4 ms·

As an uninformed outside observer, I have seen a large number of companies that used to pride themselves on product quality, customer support, and treating work

As an uninformed outside observer, I have seen a large number of companies that used to pride themselves on product quality, customer support, and treating workers well get bought by private equity or other finance guys (or maybe sometimes just taken over from inside), shed everyone competent, focus on cost cutting and nickel-and-diming customers, and start producing garbage products with no support, transforming the relationship with customers into a largely adversarial one. In many cases the finance guys have (legally?) embezzled large amounts of money while loading the companies with debt and then dumped them, leaving customers, employees, suppliers, and other investors holding the bag. I’m sure this process is considered to be “sound financial management” by some.

goatinaboat 7y ago
Financial Engineering 101 - borrow some money, use it to buy a company. - transfer the debt onto the company. Now, somehow, you own the company but paid nothing for it. - break up the company, sell off the parts, keep the money. The company goes bankrupt and the original lenders get nothing - repeat. Bizarrely you can keep on doing this over and over again, people will still keep lending you the money!
wskinner 7y ago
What are your two favorite examples that illustrate this pattern?
- notyourday 7y ago
  GE would be one. The other... EAK Ramen in NYC (small chain that landed here a couple of years ago out of LA so I'm sure it is financial engineering at work, not just an owner experimenting). They removed what used to be a standard part of the ramen that came with it ( egg, some toppings ) and started offering removed parts as "customize your own ramen! Add an egg for a $1! Add corn for a $1! Add X for a $1 ) as a way to raise prices by wrapping that into "customization". As if their customers are stupid and don't notice that the same ramen now costs not $14 but $18.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
geodel 7y ago
I agree with what you said. I notice that 'engineering/engineered' term have positive connotation as opposed to 'doctoring/doctored'. But with this Financial engineering thing scam artists have taken over 'engineering' now.
ryanjshaw 7y ago
There seems to be an insane amount of misinformation and misunderstanding on this topic. What you and others are describing is not financial engineering. It's corporate raiding, fraud, etc. I'll list some examples in the field of financial derivatives (speaking here in my personal capacity, not an expert, this is not advice, disclaimer disclaimer disclaimer): * An oil production company knows they can comfortably operate at a particular price level, P/BBL. They're willing to forego any additional profits provided they can guarantee receiving P/BBL. Commodity swaps make this possible, and it means that people in the industry get to have a reliable job despite the volatility in the market. * The national airline of a small, poor developing country depends on tourists buying plane tickets in a foreign currency, often months in advance. How can they manage the risk of the exchange rate volatility, when one of their biggest costs are fuel and they have to pay this in yet another foreign currency? Currency derivatives make this possible, and it means this developing country can reliably operate an airline and thereby receive an economic boost from tourism, helping at least some of its citizens make it through another day. * The CEO of a F500 company knows some bad news is about to hit the market and negatively impact the value of his stock. But he can't sell his shares because he'll be guilty of insider trading. Instead he enters into an equity swap arrangement with some poor sucker who doesn't know about this bad news, and because it's a pre-Dodd Frank Act deal, nobody is the wiser, and our CEO gets to enjoy another stress-free day on the golf course. As I hope my last tongue-in-cheek example demonstrates, these are just instruments. How they get used and abused is a problem for regulators; they are not inherently evil.
- bumby 7y ago
  I can appreciate your breakdown and agree with the basic sentiment but the last sentence sounds like a cop-out. Guns are just tools that poke holes in things. We can't hold the manufacturers responsible for the way they get used. Fentanyl is just a medical drug. The pharma companies aren't responsible for addiction. I don't even disagree with your sentiment and I don't necessarily agree or disagree with my silly examples. But I hope you can see why some people would see calling them 'just instruments' can come across as washing ones hands from any responsibility.
  - 7y ago

goatinaboat 7y ago

Financial Engineering 101 - borrow some money, use it to buy a company. - transfer the debt onto the company. Now, somehow, you own the company but paid nothing for it. - break up the company, sell off the parts, keep the money. The company goes bankrupt and the original lenders get nothing - repeat. Bizarrely you can keep on doing this over and over again, people will still keep lending you the money!

wskinner 7y ago

What are your two favorite examples that illustrate this pattern?

notyourday 7y ago
GE would be one. The other... EAK Ramen in NYC (small chain that landed here a couple of years ago out of LA so I'm sure it is financial engineering at work, not just an owner experimenting). They removed what used to be a standard part of the ramen that came with it ( egg, some toppings ) and started offering removed parts as "customize your own ramen! Add an egg for a $1! Add corn for a $1! Add X for a $1 ) as a way to raise prices by wrapping that into "customization". As if their customers are stupid and don't notice that the same ramen now costs not $14 but $18.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

geodel 7y ago

I agree with what you said. I notice that 'engineering/engineered' term have positive connotation as opposed to 'doctoring/doctored'. But with this Financial engineering thing scam artists have taken over 'engineering' now.

ryanjshaw 7y ago

There seems to be an insane amount of misinformation and misunderstanding on this topic. What you and others are describing is not financial engineering. It's corporate raiding, fraud, etc. I'll list some examples in the field of financial derivatives (speaking here in my personal capacity, not an expert, this is not advice, disclaimer disclaimer disclaimer): * An oil production company knows they can comfortably operate at a particular price level, P/BBL. They're willing to forego any additional profits provided they can guarantee receiving P/BBL. Commodity swaps make this possible, and it means that people in the industry get to have a reliable job despite the volatility in the market. * The national airline of a small, poor developing country depends on tourists buying plane tickets in a foreign currency, often months in advance. How can they manage the risk of the exchange rate volatility, when one of their biggest costs are fuel and they have to pay this in yet another foreign currency? Currency derivatives make this possible, and it means this developing country can reliably operate an airline and thereby receive an economic boost from tourism, helping at least some of its citizens make it through another day. * The CEO of a F500 company knows some bad news is about to hit the market and negatively impact the value of his stock. But he can't sell his shares because he'll be guilty of insider trading. Instead he enters into an equity swap arrangement with some poor sucker who doesn't know about this bad news, and because it's a pre-Dodd Frank Act deal, nobody is the wiser, and our CEO gets to enjoy another stress-free day on the golf course. As I hope my last tongue-in-cheek example demonstrates, these are just instruments. How they get used and abused is a problem for regulators; they are not inherently evil.

bumby 7y ago
I can appreciate your breakdown and agree with the basic sentiment but the last sentence sounds like a cop-out. Guns are just tools that poke holes in things. We can't hold the manufacturers responsible for the way they get used. Fentanyl is just a medical drug. The pharma companies aren't responsible for addiction. I don't even disagree with your sentiment and I don't necessarily agree or disagree with my silly examples. But I hope you can see why some people would see calling them 'just instruments' can come across as washing ones hands from any responsibility.
- 7y ago