Quote:

Merril Lynch has no banking operations regulated by the Fed. In the US, it's banking operations are either state-chartered or savings bank chartered making the FDIC, the state banking authority or the OTS the functional regulator. Outside the US, the banking operations are regulated by the regulator in that country. At the consolidated level, it is regulated by the SEC under the new rules issued by the SEC. Read the 10K.

I think ML is just trying to get as sweet a deal as they can from Bloomberg. Although I guess the company does have significant ops in Princeton that it could move to JC and consolidate/rationalize some operations.

Quote:

Thats not the way it works. Merrill's is regulated based on the type of business it conducts in the countries it trades. Merrill Lynch has banking operations that are regulated by the Fed - same with virtually every "investment bank".

Northen NJ is part of the New York Federal Reserve Disrtict. Also, Merrill Lynch is an investment bank not a commercial bank and is not regulated by the Federal Reserve like JP Morgan chase. Merrill is regulated by the SEC. Merrill is going to move where it makes most sense. It has quite a presence in JC already and if it decides to increase that, then all the better.

Quote:
Magnificent piece of propaganda. I don't know about you, but when you ask me 3 or 10 or 20 most famous buildings in Manhattan, this one doesn't come to mind.
Maybe companies that move to NJ cannot have representatives in the NYC branch of the Federal Reserve?

Merrill will never leave the city. They are considering other sites not mentioned in this article and are just playing their hand. Remember when Goldman was going to move their trading operations to Hudson St.? That building is twice the size it needed to be to house the type of operations they have there and now they are building a much bigger complex in Battery Park which will be their real homestead for trading operations.

JC rules and I wish one of these financials had the balz to really move their "mission critical" operations here.

Merrill Lynch Too Big For New York, Too Good For New Jersey

http://www.dealbreaker.com/2007/09/post_483.php

Finding a new home is hard! Merrill Lynch execs engaged in a little bitching and moaning to the Post (who gloriously came up with the headline "For Merrill, Size Counts," because Q. Who doesn't love a penis joke? A. No one) today, re: its search for new Headquarters and it sounds, completely objectively, and not taking league tables into account, like it sucks to be ML. The options at the World Trade Center and World Financial center are "simply too small" and moving downtown would force the bulge to add a second building in Jersey City. And as someone who knows the Garden State, such an unseemly measure would not bode well for Merrill Lynch, which fancies itself a Goldman Sachs (more on that later).

What about the Hotel Pennsylvania spot, located across the street from Penn Station (which, let's not kid ourselves, many Merrill employees must, by the constraints of the commute, must pass through at least twice daily, anyway)? Not "attractive enough." (Stan O'Neal only cares about looks.) Furthermore, the property, owned by Vornado Realty Trust, requires "prolonged civic and city variances and approvals to be as large enough to fill the bank's needs?at least 3 million square feet with one large 80,000-foot trading floor" that are "too iffy."

Hudson Yards? Let's not get ahead of ourselves?the site's nowhere near ready, and, as a Merrill exec pointed out, he and his men "[are] not pioneers," or heroes, either.

Brookfield Properties and Silverstein Properties are reportedly vying for Merrill's affection, but are not winning any points with traders, who are asking for one big floor, so as to facilitate "eye to eye contact," as opposed to several smaller ones, which B and S are proposing. One source went to far as to call the head of Silverstein "insane," but maybe what's insane is beating the dead horse that is Goldman Sachs favoritism ("They put $600 million into our competitor's pocket?at a bare minimum, we know that . . . first and foremost, we are at a competitive disadvantage.") and not focusing on the task at hand? Who's to say.

We are reminded, of course, that things could be worse for Merrill Lynch?they could be JP Morgan, and stuck with a hideous eyesore of a building that is being proposed for the bargain price of $2 billion, and is practically begging for a terrorist attack.

We'd like to help out the Lynchettes, but the only other options we can come with are the soon-to-be-vacated Trump Casino in Atlantic City, and West Bushwick, which actually strikes us as perfect. Got any ideas?

