Recent Blog Posts
-
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 -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:47 am 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

Merrill: Losing the Expectations Game
Dennis Berman looks today at Merrill Lynch's earnings per share. With earnings down and the number of shares up, he concludes, reasonably enough, that, in the words of Sanford Bernstein's Brad Hintz, "it's extremely difficult to get to the earnings-per-share number of 2004 anytime soon".
Er, yes. But then again, Merrill's share price is now less than half what it was back in 2004: surely therefore the bank needs to come up with less than half 2004's earnings per share in order to justify its trading level?
It's true that back in 2004, Merrill's shareholders wanted earnings per share of substantially over $4. Right now, by contrast, they'd probably be happy with anything over $0.
Berman seems to think that Merrill CEO John Thain will have failed if he can't get back to 2004's $4.40 EPS. That's not true: Merrill 2008 is not the same as Merrill 2004, and the goals have changed as the share price has fallen. The only reason to want $4.40 EPS right now would be if you were paying something over $50 a share for the stock, and nobody is doing that.
All the same, it does seem that for all Thain is downplaying his bank's prospects on CNBC, he still hasn't mastered the art of playing the expectations game. If the Wall Street Journal still thinks that Merrill should be earning $4.40 a share, there's clearly far too much optimism out there.
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.





