| Author |
Message |
    
shoshannah
Citizen
Username: Shoshannah
Post Number: 684
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:03 pm: | 
|
Have you seen the news stories about the bond analyst who was fired for printing this picture on the cover of his latest report?
The person involved is an acquaintance of mine, and I am wondering whether the bank is over-reacting or not. What do you think? Here's the Bloomberg story:
Bank of America Fires Head of High-Yield Research After Report
Jan. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Bank of America Corp.'s securities unit fired Andrew Susser, a top-ranked analyst and head of its high- yield bond research group, after his face appeared superimposed on a woman's body in a report sent to clients.
The 56-page report includes a front-page photograph doctored to make it appear as though Susser, wearing a black dress and high heels, is getting swept over the threshold of a hotel suite by another man. Susser, who covered the lodging and gaming industries from New York, approved publishing the report about the lodging industry entitled ``Checking In,'' according to people familiar with the matter, who declined to be identified.
Customers who follow Susser's work said his dismissal on Jan. 10 may hurt the firm's efforts to win underwriting and trading business. Last year, Banc of America Securities LLC won high-yield underwriting deals from companies he covered, including part of a $1.3 billion sale for a unit of casino operator Wynn Resorts Ltd. and half of MGM Mirage Inc.'s $550 million offering.
`'It's a big loss,'' said Thomas Parker, who manages $2.6 billion in high-yield debt, including gaming bonds, for Barclays Global Investors in San Francisco. ``He's definitely one of the top gaming analysts. Since we play gaming bonds, we want to know what he has to say.''
Susser, 39, declined to comment when reached by telephone at his home in New York. Banc of America Securities spokesman Jeff Hershberger declined to discuss the reasons for Susser's firing.
No. 1 Ranking
Susser topped Institutional Investor magazine's ranking of high-yield analysts for lodging and gaming for the past three years.
Banc of America Securities was the fourth-biggest U.S. underwriter of high-yield debt last year, up from sixth in 2003 and eighth in 2000, data compiled by Bloomberg show. The firm's share of the $136 billion market for high-yield sales doubled to 11 percent last year from 5.4 percent in 2000.
``He's a very good analyst and my casino analyst who gets his reports happens to think very highly of him,'' said Harry Resis, who helps manage about $550 million in high-yield bonds at Henderson Global Investors Ltd. in Chicago. ``He's obviously one of the top guys in high-yield research.''
Susser also covered Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc., the world's second-largest hotel operator by sales, Host Marriott LP, a unit of Host Marriott Corp., and Donald Trump's Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc.
Susser left the firm after almost six years, Hershberger said. Banc of America Securities, which is based in New York, named Larry Bland to succeed him as head of high-yield research. Bland has been running the firm's high-yield research on health-care companies.
|
shoshannah
Citizen
Username: Shoshannah
Post Number: 685
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:04 pm: |
|
Oops. Photo didn't copy. You can view it here:
http://www.beggingtodiffer.com/archives/analyst/bfm10d.pdf
|
Jane C.
Citizen
Username: Janegc
Post Number: 2
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:07 pm: |
|
I don't find it particularly offensive as a stand alone, but it's an odd image for a business document. A case of a smart person doing a dumb thing.
Not businesslike, not funny, not sexy. What was he thinking? |
Chris Prenovost
Citizen
Username: Chris_prenovost
Post Number: 274
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:09 pm: |
|
The photo is questionable, but no reason to fire someone.
Either the bank is overeacting, or they had some other reason for firing him, and used this as an excuse.
In either case, he sounds well connected. Should find a job in no time. |
Chris Prenovost
Citizen
Username: Chris_prenovost
Post Number: 275
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:09 pm: |
|
The photo is questionable, but no reason to fire someone.
Either the bank is overeacting, or they had some other reason for firing him, and used this as an excuse.
