Citi Warns Q4 Market Revenue Will Unexpectedly Shrink From Last Year

There is nothing quite like an impromptu market day off to sneak some bad news in hopes nobody will notice.

That's what happened today when during an investor conference in New York, Citigroup CFO John Gerspach said the bank expects market revenue in the current quarter to be slightly lower than last year. The CFO said the fall was driven by a decline in fixed-income market revenue - arguably the result of the blow out in yields which has resulted in a decline in trading volumes - while Citi's equity business is doing well.

"We had anticipated we would actually see year-over-year revenue growth in fixed income and equity markets," he said. "But while we've maintained, I'd say, good engagement with the clients, we just haven't seen that transition into transaction activity at the rate at which we had hoped."

Gerspach also warned that pressure on market-sensitive revenues could put the bank at risk of missing its efficiency targets. "The tight timeframe of having the ability to react could put us just a little bit short," he said.

Citi's outlook runs contrary to trends described by its competitors. Speaking at the same conference, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said he expects trading revenue should be roughly in line with last year. Even that was not enough for some, with KBW analyst Brian Kleinhanzl noting that Dimon's commeng that trading results are "roughly equivalent" to last year was weaker than what KBW had been forecasting. KBW models revenue growth of 11.6% y/y (FICC +10%, equities +15%) and moving to flat would take 7c off of KBW’s 4Q EPS est. (a drop of 0.8%), according to Bloomberg data. Dimon's comment was also largely lost in the noise of yesterday's broad market drop, which saw banks pummeled with JPM sliding 4.5% on Tuesday, it largest drop since the February VIXtermination event.

Meanwhile, Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan said capital markets revenue should be up a few percentage points compared to 2017.

_________

As per usual Wall Street bullshittery all of the pie-in-the-sky estimates that were allowed to stay throughout the bulk of the 4th qtr are magically taken down a few weeks before the close of it.

Usually they wait until a few days before to do this.

It must be bad for them if it is being done now.

Leverage is a bitch when it works against you.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-05/citi-warns-q4-market-revenue-will-unexpectedly-shrink-last-year

See link for description of VIX termination event.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-05/it-traders-panic-xiv-disintegrates-after-close

>>4170706

>>4170729

they have been asking questions from the start and was an easy way to fish them out when it started. They have only recently progressed to identifying quads and it took them forever with dubs (still fuck that one up when they try)

>>4170771

>>4170795

wrong fucker

>>4170833

you pay more for betting on future movements with implied volatility.

at least that's how it is explained but imo it's just a way to suck premiums out of you via the emotional hook of missing something.

So instead of trading in and out of things at your comfort level the assholes on Wall St have a 'vehicle' you can buy so that you don't need to watch it all the time.

It's your money..damn if you let someone else tell you they have your back and will 'watch' it for you via the products they offer.

VIX is the ETF that tracks implied volatility howeverit never goes up when the markets go up…It only increases in value when it drops.

This is to say that they have convinced people that down is volatile but up is somehow not.

>>4170905

just to add if I was working in a firm or institution and I said that to a client and it was either reported or heard by the wrong person i.e. managing director or VP it would be the last thing I ever did as a representative of that company.

(((they))) do not like when reality is explained.

3dadb1 (16)

sorry 'dad' you are well past it.

c394a9 (3) took you guys almost 2 months to figure that one out. Hard fail

3dadb1 (18) Makes no difference what I am…only to you racist

T

thoughts are with service members and families of accident

Give them your vibes too

>>4171086

Good

No respect for someone who constantly gets insider information, profits from it and then tries to make it look like 'mad skillz'.

Lowest of low Steve Cohen is.

you know they are through when all they have left is changing our memes with different names.

FFS this is what you shill bitches have now?

Worse off than I thought.

Airbus, Lockheed team up for U.S. tanker refueling

BERLIN (Reuters) — Airbus and Lockheed Martin said on Tuesday they are teaming up to meet a growing demand for aerial refueling from the U.S. Air Force, nearly eight years after the European plane-maker lost an initial battle with Boeing.

The deal marks the first major foray by Airbus into the huge U.S. military market since its failed 2012 bid to merge with Britain’s BAE Systems and its large U.S. business.

It also promises a sequel to an epic battle between the world’s largest planemakers, that saw two former Boeing executives sent to federal prison for ethics violations.

Demand for tankers, which refuel combat aircraft during exercises or missions, has grown as armed forces stage more longer-range operations around the world.

The U.S. Air Force, which wants to ultimately replace its entire fleet of more than 400 tankers, is looking to meet growing demand for aerial refueling with possible fee-for-service arrangements, purchases of hundreds of additional aircraft, and the future development of a stealthy tanker.

Senior Airbus and Lockheed executives have agreed to explore all these opportunities, but are still working on details of their future cooperation, sources familiar with the matter said.

Airbus, which previously worked with Northrop Grumman Corp., won a $35 billion contract in 2008 to build its MRTT tankers for the U.S. Air Force.

But the deal was overturned amid political pressure and the U.S. Air Force reran the competition, which Boeing ultimately won, landing a $49 billion contract in 2011 to build 179 of its 767-based tankers.

Boeing had hoped this would lead to further orders but it has struggled with the KC-46A program, missing deadlines and racking up some $3 billion in additional costs.

Todd Blecher, a Boeing spokesman, told Reuters it is working with the U.S. Air Force to deliver the first tanker before the end of the year and the new aircraft would be “the backbone of global mobility for generations to come.”

But Airbus and Lockheed now hope to win orders for the A330-based Multi Role Tanker Transport (MRTT), and eventually design work on a next-generation tanker.

“We will be well-positioned to provide the United States Air Force with the advanced refueling solutions needed to meet 21st century security challenges,” Lockheed Chief Executive Marillyn Hewson said in a statement.

Airbus is banking on the success of the MRTT, which has been selected by 12 countries, including Australia, Britain and South Korea, and is already refueling or capable of refueling most major U.S. combat jets, including the F-35 fighter.

Lockheed, builder of the F-35 and the C-130J transport plane that can also be used as a tanker, will give Airbus a strong partner for future U.S. bids, the companies said.Speech

http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0005393048

>>4171252

Something about having many millions of quotes just canceled within a millisecond and then claim it had no impact on the pricing structure.

That's just the tip of it too

>>4171323

Absolute total desperation for you now

It shows