Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I love it when people try debate or refute a point while completely misunderstanding the original point being made, looking stupid in the process. Cute.
Yes, and that think tank is the prime measure of global trading volumes, the Global Financial Centres Index, who is centered in England. Ranking by global indexes aren't some abstract thing, they're decided on by careful analysis, and the fact is that London has dropped (mainly from lack of economic rejuvenation, compared to the United States). It's not a bad thing, you're barely behind New York, but facts-are-facts.
Some highlights: "Worse, the UK’s second financial centre – Edinburgh – has seen an alarming drop in its ranking from No 15 in 2007, just behind Boston, to No 64 in 2014, just behind Mauritius."
When asking leading economists how they ranked this was the rankings:
On a 1,000 point scale, they anointed the following cities with the precious top 10 spots.
New York - 786
London - 784
Hong Kong - 761
Singapore - 751
Zurich - 730
Tokyo - 722
Seoul - 718
Boston - 715
Geneva - 713
San Francisco - 711
However in terms of data when measuring the flow of money through these metros, the only dramatic events were London's fall, New York's re-steadiness, and the dramatic rise of San Francisco's Technology and Industrial Hong Kong and Singapore rise.
In short, less money is flowing through London, primarily due to the UK's shortfall, and even more-so due to its heavy reliance on trade with the failing EU. So you could say it's primarily an exterior detractor, but a detractor nonetheless.
This entire post is very easy to refute, simply by referencing the article you've linked.
The report pointed not only to uncertainty over EU membership and Scottish independence, but to “regulatory creep” and “conservatism”.
In other words, trading volume is far from the only metric that is considered in the GFCI. Among other things, it factors in prospective political changes, much of which is speculative and far from reliable.
Well, that's not the only criteria is it? And as far as Asset Management, NY leads the world by far.
Top Asset Managers by AUM(Assets Under Management), 2013
*I limited my tally to $100B+*
New York: $10.717 TRILLION
1 Black Rock $3.791 Trillion
7 JP Morgan Chase $1.431 Trillion
8 Bank of New York Mellon(BK) $1.385 Trillioon
12 Prudential Financial $1.060 Trillion
16 Goldman Sachs Group $854 Billion
35 Morgan Stanley $516 Billion
36 TIAA-CREF $510 Billion
49 New York Life Investments $347 Billion
79 Neuberger Berman $205 Billion
100 Bridgewater Associates $142 Billion
102 Guggenheim Investments $138 Billion
107 Lord Abbett $129 Billion
113 GE Asset Management $119 Billion
London: $2.995 TRILLION
15 HSBC $910 Billion
24 Legal & General Group $655 Billion
25 Prudential $654 Billion
40 Aviva $443 Billion
45 Schroders $382 Billion
57 Lloyds Banking Group $305 Billion
96 F&C Asset Management $151 Billion
120 Pearl Group $110 Billion
Well, that's not the only criteria is it? And as far as Asset Management, NY leads the world by far.
Top Asset Managers by AUM(Assets Under Management), 2013
*I limited my tally to $100B+*
New York: $10.717 TRILLION
1 Black Rock $3.791 Trillion
7 JP Morgan Chase $1.431 Trillion
8 Bank of New York Mellon(BK) $1.385 Trillioon
12 Prudential Financial $1.060 Trillion
16 Goldman Sachs Group $854 Billion
35 Morgan Stanley $516 Billion
36 TIAA-CREF $510 Billion
49 New York Life Investments $347 Billion
79 Neuberger Berman $205 Billion
100 Bridgewater Associates $142 Billion
102 Guggenheim Investments $138 Billion
107 Lord Abbett $129 Billion
113 GE Asset Management $119 Billion
London: $2.995 TRILLION
15 HSBC $910 Billion
24 Legal & General Group $655 Billion
25 Prudential $654 Billion
40 Aviva $443 Billion
45 Schroders $382 Billion
57 Lloyds Banking Group $305 Billion
96 F&C Asset Management $151 Billion
120 Pearl Group $110 Billion
1. Foreign exchange is not the "stock market".
2. Market cap is not the same as daily trading volume.
3. Liquidity or contractual trading volume is not the same as personal wealth.
4. Trading at equity exchanges no longer form the bulk of transactions in the global financial system. The biggest exchange in the US today is not a stock exchange. It is a commodities exchange.