In either case, he sounds well connected. Should find a job in no time. |
redY67
Citizen
Username: Redy67
Post Number: 566
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:10 pm: |
|
Agreed with Jane, it isn't offensive, but it is also not clever, he must have been in another world. |
Chris Prenovost
Citizen
Username: Chris_prenovost
Post Number: 276
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:10 pm: |
|
The photo is questionable, but no reason to fire someone.
Either the bank is overeacting, or they had some other reason for firing him, and used this as an excuse.
|
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 3675
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:15 pm: |
|
I think it's the dumbest attempt at levity in a business setting that I've ever seen. Maybe he wasn't fired for any kind of harrassment issues, just plain stupidity? He must have really upset a very, very, very important client.
I'm with Jane and Chris. |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 49
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:15 pm: |
|
Chris: Looks like you've made your point.
I find the picture merely frightening. I also think it seems like there must have been another reason why they fired him. But then again, you know those uptight bankers.
What does your friend think? Does he think there's another reason they don't want to 'fess up to? |
shoshannah
Citizen
Username: Shoshannah
Post Number: 688
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:21 pm: |
|
Not a friend -- just a friend of a friend whom I have met socially a few times. Most of the press and the chat -- and there is a lot of it if you Google -- seems to chastise the Bank of America for over-reacting. Maybe it's only the top layer of the onion. I don't know. |
Wendyn
Supporter
Username: Wendyn
Post Number: 1268
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:24 pm: |
|
I agree with Greentree. I can't imagine a professional business person (and I am nowhere near as "important" as he is) thinking it would be appropriate. |
Mark Fuhrman
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 1155
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:40 pm: |
|
What was his boss and/or editor and/or publisher thinking? Surely one of them should have said, ahem, funny, but not appropriate.
Well, let's see, they fired the publisher also, but were these two the only ones who saw this before it went to press? The Bank seems to have a problem with responsible oversight procedures to allow this to happen. |
LilLB
Citizen
Username: Lillb
Post Number: 321
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 1:41 pm: |
|
I'm not offended as much as I'm left with the impression that he's someone who makes very poor judgement calls. I can't imagine how this picture would have in any way related to any businesss report.
Wasn't there ANYONE else who saw the cover of this thing before it went out? |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 5165
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 - 4:31 pm: |
|
At some point, that sort of attire might seem normal or at least acceptable. I worked at Bell Labs, and there was a guy undergoing a sex change. The transition period is pretty weird. Lucky he/she worked at Bell Labs, where we try to have open attitudes.
And of course, cross dressing usually has little to do with sexual orientation or transgendering. |
CFA
Citizen
Username: Cfa
Post Number: 1279
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 - 4:47 am: |
|
Meandtheboys,
Why would you find that picture "frightening?" |
J. Crohn
Citizen
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2016
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 - 1:53 pm: |
|
Tom, the guy superimposed his own head over a picture of a woman's head. He was not actually even cross-dressing.
I thought the photo was funny in a bizarre sort of way, and a very poor reason on its own to fire someone. But then, I don't personally approve of much corporate pretense at propriety in the first place, so I'm probably not a good person to ask.
(Am I the only human being alive who is really disappointed that the Israeli Knesset has ceased being photographed in kibbutz-chic attire such as khakis and white short-sleeved shirts sans tie or jacket?)
|
algebra2
Supporter
Username: Algebra2
Post Number: 2858
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 - 2:15 pm: |
|
People at Bank of America seem like a humorless bunch (from what I observe in the elevator). The guy obviously didn't read his target audience very well |
Dave
Moderator
Username: Dave
Post Number: 5016
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 - 2:25 pm: |
|
Target audience = people who run casinos. He gambled and lost. He should go play some blackjack and take revenge. |
chiquita
Citizen
Username: Chiquita
Post Number: 35
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 - 2:37 pm: |
|
"What was his boss and/or editor and/or publisher thinking?"
