Industry Terms You Can't Stand

Well, you’re on here too, so by logical extension…

So, who specifically are the rare exceptions? (names please)

I’l keep it confidential.

KM, and you’re responding on “Guys”? :slight_smile:

meh… “guys” has an androgynous connotation where I’m from.

“See me in my office” - I friggen hate this industry buzz word/phrase.

lol

That’s code for doing blow

i hate when they say FAce Down with the Masterpiece

Lets put on our thinking caps.

“Heavy lifting”

On one deal, our team’s top management would use so many cliches. So all the associates would try and one up management ridiculous use of them. So when we would have conference calls with employees and middle management it was a game to see how many cliches and vague innuendos we could get out just to match our managers.

I’ll leave you with a few gems I came across from that deal as well as the translated meaning:

Circle the Wagons --> (Shit is getting out of control so let’s get our stories straight)

Stuff & Things --> (I have no F*ing idea what I’m talking about)

Loop [insert name] in (I don’t want to do this work so get an associate to do it)

Why don’t you step up to the plate (same as above)

I have a great opportunity for you (Haha you are F*cked now)

^ How many “meows” did you get in?

reach out, touch base, circle back, take temperature, helicopter level.

“take a look inside the hood of their model” “just as a sanity check” “rising at a fast clip” “he was constructive on” “pass the baton” “please make the rounds” “having said that…” “organic growth” “what’s the colour on…” “let’s engage our clients on…” “drive further spread compression” “the internals are good” “the situation is in flux” One I cannot stand, even though you hear it more in sports than in the corporate world… “It is what it is”

  1. Error account 88888-8
  2. On-The-Run Off-The-Run arbitrage
  3. Fat-Boy & Ricochet
  4. Long NGH2007 / Short NGJ2007
  5. Household Finance
  6. Split-Strike Conversion strategy

i’m pretty sure there’s only one way to say “organic growth” and “having said that / that said”. these don’t really count. it’s like the word synergy. when its used to describe cost savings or cross-selling opportunities as a result of M&A, there is no way to replace the word synergy in less than 5 words.

Hard to replace doesn’t imply it’s not cliché. And full disclaimer: I’m guilty of several of the bits of language I’ve listed (except for “it is what it is”).

Why are people around me saying “spinning up”, I had to Google, I still don’t understand. Apparently it will take some lazy people time to “spin up”…they should probably just DO IT instead of spinning.

synergy is only a cliche when it is used inappropriately in a general way in general business talk. cost synergies and revenue synergies are the only phrases to describe M&A benefits without using a paragraph. why waste 3 minutes describing these phrases when you can just use them? being annoyed with the phrase synergy when used properly is like saying you’re tired of the words debenture or bond.

I don’t disagree with the example you describe. I think what caught your eye was my “organic growth” example but you do see it used where it does not necessarily belong. It really depends on the audience. For example equity research guys use it to describe growth in earnings that is not due to takeovers, buybacks or whatever manipulation. It is a common and accepted term, and to your point, is an efficient way to convey information to a seasoned audience.

But for example if I’m talking about the economy in general, there’s more chance I have a more diversified audience that might not be familiar to the word “organic” outside of a grocery store. So if I say “when the economy will reach a phase of organic growth, earnings will rise”. You can infer what I’m trying to say, but it would be clearer if I said “when the economy will be able to grow without policy assistance, earnings will rise”…

So that case could go as a case of terminology misapporpriation for the benefit of looking fancy, even though the use of the term is appropriate, accurate and accepted in the equity research example.