5. The amount of trading volume in the FX market dwarfs that of equity or commodities exchanges, and that changing hands through the trade of goods and services that contribute to GDP.
We are discussing one very specific metric. How much money flows through each financial centre during the average trading day.
1. Yes, that's my fault. But Forex IS the foreign exchange market.
2. Yes I'm aware that the market cap is not the same as daily trading volume, the point of citing the London Stock Exchange versus New York was a counter to the Forex point. While it is the largest market as of current, Forex is not centralized, compared to a stock exchange, and thus has more relevance when talking about the impact trading and exchange has on a city. Secondly there are other methods to measure a city's wealth in global trade besides Forex (and the amount of money flowing through a city is not better than the amount of money flowing to a city,).
3. What is '3, 4, 5' referencing? When I mentioned GDP earlier?
In relation to Forex, I just checked that the United Kingdom has the largest share but that's not specific to London, nor is the largest trading bank of FX in London, or England, it's Deutsche Bank in Frankfurt. And especially since it's the foreign exchange, I don't see how it's centralized to London at all. Unless the point Hightowers was trying to make is that there is simply a larger market than the NY stock exchange, and not anything about London in particular.
Last edited by GalacticDragonfly; 05-28-2014 at 06:10 PM..
As far as bank assets(Top 100 Banks), London bests NY by about $500B
London $7.055 Trillion
2 HSBC $2.723 Trillion
10 Barclays $2.274 Trillion
22 Lloyds Banking Group Plc $1.409 Trillion
45 Standard Chartered Plc $649 Billion
New York $6.488 Trillion
6 JP Morgan Chase $2.463 Trillion
14 Citigroup $1.899 Trillion
28 Goldman Sachs Group Inc $923 billion
34 Morgan Stanley $832 Billion
72 Bank of New York Mellon $371 Billion
As far as bank assets(Top 100 Banks), London bests NY by about $500B
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalacticDragonfly
1. Yes, that's my fault. But Forex IS the foreign exchange market.
2. Yes I'm aware that the market cap is not the same as daily trading volume, the point of citing the London Stock Exchange versus New York was a counter to the Forex point. While it is the largest market as of current, Forex is not centralized, compared to a stock exchange, and thus has more relevance when talking about the impact trading and exchange has on a city. Secondly there are other methods to measure a city's wealth in global trade besides Forex (and the amount of money flowing through a city is not better than the amount of money flowing to a city,).
3. What is '3, 4, 5' referencing? When I mentioned GDP earlier?
In relation to Forex, I just checked that the United Kingdom has the largest share but that's not specific to London, nor is the largest trading bank of FX in London, or England, it's Deutsche Bank in Frankfurt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair
Right, but that represents a much more vested interest on the part of both managers and clients.
Finance is not just what occurs daily on the markets. We need to look at the entire picture.
Once again:
"We were discussing the volume of money that flows through each centre (contractual trading volume), not whether or not one or the other is ranked the leading centre according to a specific think tank."
This is not a discussion about how finance is defined, or which city holds the most assets. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
"We were discussing the volume of money that flows through each centre (contractual trading volume), not whether or not one or the other is ranked the leading centre according to a specific think tank."
This is not a discussion about how finance is defined, or which city holds the most assets. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Okay, and I used other metrics to measure wealth of a city compared London. The forum isn't called 'volume of trade by metro', it's "Most Powerful City in the World." I admittedly didn't read his link, but merely looked at the trade graph--however--now that I did click the link, what relevance does the largest (not centralized) market have to do with the power of London? Hence the title of the forum. If you want to have a conversation about that exclusively, then I think you know the link to the forum where you said it had already been discussed.
Or maybe I should just ask him that, since Hightowers cited it.
I love it when people try debate or refute a point while completely misunderstanding the original point being made, looking stupid in the process. Cute.
Not going to lie, you're likely right on this. I went from 'assuming' that the FX market was central in London and then trying to find other trade information to stack against it, rather than reading his link thoroughly. Now that I did, and seeing that the largest traders in the world are Chinese, the largest bank in FX is German, I'm now totally lost on the original point his comment was making, I admit. I have no clue what it had to do with London.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
