Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck Technology

Morgan Stanley Buys E-Trade For $13 Billion (bloomberg.com) 14

Morgan Stanley is buying E-Trade in a $13 billion deal that "will give a powerful Wall Street firm control of a major presence in the world of online brokerages," reports The New York Times. The deal highlights the tech-driven change felt in many markets, from the fixed-income market to the institutional market. Matthew Leising writes via Bloomberg: A report released Thursday by Greenwich Associates found an appetite for "new and better digital products and tools" among fixed-income investors is fueling competition at banks. Kevin McPartland, head of market structure and technology research at Greenwich, said the elimination of trading commissions by many firms including Charles Schwab Corp. has freed investors to choose a brokerage based on services alone. "A lot of it is based on the tools you provide to the end-user, and I'm not sure the institutional market is much different any more," he said in an interview. "Compute power is effectively limitless at this point."

In earlier research, Greenwich asked investors how they choose a top-tier bank, and 18% of respondents said technology services like execution algorithms and analytics were a factor. Breakthroughs in artificial intelligence, machine learning and the ability to mine huge pools of data have radically changed investing, McPartland said. The E*Trade deal, announced Thursday, helps Morgan Stanley add clients who are less wealthy than its traditional customers, but a state-of-the-art platform for investors was another draw. Morgan Stanley Chief Executive Officer James Gorman cited E*Trade's "innovation in technology" as a reason for the acquisition, according to a statement.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Morgan Stanley Buys E-Trade For $13 Billion

Comments Filter:
  • by bobstreo ( 1320787 ) on Thursday February 20, 2020 @07:57PM (#59748726)

    because it probably should be very closely examined.

  • Its an all stock transaction. No one is writing a check for real money. I'm not a financial person, so I wonder if this dilutes the value of all of the purchasers stocks.
  • Back in the late 90s, Citibank acquired a bunch of unrelated financial businesses in an attempt to get as big as possible, and as involved in customers' financial lives as possible. Maybe that's what's driving this? The only other thing I can think of is acquiring the customer base so they can try to sell them financial advice and asset management. Trade commissions have been set to $0 everywhere now, so they're sure not making money off everyone's stock trading. I think the only way to make money is hawkin

    • by _merlin ( 160982 )

      You can make money in multiple ways. You get interest on the money deposited in margin accounts. You can provide broker markets on derivatives, and then just net them off to securitise them with exchange-traded derivatives. You can offer your own derivatives to customers, and price them how you want since you're the only possible counterparty.

  • by Snotnose ( 212196 ) on Thursday February 20, 2020 @08:43PM (#59748856)
    Haven't we learned yet? Too big to fail is a problem, not a feature.

    See also Boeing, the big banking companies, the cable companies, etc etc etc.
  • by fred911 ( 83970 ) on Friday February 21, 2020 @01:15AM (#59749534) Journal

    means the broker is making profit from either order flow or a spread. Either way, unless the buyer is placing a limit order it's not getting filled on an inside market. IE, it's not filled at the best available price in
    front of the broker order. Additionally, if the order is filled on a limit order, chances are the buyer doesn't have the freshest data on price as the broker has.

      If an institution can purchase a security cheaper than is listed or offered on a market, the market is no longer transparent and hence is designed to fuck retail investors/buyers.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The advice since years ago has been to use limit order when trading. The only reason not to use one is when you want to trade quickly and are willing to waste some money. Spreads are very tiny these days. If you are buying stocks to hold them you don't need to stress this. Only day trades care. Small spreads mean a transparent market. High speed trading does improve some things.
      • by fred911 ( 83970 )

        'only reason not to use one is when you want to trade quickly'

        Most retail investors don't place limit orders with their brokers, they trust the broker will place the order and provide the best available price. The only reason spreads are thin on a listed security is due to the fact that the specialist must fill any bid or ask for size that's not from his account first. Hence scalpers assure this.

        On 'transparent' markets there is fragmentation that is supposed to be balanced by market makers. The pr

  • God damn Ferengis!

The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.

Working...