The conventional wisdom was that Dodd-Frank (Dodd-Frank news) was a major stumbling block for the top banks, and many analysts had predicted it will collectively cost the industry billions in revenue.

As for Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS), its prowess as a proprietary trader was thought to be a major issue. But executives at the bank are telling analysts that they do not expect to give up any revenue because of the law. As noted by the LA Times, one prominent analyst, Guy Moszkowski (Guy Moszkowski news), wrote in a note to clients: "The statement was perhaps surprising in its level of conviction but we've learned to take such judgments from GS very seriously."

The bank would appear to be coping well. But there are some issues with their words. Consider the banks' proprietary traders. How exactly will the revenue be preserved? The bank distributes the traders to market making operations, but would they now be trading for clients? Or would they be free to continue to trade firm money as part of a market maker, as they have always done? That might not sit well with regulators.

Perhaps Goldman Sachs is suggesting that when all is said and done the level of revenue might be the same, though the composition may be different. In the derivatives business, working as one of the early swap execution facilities may prove to be a revenue boon. And that might offset revenue lost to the Volcker Rule (Volcker Rule news).

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley's Volcker Rule timeframe
Goldman Sachs to spin out a prop trading unit?
Goldman Sachs to spin off private equity arm?
The reform effort: Hedge funds and private equity funds