To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (34232 ) 4/16/1999 7:31:00 PM From: accountclosed Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 86076
Michelle, I feel like perhaps it would be better to ask Bill the nuances. Bill is not an economist. In my experience, economists are simply that. They take the data, massage it, try to look ahead...and turn over the report. Chief Market Strategist is someone who looks at markets, per se and makes calls such as asset allocation. Analysts are people that take a bottom up approach to companies and parts of industries. Those lines drawn, however, there is certainly overlap. Chief market strategists need to integrate information from both economists and analysts. Chief Market strategists, in my understanding, are largely good will ambassadors for their firms. They want to get appearances in front of the camera or in print that make investors pause and think, hey that person is making sense to me...maybe that firm ought to get some of my business. That exposure requires a generalist approach from economist to market allocation model to analyst levels. What is a chief market strategist going to say when asked why? Have to have economic information. What is a chief market strategist going to say when asked what? Have to have a stock or sector... I believe the situation that Bill faces for a primarily bond house is that CNBC type audiences are more interested in stocks than bonds. Bill's position has to be responsive to what audiences are interested in. Bill really ought to comment on the bond guru structure at Cantor rather than me...as I know very little about it. I just know we are truly fortunate to hear from him regularly. Mostly we just shoot the breeze about the market.