Show a comparison of ML to its competitors by revenue and earnings. Also compare along the lines of revenue per FA, and number of FAs and Assets under managment.
Don't use the risk reward framework. Just talk about the trend or force and how it affects ML's business.
It seems like the article strays from NPOV at times. Examples include:
-- In time it dove into investment banking; but never forgot the premise that the company was based on: an emphasis on client needs, goals, and circumstances when suggesting investments. (this sounds a bit like a sales brochure) -- Over the last 5 years the company has achieved both record revenues and impressive margin expansion - from 12% in 2002 to 31% in 2006. The new meaner-leaner Merrill is a far cry from the bloated giant, that struggled to gain momentum just a few years earlier. (that margin expansion is "impressive" is both not very descriptive and a bit editorialized IMHO). That merrill lynch is "meaner-leaner" and a far cry from the "bloated giant" -- is that something that everyone would universally agree with? It also sounds a bit like a PR guy. I wonder if we could say that the company is leaner than it was before (demonstrably true) while leaving out the "meaner" which I think is more intangible. -- Despite such occasional hardships, investors remain "bullish" on Merrill. THIS is definitely editorialized, and should be removed -- It has grown into a massive and lucrative business that still remains true to Merrill's original credo, "I have no fear of failure, provided I use my heart and head, hands and feet — and work like hell." This doesn't seem to add anything to me and should be removed, I think.
Parkerconrad 03:03, 13 June 2007 (PDT)