Trader’s Narrative

Executive compensation is one of the glaring issues at the heart of the financial crisis. We haven’t even come close to dealing with it in a meaningful way as the powerful Wall St. lobby moved quickly to throw obstacles in the path of any regulation or even discussion of the matter.

The most common argument that is trotted out to defend the obscenely disproportionate compensation packages on Wall St. is that the bonuses, salaries and stock options are needed to keep ‘talent’. But no one is able to ask how ‘talent’ that nukes the global financial system and brings down once mighty investment banks is worth even a shiny dime.

A look at the global bank CEO compensation also throws cold water on this non-sequitur:

Source: Reuters

The only non-US bank that approaches lofty compensation levels is Santander. Since the graph above shows the compensation and the market capitalization of each bank, I thought it would be interesting to show the relative compensation, so here is a graph of that:

There is incredible variation in executive compensation around the world with many very large banks being run by CEOs who are paid next to nothing (compared to US counterparts). So are they stupid to stick around? or is the North American mindset wrong?

I’m not really in favor of a government cap on compensation. But regulation is needed to bring salaries and bonuses in line with performance. And they clearly are not right now. The industry itself nor the market is going to deal with the agency issue at the heart of the matter. Shareholders theoretically are in control but in reality, there is so many layers of bureaucracy insulating them and the compensation committees appointed by the CEOs that no one really believes in this free market fairy tale anymore. A third objective party needs to step in and rescue Wall St. from themselves for the good of all.

Due diligence has many meanings depending on context. If you pressed me for a definition within finance, I would say it is:

The process of investigation undertaken by an party to gather material information on actual or potential risks involved in a financial transaction or relationship.

If you suffered losses as a result of Madoff’s fraud, then this lesson is extremely expensive. If not, it is probably the biggest gift Madoff has given the world.

As an investor or trader, you have to perform due diligence not on just trades or investments, but also on your broker or prop firm, your bank, your accountant, etc. Each link in the chain is vital. Never assume anything. Check and verify every little detail. As this most recent event has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt, you have to take personal responsibility and can not have the SEC or FBI do it for you.

Madoff’s Ponzi scheme has snared not just wealthy individuals but very large instititutions like Nomura, BNP Paribas, Neue Privat Bank, Santander, UniCredit, Lombard Odier, Royal Bank of Scotland as well as dozens and dozens of fund of funds that allocated portions of their assets under management to Madoff. These institutions supposedly have whole departments full of lawyers and accountants who are given the task of due diligence. Each and everyone of them failed their fiduciary responsibility and will probably be sued by those who experienced losses.

Just out of curiosity, I looked the website for Optimal Investment Services, the hedge fund arm of Banco Santander. Here is a snippet:

Optimal clients were exposed to the tune of 2.33 billion euros or $3 billion US dollars, according to a report from Bloomberg.

What sort of due diligence did they perform exactly? one that didn’t flag a potential problem with Madoff being the broker, custodian and investment manager, all rolled into one? one which missed the fact that a tiny one person accounting firm did their annual audit?

A lot of heads in “due diligence” and “risk management” departments are going to roll.

Santander’s takeover of Sovereign Bancorp is a great example of the smart money vs. the dumb money. Santander has had Sovereign in its sights for a long time and had been rebuffed by them. But Santander is now using this crisis as a catalyst to buy up the remainder of Sovereign it doesn’t already own.

Emilio Botín, the head of Santander, has banking in his blood. His family has had control of Santander for four generations. He took over a staid, lazy bank and took it to the top position in Spain. Not content with that, he then started to expand outward. He’s already 71 and after his retirement the family legacy is expected to continue with his daughter, Ana Patricia Botín taking over.

Santander is already one of the world’s largest banks and earlier this year Euromoney named it as the world’s best bank for 2008. It has operations in Europe, as well as in England and Latin America. This new acquisition brings Santander into the US.

Here is Botin schooling the rest of the banking world in his thick Spanish accent on the 3 important principles of banking - the video goes wonky towards the end but the sound is good, so listen up Wall St.!

Got that?

Keep in mind that the strongest banks in the world are in Canada (as a group).