Editor's letter

Editorial

Richard Jory

However simply you breakdown and classify structured products, they involve more work than a corporate bond or a share issue.

But not being a kid means that things such as fees are eroded as the techniques of creating products become commoditised. In addition, simpler and vanilla products demand less financial technology. Moreover, those in the business pass on their wares and expertise to other, 'cheaper' financial technicians. The pay is less because the expertise is no longer unique.

Another crucial driver behind lower fees for structurers is the sudden awareness that distributors are taking some of the rap for the carnage inflicted by the default of Lehman Brothers. Distributors have generally taken a back seat when it comes to making good on deals they have sold that have subsequently gone bad. This is not always the case, and each circumstance tends to be relatively unique, but it is fair to say that the issuer of the product is often the first port of call when things do not work out as promised.

With the markets so ravaged by crisis, and with distributors in Singapore and Switzerland starting to recognise their role in dealing with moral hazard, it must be time to take the more familiar products and offer them on a cheaper basis. No-one wants to take lower fees, but that's what happens when markets develop. Providers will still make good money, and so they should. But they need to recognise that they, as well as the structured products market, are maturing, with all that entails.

Richard Jory

[email protected]

+44 (0)20 7484 9802.

  • LinkedIn  
  • Save this article
  • Print this page  

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an indvidual account here: