You will be redirected back to your article in seconds

Wall Street analysts lay an egg for SEC

HERE’S A NEWS FLASH that shouldn’t startle anyone: Stock analysts are not to be trusted. It seems they have a bad habit of touting stocks that they personally own.

No kidding.

The source of this intelligence is the Securities & Exchange Commission, which has just issued a report on the care and feeding of analysts. The business press, of course, has helped make analysts into folk heroes, quoting their epiphanies on industry trends. Indeed, it’s hard to find a financial story that doesn’t cite the wisdom of at least one analyst.

Analysts have always presented themselves to the press, and to the investing public, as objective and informed. I’ve never heard one admit he’s also greedy and self-serving.

Now along comes the SEC to suggest that over a quarter of the analysts surveyed have a habit of buying shares in companies before recommending them. They also acquire shares in private placements at delicious prices unavailable to the public, then tout those stocks as great buys.

Often these analysts are mere pawns of investment bankers. The so-called “Chinese wall” separating the bankers from the research departments has become a myth. The bankers tell their analysts what to push and reward them for pushing it. The SEC says analysts come away with paydays ranging from $100,000 to $3.5 million for going along with the game.

THEY EVEN GET SPECIAL REWARDS for issuing so-called “booster shots” — recommendations timed when analysts and their firms can dump their shares right after a successful IPO.

Everyone would still be enjoying these ploys if the bull market hadn’t collapsed. Now that investors have been reminded about the law of gravity, everyone, even the SEC, has started scrutinizing the machinery of hype. Is it a mere coincidence, the SEC asks, that analysts always issue “positive research” when their firm happens to be the underwriter?

And why has the press become a helpmate in this process? When a company goes public, reporters manage to quote an analyst testifying as to its dazzling growth potential. A major merger always seems to be accompanied by the applause of several analysts. These quotes, of course, often emanate from the very firms that orchestrated the deal.

The global mega-companies are especially shrewd at playing the analyst card. Having made preposterous projections to Wall Street about their future growth, the corporate hierarchs summon up the help of investment bankers to find an acquisition that will reinforce this illusion and help them hit their numbers. The bankers not only come up with the mergers, but also the grandiose pronouncement about their merits — a cacophony of self-approbation that’s dutifully reflected in the press.

The analysts, at least, are rewarded for their complicity. The reporters who quote them just look stupid.

WHAT DOES THE SEC PROPOSE to do about all this? At the moment it’s just presenting the facts; congressional hearings supposedly will take it from there. And at least two lawsuits have been filed against top analysts at Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch.

Meanwhile, Wall Street is rising to the challenge. The Securities Industry Assn. has issued a code of conduct for analysts mandating disclosure of personal financial holdings. Furthermore, brokerage firms may not base analysts’ pay on overall company earnings or on the performance of the stocks they’ve hustled.

But guess what: The so-called guidelines are voluntary. And there’s as much chance they’ll be enforced as that the dot-com bubble will imminently re-inflate itself.

More Voices

  • FX Confronts Streaming Thanks to Disney

    Kicking and Screaming, FX Is Forced to Confront Future in the Stream (Column)

    During his network’s presentation at the winter Television Critics Assn. press tour, FX chief John Landgraf made waves — and headlines — by mounting perhaps his most direct criticism yet of Netflix. Landgraf, whose briefings to the press tend to rely heavily on data about the volume of shows with which FX’s competitors flood the [...]

  • Longtime TV Editor Recalls Working for

    How a Bad Director Can Spoil the Show (Guest Column)

    I have been blessed with editing some of TV’s greatest shows, working with some of the industry’s greatest minds. “The Wonder Years,” “Arrested Development,” “The Office,” “Scrubs,” “Pushing Daisies” and, most recently, “A Series of Unfortunate Events.” I have earned an Emmy, ACE Eddie Awards, and many nominations. But whatever kudos I’ve received, over my [...]

  • Stock market Stock buyback

    Stock Buybacks Leave Firms Without Funds to Invest in Future (Column)

    Corporate giants on the S&P 500 have spent more than $720 billion during the past year on stock buybacks. Media and entertainment firms account for only a fraction of that spending, but even $1 million spent on share repurchases seems a foolhardy expenditure at this transformational moment for the industry. The record level of spending [...]

  • Hollywood Has Come Far With Diversity

    An Insider's Look at Hollywood's Diversity Efforts and How Far It Still Needs to Go

    I am a white man working in Hollywood. I grew up in Beverlywood, an all-white, predominantly Jewish, Los Angeles neighborhood sandwiched between 20th Century Fox Studios and MGM, where my elementary school had only one black student. I am compelled to write about diversity in Hollywood because “diversity” — in front of and behind the camera [...]

  • Venice Film Festival A Star is

    How Venice, Toronto and Telluride Festivals Stole Cannes' Luster (Column)

    In all the years I’ve been attending film festivals, I have never seen a lineup that looked as good on paper as Venice’s did this fall, boasting new films by Alfonso Cuarón (“Roma”), Damien Chazelle (“First Man”), Paul Greengrass (“22 July”), Mike Leigh (“Peterloo”) and the Coen brothers (“The Ballad of Buster Scruggs”) in competition, [...]

  • Black Women in Medicine BTS

    Hollywood Needs to Include People With Disabilities on Both Sides of the Camera (Guest Column)

    In five years, nothing has changed. Despite open calls for greater diversity and inclusion, recent research shows that there was little change in the number of characters with disabilities in popular films in 2017. A study conducted by the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative of the University of Southern California’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism found that [...]

More From Our Brands

Access exclusive content