small number of retail investors
who trade through
Salomon. Its analysts would no longer be allowed to attend
“pitch”
meetings with investment bankers. Citigroup has resisted
making any changes
unless and until they can be imposed on other Wall Street
firms as well.
CSFB, which is under scrutiny itself over the alleged
allocation of shares
to “friends of Frank”--Frank Quattrone, its star technology
banker--is known to be willing to go along with such changes.
Merrill
Lynch, which has already made some changes to the way
its analysts are
organised and paid, and which has paid a $100m fine following
an earlier
investigation by Mr Spitzer, is opposed to further reform.
In bringing his latest charges, Mr Spitzer has not
only upset Wall
Street’s big banks. He has also upstaged the SEC and its
chairman, Harvey
Pitt, a former securities lawyer who stands accused of
being too soft on
the big firms that used to count among his clients. The
SEC, along with the
New York Stock Exchange and the National Association of
Securities Dealers,
Wall Street’s self-regulatory organisation, have been
looking into IPO
spinning for years, but have yet to bring any actions.
This may now change.
Messrs Pitt and Spitzer have patched up their differences
and are joining
forces to press for changes in the way investment banks
go about their
business. Egged on by Mr Spitzer, his opposite numbers
in other states have
also divided up their investigations into the big investment
banks: Utah is
looking into Goldman Sachs, Texas J. P. Morgan Chase,
and Alabama Lehman
Brothers, for instance. This will not please those who
believe that the
zest for re-regulation is getting out of hand. Siren voices
including that
of Bill Harrison, chief executive of J. P. Morgan Chase,
are beginning to
warn that a raft of new regulations and moves to break
up the industry
could shackle investment banks at a time when their profits
are already
under strain.
Nevertheless, reform of how research is conducted
by investment banks now
seems inevitable. There are few examples on Wall Street--Sanford
Bernstein
is one--of truly independent research houses. It is notoriously
difficult
to get investors to pay for research, especially since
academic studies
suggest that it is extremely difficult to beat the market
consistently.
Still, observers increasingly believe that the collapse
of the bull market
will lead to the break-up of financial “one-stop-shops”
such as
Citigroup, because no firm will want to risk the sort
of
conflict-of-interest lawsuits to which it is now being
subjected.
Quite apart from any fine, Citigroup’s share price
has fallen by nearly
40% this year, despite healthy operating profits. Even
if it does not come
to break-ups, it is hard to see analysts retaining the
status they enjoyed
in the late 1990s. Briefly masters of the universe, they
will return to
being the backroom geeks they once were.
|