Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm 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.
