Worth the Trouble

In Inside Reference Data’s most recent webcast, Building a Data Management Foundation, 36% of 92 attendees who responded to a question about how much their firms planned to spend on new data management initiatives said they planned to spend less than $1 million, and another 26% said they plan to spend less than $5 million. This is surprising, considering responses to another question in the webcast concerning readiness for the legal entity identifier (LEI) implementation, where less than half of those who responded had made some changes or extensive changes to prepare.
The adage “you get what you pay for” comes to mind again, as I wrote in the Editor’s Letter of our latest special report on corporate actions. And that maxim seems to be tied to data operations quite a lot lately—it’s also turned up in a recent issue of Bloomberg Businessweek, in coverage of potential cuts to the US federal government’s budget for its own essential economic data, including census and labor statistics.
It’s not the only place I’ve heard the phrase either. My wife loves to say it when I habitually reach for less expensive options when clothes shopping, or picking up household goods, or getting some new electronic gear. Inevitably the frayed ties, broken electric toothbrushes and cheaper MP3 players end up in the garbage and I go back to the malls or Amazon a little bit wiser.
Webcast poll results aside, there is some light at the end of the cost-cutting tunnel. As Sybase’s Neil McGovern noted in the program, some data initiatives may be getting their funding from project requests made by risk management or trading departments at firms, rather than designated data management budgeting.
Ironically, data professionals are probably the most aware of the need for greater spending. The LEI responses, not to mention the ongoing implementation saga itself, show they at least know they have to look at or reach decisions on some data management changes. And in another poll question, respondents largely said they expected to see benefits from LEI between now and five years from now at most. The question this raises: will they want to pay for what they will get?
Next week, London reporter Nicholas Hamilton will fill in with an Editor's View while I am on vacation.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: https://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Regulation
Doing a deal? Prioritize info security early
Engaging information security teams early in licensing deals can deliver better results and catch potential issues. Neglecting them can cause delays and disruption, writes Devexperts’ Heetesh Rawal in this op-ed.
SEC pulls rulemaking proposals in bid for course correction
The regulator withdrew 14 Gensler-era proposals, including the controversial predictive data analytics proposal.
Trading venues seen as easiest targets for Esma supervision
Platforms do not pose systemic risks for member states and are already subject to consistent rules.
The Consolidated Audit Trail faces an uncertain fate—yet again
Waters Wrap: The CAT is up and running, but with a conservative SEC in place and renewed pressure from politicians and exchanges, Anthony says the controversial database faces a death by a thousand cuts.
Exchanges plead with SEC to trim CAT reporting requirements
Letters from Cboe, Nasdaq and NYSE ask that the new Atkins administration reduce the amount of data required for the Consolidated Audit Trail, and scrap options data collection entirely.
EU banks want the cloud closer to home amid tariff wars
Fears over US executive orders have prompted new approaches to critical third-party risk management.
Friendly fire? Nasdaq squeezes MTF competitors with steep fee increase
The stock exchange almost tripled the prices of some datasets for multilateral trading facilities, with sources saying the move is the latest effort by exchanges to offset declining trading revenues.
Europe is counting its vendors—and souring on US tech
Under DORA, every financial company with business in the EU must report use of their critical vendors. Deadlines vary, but the message doesn’t: The EU is taking stock of technology dependencies, especially upon US providers.