Recent Blog Posts
-
The $4.5 Billion Dollar Bank Run
Nov 07 201111:20 am EDT -
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:26 am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:45 am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:00 am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:36 am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:37 pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:41 am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:32 am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:29 pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:09 pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Still No Vision at Citigroup
Another day, another 6,500 job cuts at Citigroup's investment bank. (For reference, that's pretty much exactly the total number of employees that Salomon Brothers had in the early 1990s. Now, it's just 10% of the investment-banking workforce at Citi.) But for all that the cuts will be big, it's worth pointing out that they're still tactical rather than strategic.
Underperforming divisions are being pared; outperforming divisions like "Citigroup's lucrative transactions-services arm" (no, I'm not entirely clear what that is either) will be spared. This is all pretty standard stuff for any investment bank: if revenues are falling, and you want to keep your payroll down to about 50% of revenues, then you're going to have to fire quite a lot of people.
What we're not seeing here is any indication of how Citi's investment bank fits into Vikram Pandit's vision for Citigroup as a whole. Are some parts more strategically important than others? Is Citi making any long-term bets on the future of the banking industry or even on its own future direction? Is the evolution of Citigroup going to be driven from the top down, by senior executives, or is it rather going to be driven from the bottom up, by dint of whichever groups happen to be making a lot of money at the time?
At the moment, clearly, it's the latter. And hopes for any sign of the former are rapidly evaporating. Cost cutting isn't a strategy, it's a tactic. I wonder whether Pandit really understands that.
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.




