April 2006

Email a Friend

  • All fields are compulsory


To include more than one recipient, please separate each email address with a semi-colon ';'





Add Your Comment


  • All fields are compulsory
  • All comments are subject to editorial review as we are subject to the same regulations adhered to in publishing our own content. For this reason, your comment may not be live immediately, or may not be published.






I have read and agree to the Terms and Conditions





Abigail Hofman: On HSBC's recent reorginization



Abigail Hofman

Deutsche Bank: Akermann, Anshu Jain | Marks & Spencer: Chairman Stuart Rose's tomatoes | Citigroup Chairman Sandy Weill's sweater
                                                                                                                         More on Anshu Jain
                                                                                                               More on Josef Ackermann
                                                                                                                        More on Sandy Weill
                                                                                                                        More on Stuart Rose

HSBC is a fabulous institution that hardly ever seems to put a foot wrong – it has just reported record 2005 pre-tax profits of $21 billion. Except, that is, when it comes to investment banking.

I raised one perfectly shaped eyebrow when I read that the co-head of HSBC’s corporate, investment banking and markets (CIB) division, John Studzinski, (recruited from Morgan Stanley nearly three years ago, no doubt on a king’s ransom) was to become a “special adviser” to chairman elect Stephen Green. In other words Studs was “toast”.

But my rather flabby jaw dropped precipitously when, several weeks later, a “reorganization of investment banking” was announced. Lo and behold, Studzinski was to remain as co-head of the global investment bank alongside Stuart Gulliver (who is incisively described by one wag as “the brighter side of solid”).

What an embarrassing volte-face. Do I perhaps detect the stamping of bespoke Lobb loafers by an elegant American? For it would appear Studzinski is a controversial figure.

Ask around about Studs and some unfair and uncharitable comments rain down: “grossly over-promoted... career fatigued... only now really interested in charity work and a knighthood.” Now this seems harsh on Studs. He built a great reputation in his time at Morgan Stanley, and you don’t lose your touch overnight. And he’s hardly the first person to find out that the job of transforming a commercial bank’s investment banking ambitions into reality is one of the toughest assignments of all.

But even the digs from patently jealous competitors seem quite bland when compared with the words of a female colleague. She spat in to the phone: “Studzinski has an insatiable appetite for personal publicity. He has to be the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral.” Now this applies to a few other bankers I know, but I wouldn’t want it as my own epitaph.

But when it comes to the “world’s local bank”, Studs isn’t the only one who gets it in the neck. “HSBC treats its investment bank like a bastard child,” another source harrumphed. “They indulge it periodically and then hand it back to the nanny.” One major client goes further: “Investment banking is just not in the HSBC DNA,” he insists. “Its profit contribution will always be relatively meagre in the larger scheme of things.”

I disagree. HSBC cannot afford to ignore this revenue stream. In the past, lumbering commercial banks such as Barclays and Deutsche have had the vision and patience to build successful investment banking operations. So why can’t HSBC? The bank is actually halfway through a five-year plan to build up this business. But the results, it has to be said, are not stunning: despite spending millions in the past few years to hire investment bankers, 2005’s M&A league table performance was limp. Recently announced roles for Generali, E.ON and Mittal Steel are good news, although detractors mutter about conflicts and “mandates by default”. Indeed profits from the whole CIB division fell last year against a backdrop of excellent market conditions.

  Page 1 of 2  Next | Single Page