Gluskin Shefff Associates Inc. GLUSF

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Earnings

[McRambus]

4frankly wrote: Jarislowsky is 70% institutional. Gluskin is more focused on private client: https://www.gluskinsheff.com/Service/Institutions, although I haven't been able to find a breakdown which may mean it is not an apple and oranges comparison. There are some who think money lost to ETFs may come back to active human managers with the recent volatility panic and general consensus is it not yet over.


with the share buyback. perhaps more plausible to speculate GS may have plans to take it private?

The problem isn't necessarily the stagnant AUM growth.This company used to be the cream of the crop of asset managers. This also used to be a $35 stock and pumped out $250 million in base management +performance fees at the peak with only $7.5 billion in AUM. Today we have $9 billion in AUM and trailing 12 months base management+ performance fees are $145 million. And this with the markets in a raging bull market the past 12 months. Perhaps they are being much to conservative which may explain the departure of the high profile portfolio managers.

I'm also not sure of the breakdown between institutional and private client. I would assume GS mostly private client and probably generates more fees than Jarislowski and their 70% institutional clients. Without knowing how much total revenues Jarislowsky brings in we can't value GS properly. Ultimately, GS will eventually be taken over for it's book as well, the price unfortunately will not be anywhere near the former all time high.