For Merrill, Size Counts [New York Post]

http://www.dealbreaker.com/2007/09/post_483.php

FOR MERRILL, SIZE COUNTS
HUNT FOR N.Y. HEADQUARTERS

New York Post - September 19, 2007 -- MERRILL Lynch executives say the three possible locations in the city for a new headquarters remain candidates, though none of them is ideal.

That's because with the city popping at the seams, and no ideal location available to accommodate the type of floor plan envisioned by the bulge-bracket firm, none is a sure bet.

What Merrill execs did tell us was that size matters and that the lower Manhattan options at the new World Trade Center and World Financial Center are simply too small and would force the bank to develop a second building in Jersey City.

But the financial giant also worries that Vornado Realty Trust's Hotel Pennsylvania site, across from Madison Garden, is not attractive enough to employees.

It is also described as too "iffy," as it needs prolonged civic and city variances and approvals to be as large enough to fill the bank's needs - at least 3 million square feet with one large 80,000-foot trading floor.

"Hudson Yards [on the West Side near the Javits Center] is just not ready yet and we're not pioneers," said one top Merrill executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, adding the development plans for an area now made up of railroad tracks is still on the city's drawing boards.

Competing Brookfield Properties' and Silverstein Properties' proposals call for several smaller trading floors, but Merrill traders say they need eye contact with multiple co-workers to make proper bids and therefore feel they must be on one floor.

Brookfield's proposal for a 500,000-foot expansion of 2 World Financial Center would still leave Merrill 20 percent short on its trading floor needs.
Meanwhile, Silverstein Properties' upcoming new Tower 3 at the World Trade Center site comes up 15 percent short, and faces another hurdle for Merrill - the rents he's seeking.

Said the Merrill source of Larry Silverstein: "He's insane in terms of the numbers he's throwing around."

Both the Brookfield and Silverstein sites would require the expense of building and operating a second tower to accommodate a move by 3,000 to 5,000 people who won't fit into either of the two downtown options.

"We need flexibility going forward. It is a critical [need]," added our source. "[No one wants] to be the bonehead who built us the wrong trading floor 10 years from now."

Of course, they could put up with any of it anywhere if given some underlying support, i.e., some help with variances and review timelines, some tax relief off this and some energy pumped in from that - stuff that puts competitiveness back into their mix.
That's because Merrill executives glower as rival Goldman Sachs, after receiving massive subsidies, builds its own 2.1 million foot headquarters smack in the middle of Merrill's World Financial Center territory.

"They put $600 million into our competitor's pocket," complained one Merrill Lynch official. "At a bare minimum, we know that . . . first and foremost, we are at a competitive disadvantage to the guys going up across the street - and they will have rocket speed execution.

"We're not threatening to move our headquarters to New Jersey - we are being honest and saying we want to remain here, but the city seems indifferent to our needs," the official continued.

"If they really want New York City to remain the financial capital they need to figure out what they have to do to make the companies competitive and not penalize them."

A Merrill spokesman declined comment on our findings and a call for a response from Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff was not returned by press time.
Jones Lang LaSalle is working with Merrill, which is expected to make a decision in the next few weeks.

*
Changes: Isaac Chetrit just bought 989 Sixth Ave. from Leslie Himmel's Himmel + Meringoff Properties, which had owned it for 22 years.

This was H+M's first acquisition back in 1985. The sale was made through Eastern Consolidated, while Jones Lang LaSalle has been appointed to handle leasing.
The LeFrak Organization owns 50 W. 57th St. by itself and also owns 33 W. 57th St. with Vornado Realty Trust.

*
Yesterday's RealShare conference at the Marriott Marquis underlined the current doom and gloom due to the "strike" in the bond markets but was brightened by doses of reality: soon deals will be re-priced and we'll all get back to business.

"We will come out of it because fear gives way to the desire to make money," declared wunderkind Ethan Penner, now of Lubert-Adler Partners, who slammed the three credit rating agencies for creating the problems by being "hired by the sellers" and ignoring the true risks.

lois.weiss@nypost.com
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09192007/ ... _merrill__size_counts.htm