As a financial editor, I've seen some questionable language or pictures used in reports (although NEVER anything even close to this), and trust me, we can object to the analyst and his boss, but if the analyst insists, they get their way. No way does an editor on Wall St. get to overrule a high-profile, highly paid, revenue-producing analyst! It all comes down to what an analyst once said to me--"It's my name on the report--not yours." |
Brett Weir
Citizen
Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 540
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 - 2:39 pm: |
|
Banking Executives just aren't the irrepresible zanies that they used to be. Probably a bad choice by Mr. Susser, but it sounds like he's valued enough in the business to catch on elsewhere- probably at an increase in pay. |
flugermongers
Citizen
Username: Flugermongers
Post Number: 355
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 10:01 pm: |
|
Doesn't offend me, but in the work place, is sexual harassment.
|
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 3699
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 10:12 pm: |
|
Fluger - that's the problem with all these harrassment rules. They've been watered down to the point that when real harrassment or discrimination happens, it gets lumped in with tasteless but harmelss pictures or an over-sensitive cry-baby who objects to someone telling him/her that they like today's outfit.
Before you go thinking to yourself "wow, I thought Greenetree was so 'liberal'", let me assure you: I think that when real discrimination happens, castration or firing of the perpetrator is the only way to go..... |
flugermongers
Citizen
Username: Flugermongers
Post Number: 359
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 20, 2005 - 11:53 pm: |
|
Greenetree, I don't think it is a problem. I think not enough people speak up, and it's wonderful that these "rules" were created. I myself have been in a work situation where I spoke out against sexual harassment and was basically told I was trying to be too PC (Nothing like the picture; I can't even say the things that were said to me, or they'd be blocked here)... so it was shut down as my overreaction. I think there is not enough recognition of sexual harassment in the workplace, not an excess. With that said, I have no idea why this guy was fired, but if this picture made someone uncomfortable, I doubt it was the reason. Not professional by any means, though. |
greenetree
Supporter
Username: Greenetree
Post Number: 3704
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 8:07 am: |
|
Fluger - I think we agree. My point is that these "rules" are so over the top, that everyone tends to roll their eyes at everything, even the horrible things. I've been there, too, but before it was recognized at all.
When I was 19 (too many years ago), I had a boss who actually used to grab my rear and tell my coworkers about the fun times we had in private. Of course, none of it was true. I was a cook in a restaurant, and it finally stopped when he grabbed my ••• one day & I put a knife to his throat and told him if he touched me again, he'd be incapable of having fun with anyone. It stopped. But, if I did that today, I'd be in jail. My roommate worked for a major grocery store chain and was actually told she had to sleep with her department manager to keep her job. She went thru appropriate channels (at the time, the store general management). The result? Well, the guy made a bad decision, but he had kids, so it wouldn't be nice to fire him. She ended up getting another job. The other woman in her department, who needed her job and did sleep with the guy, testified too. Her husband divorced her.
Things started to change for the better in the early 90s, but then it went too far. My point is not that the rules shouldn't be here, but that they need to address real issues. Telling a woman that she "has a great rack and should wear more lowcut sweaters" is harrassment. "You look really nice today, I like that shirt" is not.
True story: the other night, I was leaving the office late and passed by the night guard. He's a nice guy. He told me to bundle up, because it was cold out & I shouldn't get sick & that my husband would be upset if I couldn't perform my "wifely duties". Stupid? Yes. Did I feel threatened? No. I did not, however, tell the head of security that he needs to speak with the guy about appropriate behavior, because I know that he would've gotten fired.
IMHO, When everything is treated like a problem, no one gets justice. |
cmontyburns
Citizen
Username: Cmontyburns
Post Number: 630
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 8:51 am: |
|
Note to self: Stop grabbing greenetree's butt. |
flugermongers
Citizen
Username: Flugermongers
Post Number: 361
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 4:32 pm: |
|
Yeah Greenetree, I think we have similar thoughts. And I probably would have a problem with the guard, but it's not like a boss harassing you repeatedly. Rule of thumb - if it makes you feel uncomfortable, something ain't right.
In the situation between "Nice rack" and "Nice shirt" of course there is a difference -- but there are bosses who would say nice rack, and when you complained, tell you you're overreacting.
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page