Friday, 10 October 2014

Banks? No, thanks!



"AN INVESTMENT banker was a breed apart, a member of a master race of dealmakers. He possessed vast, almost unimaginable talent and ambition.” So wrote Michael Lewis in his 1989 book, “Liar’s Poker”. Mr Lewis charted the ascent into investment banking of the most talented graduates in the 1980s, a situation that still held true as the financial crisis struck in 2007. Then, 44% of Harvard’s MBAs landed a job in finance; 12% became investment bankers. Yet in the class of 2013 only 27% chose finance and a meagre 5% became members of Mr Lewis’s master race.

The trend is the same at other elite business schools. In 2007, 46% of London Business School’s MBA graduates got a job in financial services; in 2013 just 28% did, with investment banking taking a lower share even of that diminished figure. At the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, the percentage of students going for jobs in investment banking has fallen from 30% in 2007 to 16% this year.
In this section

Since the crisis, investment banks have culled the recruitment schemes through which they once hired swathes of associates straight from business schools. Instead, they rely more on recruiting the brightest undergraduates, in the belief that it is more productive—and better value—to develop cohorts of junior analysts in-house, rather than those with fixed ideas honed on expensive MBA programmes.

It is not just that the supply of investment-banking jobs has diminished; so has MBAs’ enthusiasm for them. Once, they wanted nothing more than to climb a bank’s greasy pole, with the vast riches this promised. But regulation has stunted bankers’ bonuses and, perhaps as important, MBAs increasingly seek the flexibility to switch careers within a few years. Investment banks expect long-term loyalty, notes an MBA who did a spell in banking, whereas students see them as “a stepping stone into private equity or a hedge fund”.

This is one reason why there has been a revival in business-school graduates’ interest in working as consultants. Almost 30% of students at the elite business schools now typically find work at consulting firms. In 2007, 23% of London Business School’s MBAs joined such organisations, last year 29% did. At Chicago the number has risen from 24% to 31% over the same period. Indeed four big consultants—McKinsey, Bain, the Boston Consulting Group and A.T. Kearney—accounted for 19% of the 472 students hired from Chicago’s MBA programme last year.

This should not be surprising. Before investment banks were in vogue, consulting seemed the natural home for business-school students’ talents. The general-management focus of most MBA programmes, and their use of the case-study method, make them ideally suited to the job. An old consulting joke tells of the newly minted MBA sitting at his desk, demanding: “Bring in the first case!”

Whereas banks expect MBAs still to be with them in five years, consulting firms ask recruits: “Whom do you see hiring you in five years?” Encouraging them to think about life beyond the firm has several benefits, consultants believe. It attracts the strongest candidates and it gives the firms a high-powered network of alumni who may become future clients.

For MBAs, the exposure to different industries and the access to senior managers that a consulting job brings are a perfect base from which to launch a new career, says Julie Morton of Chicago Booth. That base salaries for those going into consulting are among the highest for any industry—a median of $135,000, compared with $100,000 for Chicagoans signing up with an investment bank—only makes the choice easier.

Not just in it for the money

Even if investment banks were still able to offer the financial rewards they once could, students’ priorities seem to be changing. Contrary to MBAs’ reputation as breadheads, in a survey by The Economist for our latest full-time MBA ranking (see article), less than 5% said that higher pay was their most important consideration when deciding to enroll at business school, far behind factors such as “to open new career opportunities” (58%) or “personal development” (15%).

Sceptics might respond: they would say that, wouldn’t they? And MBAs’ ostensible disregard for the size of their pay packets must be put into context—a student from a top ten school in The Economist’s ranking will still earn an average basic salary of $118,000 immediately after graduation. Nonetheless, it is somewhat surprising given that they are also likely to have accumulated huge debts. Harvard reckons its MBA can cost $250,000 for two years’ board and study, and that is before forgone salary is taken into account.

Another big beneficiary of MBAs’ loss of interest in banking is the technology industry. Of the top eight recruiters at INSEAD, a business school with campuses in France and Singapore, half now fall into this category: Amazon, Microsoft, Samsung and Google. (The other half were consultants.) The proportion of Chicago MBAs landing jobs at technology firms has risen from 6% to 12% since 2007. At Stanford, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it is close to a third. “Many students want to be part of an entrepreneurial environment and make an impact, to feel they are building and shaping something,” says Ms Morton.

