My two cents worth:1. "I even got the impression that BO quant positions are not even respected as an equal functionality to the counterparts in FO and MO. But at the same time, isn't risk management one of the most important perspective of a financial institute? " Just because a job is crucial, doesn't make it a desirable or respected job. 2. Risk management is usually in a separate reporting line from front office in order for them to do their job independently. Good banks know that despite this separate reporting line, they should should still pay good risk managers well, and shouldn't keep them in the basement.

QuoteOriginally posted by: KackToodlesYou are gullible if you think that senior management of IBs or public companies ever publish anything except for marketing or promotion purposes!And I have the strong feeling that GS published what it did because it already has a very strong risk organization, and if it succeeds to making its structure "industry standard" than banks that don't have similar structures will be playing catch up.QuoteFor their point of view, how should things work? Maximize profits.No. The incentive structures are set up to maximize profits at the expense of everything else, but those structures are badly created. QuoteThey have no choice because either they maximize profits or their shareholders and board will have them fired.This isn't true. Shareholders have virtually no control over large public companies in the United States, and boards are still largely subservient to senior management. If you don't want to maximize profits, you don't have to as long as you make a profit and keep from bankruptcy.It's perfectly possible for the CEO of an investment bank to say "all you front office traders are wildly overpaid, I'm going to cut your salary and bonuses and increase the salary and bonuses of people in risk. If you don't like it, leave." It's possible because it's been done before, and firms that *did* do that are in better shape than firms that didn't.

"senior management of IBs or public companies ever publish anything except for marketing or promotion purposes!"I read this in a WIRED article a month ago. The author argued about the demand for "transparency" in banks' reports. Meaning that banks do share, but the amount of information they share with public is so overwhelming and redundant, that it is hard to easily figure out what the reports say. (I am simply recalling the article not meaning to criticizing banking industry) Quote senior management in banks that do think about how things *should* work rather than just do the easy thing and adopt whatever structures exist, have either radically changed their structures from the "stereotype" or are thinking about how to do so. For their point of view, how should things work? Maximize profits. They have no choice because either they maximize profits or their shareholders and board will have them fired. Just like the GM CEO got fired. I thought that was another sign of government is taking over free market...

QuoteOriginally posted by: popviviQuoteOriginally posted by: KackToodlesQuoteOriginally posted by: Nomadepeople in risk are generally dumber, You have hit on an interesting topic. What is the pecking orderof intelligence? 1) prop traders 2) trading desk quants 3) developers 4) trade ops 5) risk managers 6) accountants 7) IT 8) doorknobSo ITs are dumber than accountants than risk analysts?? aren't ITs those who help to get the fancy models running (such as coding and debugging)??I wouldn't put IT ahead of a doorknob. The latter at least is reliable, the former isn't. But that's just me

QuoteOriginally posted by: twofishIt's perfectly possible for the CEO of an investment bank to say "all you front office traders are wildly overpaid, I'm going to cut your salary and bonuses and increase the salary and bonuses of people in risk. If you don't like it, leave." Look what happened at GS yesterday. The 3 top leaders of their asset management division (all under 45) suddenly quit. They are going to look at better opportunities. Top bankers work for large corporations to make money. Once you squeeze their compensation, they move to better opportunities elsewhere. Then GS has to hire a bunch of losers.

QuoteOriginally posted by: NomadeI wouldn't put IT ahead of a doorknob. The latter at least is reliable, the former isn't. But that's just me Our IT guys are sometimes surprisingly clever. Once they pretended that their help-desk answering machine wasn't working and lost the records of all the requests for assistance for three days.

QuoteOriginally posted by: KackToodles Look what happened at GS yesterday. The 3 top leaders of their asset management division (all under 45) suddenly quit. They are going to look at better opportunities. Top bankers work for large corporations to make money. Once you squeeze their compensation, they move to better opportunities elsewhere. Then GS has to hire a bunch of losers. Hey. It's a free market. If you don't think you are paid enough, leave. We'll let Darwin decide.

QuoteOriginally posted by: twofishHey. It's a free market. If you don't think you are paid enough, leave. We'll let Darwin decide. Darwin says the govt should stop excessive regulation and stop sticking it's crotch into the private sector.