Here They Go Again: “Morgan Stanley Smith Barney”

MSDW_MarkOur large financial institutions simply refuse to learn the lesson that large, M&A-driven investment shops, and retail investment firms, cannot comfortably coexist. There are simply too many inherent conflicts of interest, and most so-called “firewalls” are observed mostly in the breach. Deregulation, and most important, Graham-Leach-Bliley, removed the last remnant of common sense in this arena: you just can’t mix oil and water. 

MS_MarkNevertheless, the brilliant minds that brought you “Morgan Stanley Dean Witter” — a merger that cost billions, that cost untold millions to “brand,” and then just a few years later cost shareholders untold millions more to “un-brand” — now bring you “Morgan Stanley Smith Barney“.

MSSB_markGee, and to think, they could call it “Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Smith Barney & Co.” Hey, why didn’t I think of that?

2 responses to “Here They Go Again: “Morgan Stanley Smith Barney”

  1. The name does not suggest a feeling of confidence, just a bunch of WASP-y names.

    Fuuny how JP Morgan’s name still exists at so many firms.

    How about “Overpaid executives at a firm TOO BIG TO FAIL” or just TBTF for short.

    Wall Street works better when there are many firms competing for fewer dollars.

    More Firms means more jobs. Smaller firms don’t move to Bermuda or Dublin for Taxes.

  2. Paul & Joan Fleisig

    The Pirates of Wall Street are reassured that Democrats can be bought just as easily as Republicans. They’ve won the Treasury! No FDR nor TR, no “Bully Pulpit” from this administration or congress. Any “new” regulations will be fart, farce and pound the table for the camera. “God Bless America”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s