Jump to content

Talk:Salomon Brothers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is "Liar's Poker" reference relevant?

[edit]

I think the Liar's Poker section should be merged with the "Liar's Poker" article. The text on the Solomon Brother's page is a detailed discussion of the book. Just summarize and link to the book's article. Furthermore, I take issue with the phrase "Lewis portrays the 1980s as an era where government deregulation allowed less-than-scrupulous people on Wall Street to take advantage of others' ignorance". I haven't seen any mention of deregulation of thrifts in the book. He does, however, explain in great detail how the Fed's decision to allow interest rates to float increased volatility in the bond market. This is not an example of "deregulation". This is the Federal Reserve control the economy.

Solomon Brothers did not collapse in 1 week

[edit]

Solomon Brothers was not affected by the sub prime crisis. It is no longer a public company. The article itself states that it was bought by Citi in 1998.

Why did Salomon Brothers collapse in just 1 week?

[edit]

I think the reason of Salomon Brothers's collapses is very important topic.

This is a company, which ever passed the great depression, but why it finished by sub prime mortgage crisis? Many people should be confused as me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.147.35.104 (talk) 06:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Liar's Poker

[edit]

To get an insight into the the Salomon Bros. I recommend the readers to read Liar's Poker by Micheal Lewis, where he shartes his experince woking with the company in 80s.

Yes, this is very true and I have inserted a section into the article describing this non-fiction semi-autobiographical book in more detail. Ivankinsman (talk) 11:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The section on Liar's Poker reads like it was written by a 12 year-old. Bad summary, inconsistent tenses, weak structure. FYI. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.237.61 (talk) 09:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cul-de-sac redirection

[edit]

7 World Trade Center is also called the Salomon Brothers Building and is often referred to as such in the media. Yet, Salomon Brothers Building redirects to this article about the Salomon Brothers instead of 7 WTC. In this article there is no mention of the World Trade Center or 7 WTC. 87.234.117.192 (talk) 17:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've found out how to fix this and did. 87.234.117.192 (talk) 00:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

article virtually silent on years 1910-1990

[edit]

also, seemingly passing mention of Salomon dominance (along with NYC-based boutique firm, Lepercq, de Neuflize & Co. Incorporated) in creating the first mortgage-backed security (public or private). For some years from the mid 1970s into the 1980s (until about 1985?), these two firms were virtually the only players in the nascent MBS market. almost all were private placements mostly to state pension funds (public employees, teachers, etc.)...primarly through "GNMA pass-through certificates" (sale of assets) and "pay-through bonds" (debt offerings by thrifts (S&Ls and savings banks); home builders; and mortgage bankers). all this was prior to the explosion of the MBS (and CMO and CDO and other asset-backed securities) market that is well known today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.2.68 (talk) 01:32, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no mention of John Gutfreund's admittance of involvement in treasury bond scandal and Buffet as interim chair

[edit]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5037/is_199108/ai_n18310774 - site provides teaser to 1991 article in the economist - "A STRANGE blend of alarm mixed with hope prevails at 7 World Trade Center as Salomon Brothers struggles to survive the biggest crisis in its 81-year history. The chairman (John Gutfreund), president (Thomas Strauss) and vice-chairman (John Meriwether), who admitted on August 14th to having sat on evidence of fiddling in the firm's Treasury-bond department, have resigned. Two others have been fired.

"A new chairman and chief executive, Warren Buffett, Salomon's largest private shareholder, has swept in from the plains, vowing that he will leave as soon as he has swept out the ..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.2.68 (talk) 01:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Warren Buffett biography The Snowball describes this time in great detail (chapter ~49). I might do something about it if I have a lot of time on my hands... otherwise, I recommend the book if you want to know more. -M.Nelson (talk) 05:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Big Swining Dicks

[edit]

If memory serves right, the "big swinging dicks" according to "Liars Poker" are salesman, not traders as stated in the wiki article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdrumstik (talkcontribs) 02:32, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Liar's Poker

[edit]

Why does the book Liar's Poker (one of several sources cited in the article) have its own section giving a detailed description of the author and his book? This seems like promotion and POV pushing to me. Comments?--KeithbobTalk 18:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since there doesn't seem to be any objections I'm going to make some changes to align the section with WP:WEIGHT and WP:NPOV.--KeithbobTalk 12:49, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The entire section is unreferenced and unverifiable and way too long. Devoting several paragraphs to one source and featuring that source with special section creates undue weight and POV. I have removed the following content on that basis:

  • In the work, Lewis portrays the 1980s as an era where government deregulation allowed unscrupulous people on Wall Street to take advantage of others' ignorance, and thus grow extremely wealthy.He traces the rise of Salomon Brothers through mortgage trading, when deregulation by the U.S. Congress suddenly allowed Savings and Loans managers to start selling mortgages as bonds. Lewis Ranieri, a Salomon Brothers' employee, had created the only viable mortgage trading section, so when the law passed, it became a windfall for the firm. However, Lewis believed that Salomon Brothers became too complacent in their new-found wealth and took to unwise expansion and massive displays of conspicuous consumption. When the rest of Wall Street wised up to the market, the firm lost its advantage. Likewise, Lewis argued that Salomon Brothers improperly tried to "professionalize" itself. As he notes, Ranieri and his fellow traders lacked college degrees; one of the traders only had an eighth-grade education. Despite this lack of credentials, the group was extremely successful financially. However, the firm, in order to improve its "image," began to hire graduates of prestigious business and economics programs (a group which included Lewis himself). Because of his uncouth manners, Ranieri (along with many of his Italian colleagues) was eventually fired. By relying more on diplomas than on raw trading skill, Lewis argued, Salomon crumbled as the quality of newer recruits was poorly relative to Ranieri and the older generation of traders. After mortgage bonds, Lewis examined junk bonds and how Michael Milken built junk bonds from nothing to a multi-trillion-dollar market. Because the demand for junk bonds was higher than its supply, Lewis argues that corporate raiders began to attack otherwise sound companies in order to create more junk bonds. Lewis remarked in his conclusion that the 1980s marked a time where anyone could make millions, provided they were at the right place at the right time, as exemplified by Ranieri's success.--KeithbobTalk 00:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well why don't we just integrate that content into other parts of the article? Lewis is a pretty darn reliable source on SB, right? At some stage I will just rewrite that a bit into the history section. Any objections?The Sound and the Fury (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

U.S. Treasury Deputy Assistant Secretary Mike Basham goes to a English footballer, surely not right. --Finn Bjørklid (talk) 15:44, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a huge portion of the company history missing

[edit]

It would be interesting to know the history of the company after the founding and before 1980.RichardBond (talk) 07:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]