Tech firms and consultants both appeal to the growing number of students who want to gain the right experience to start their own business. A survey by the Graduate Management Admission Council, an association of business schools, found that although only 4% of MBAs have entrepreneurial experience when they enter their course, 26% say they want to start companies after they graduate.

Competition for the best students is also coming from the non-bank financial-services sector, notably hedge funds and private-equity (PE) firms. Five years ago it was rare for such places to recruit MBAs straight from campuses. Instead they would often poach talent from the banks. But now several big schools, including Harvard and Wharton, are building formal recruiting ties with such firms.

They are helped by the fact that many students have already had some finance experience before enrolling: 17% of Harvard’s latest MBA class came from a PE or venture-capital firm. Students from other backgrounds are also attracted by the dynamic atmosphere these outfits offer. Michel, a recent graduate of Kellogg School of Management, for example, says PE appealed to him and his peers over banking because the firms are smaller and the work more entrepreneurial and hands-on.

If self-fulfillment is indeed the priority for millennial MBAs, then banks need to do some serious rebranding. “I have never heard anything about the corporate culture of investment banks that sounds like it’s an environment I’d like to work in,” says a business-school graduate who chose consulting. Added to this, MBAs also seem to have discovered a sense of moral purpose. At London Business School the fastest-growing student society is something called the “Net Impact” club, says Lara Berkowitz, a senior career adviser at the school. This means thinking about how to build careers that have a positive impact on the world around them, such as running ethical-investment funds or corporate-social-responsibility programmes.

Attacked on so many fronts, banks are trying to fight back. Some are running campaigns urging graduates not to believe media stories portraying them as greedy or evil. Others are trying to lure recruits by persuading them they will help make the world a better place. Goldman Sachs’s job portal advertises opportunities to work on community projects alongside positions for analysts: “That’s why you come and work at Goldman Sachs, because you can make a difference in the world,” trills its recruitment video.

A few banks are trying to change their culture, taking a tougher line on sexual harassment of female staff and advocating a healthier work-life balance, perhaps even allowing the odd work-free Saturday. For the business schools’ brightest and best, though, all this may not be enough.

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

Nexus 6 leak 'confirms' it will have 5.9-inch screen, new Moto X design




 It has been reported earlier that the Nexus 6 is a device with codename Shamu that Motorola is building. The Shamu has a huge 5.9-inch screen, which has led to speculations that it may not be the next Nexus phone because Google usually likes to keep its phones small. However, now Android Police, a fairly reliable source for Android related news, is reporting that Shamu is indeed the next Nexus 6 and there may not be any smaller size Nexus this year. 

"We've been provided with new information about the next Nexus phone, and can confirm that it will be a 5.9-inch device called the Nexus 6," .  

This large screen is likely to have a QHD display with resolution of 1440 X 2560 pixels. The device will be powered by Qualcomm Snapdragon 805 processor, may have 2GB to 3GB RAM, a 13MP rear camera with optical image stabilisation and 2MP front camera. It will run on the final version Android L. 

The Android Police is reporting that the device they saw had a new messaging app installed on it, something that is not a part of the current Android L. This indicates that Google may abandon its attempt to unify all messaging within the Hangout app and may bring back the proper SMS app back to the OS. 

Confirming the earlier leaks, the website also notes that the Nexus 6 will have a design similar to that of the new Moto X, complete with an aluminium frame. However, it will be bigger in size and will have front facing stereo speakers unlike the new Moto X that has single speaker.

Antibiotics 'linked to childhood obesity'


 picture of a boy

Young children who are given repeated courses of antibiotics are at greater risk than those who use fewer drugs of becoming obese, US researchers say.

The JAMA Pediatrics report found children who had had four or more courses by the age of two were at a 10% higher risk of being obese.

But scientists warn this does not show antibiotics cause obesity directly and recommend children continue using them.

Many more studies are needed to explain the reasons behind the link, they say.

Targeted therapy
 
US researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and Bloomberg School of Public Health reviewed the health records of more than 64,500 American children between 2001 and 2013. 

The children were followed up until they reached five years of age.

Almost 70% of them had been prescribed two courses of antibiotics by the time they were 24 months old.
But those who had four or more courses in this time were at a 10% higher risk of being obese at the age of five than children who had been given fewer drugs.

And the type of antibiotics they were prescribed appeared to make a difference too - those given drugs targeted at a particular bug were less likely to put on weight.

But those given a broad-spectrum antibiotic - that can kill several types of bacteria indiscriminately - were more likely to have a higher body mass.

Prof Charles Bailey at the University of Pennsylvania, said: "We think after antibiotics some of the normal bacteria in our gut that are more efficient at nudging our weight in the right direction may be killed off and bacteria that nudge the metabolism in the wrong direction may be more active."

And researchers say the study highlights that over prescribing inappropriate antibiotics could have a negative impact on child growth.

 Children who were given antibiotics in the first few months of life were also at greater risk Prof Nigel Brown, president of the Society for General Microbiology in the UK, said: "This study adds further evidence that the use of antibiotics early in life has a role to play in obesity.

"While antibiotic use is only one factor that may predispose children to be obese, the study emphasises the importance of rapid diagnostic tests that allow precise targeting of antibiotics, which will kill the disease-causing bacteria and cause minimum disruption to the normal gut flora."

And Prof Bailey acknowledged his study had limitations as they were not able to look at the children's weight or exercise regimes.

He says the team will now start to explore what influence lifestyle factors has on these findings.

But Dr Graham Brudge, at the University of Southampton, said: "The design of the study did not allow testing as to whether antibiotic use during infancy causes obesity in childhood, only that there may be an association.
"It would be a concern if parents took from this that they ought to be reluctant to allow antibiotic use in their children.

"The key risk factors for childhood obesity are over-consumption of high energy, nutrient-poor foods and lack of exercise."

Mice trials 
 
Meanwhile in a separate study, scientists reporting in the journal of the American Society for Microbiology found that a species of gut bacteria - called Clostridium ramosum - could promote weight gain in mice.

Mice with these bacteria present in their guts became obese when fed a high-fat diet, while those that did not have the bacteria put on less weight despite being given high-calorie meals.

The scientists, from the German Institute of Human Nutrition, in Nuthetal, are now trying to understand how the bacteria interact with digestion.

Lloyds dismisses eight staff over Libor



Lloyds Banking Group has dismissed eight staff members following an investigation into the manipulation of some key interest rates set in London.
The move follows the bank's £218m fine in July for "serious misconduct" over the setting of Libor.
Chair Lord Blackwell said the actions of those responsible for the misconduct were "completely unacceptable".

Lloyds, which is 24.9% owned by the government, said the individuals had also forfeited £3m in unpaid bonuses.

The bank said its remuneration committee would now ensure the outcome of the disciplinary process was "fully and fairly reflected" in other staff bonus payments.

Regulators found that Lloyds manipulated the London interbank offered rate (Libor) for yen and sterling and tried to rig the rate for yen, sterling and the US dollar.

It was also found to have manipulated submissions for another short-term rate linked to the value of UK government debt.

'Highest integrity'
 
Lloyds said Monday's disciplinary action followed July's fine by the UK-based Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and a US-based trading commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
However, it said it had been unable to take disciplinary action against " a number of individuals" who had already left the bank before the settlements.

Lloyds Banking Group chief executive Antonio Horta-Osorio said the bank was committed to preventing this type of behaviour happening again.

"We are determined to make Lloyds Banking Group a company of the highest integrity and standards," he added.

In July, Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said the attempted manipulation was "highly reprehensible" and could lead to criminal action against those involved.

Lloyds also said it had shared the outcome of its disciplinary process with City regulator the Financial Conduct Authority and other relevant authorities.

'Fix it higher' In July, the US trading commission said the "unlawful conduct" of Lloyds had "undermined the integrity" of Libor.

It said Lloyds had acted to benefit its trading positions and protect its reputation by manipulating the rate when it was in the process of buying HBOS during the financial crisis.

The commission also released a transcript detailing examples of requests to manipulate the sterling and US dollar Libor rate.

They included an employee from Lloyds telling their counterpart at HBOS: "Oh mate, I always have loads of loans going out at the end of the month so I always try to fix it higher".

The trader added: "They keep calling it lower... I can't work out why it is going down all the time... I will leave it at 67 and I won't go any lower, right?"

A sterling submitter at HBOS responded with: "Yeah".


Monday, 14 May 2012