Did the eight days between Sunday September 14 and Sunday September 21, 2008 mark the death of the investment bank? Lehman Brothers went bust, Merrill Lynch gave up and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley became regulated banks. It was part of the most catastrophic shift among investment banks since the event that created them, the Glass Steagall Act of 1933. In future, familiar terms such as the bulge bracket, the tag for elite US investment banks, will need to be redefined, end-of-year league tables will have a different look and clients and executives will need to adjust to new ground rules. But despite these changes and provided they survive the current crisis, it is likely that investment banks will exist as recognisable entities within their new organisations and investment banking as an industry will emerge with enhanced validity.

In one sense not much will change. The firms we regarded as investment banks had already become large financial conglomerates. Morgan Stanley ceased to be a stand-alone investment bank in 1997 when it merged with the consumer finance company Dean Witter. Goldman broadened away from investment banking when it expanded its trading and principal investment activities after it went public in 1999 and by 2007 less than 15 per cent of its pre-tax profits came from investment banking. The truth is that pure investment banks ceased to exist long ago. The absorption of some famous old names into banks and the redefinition of some others will make little difference to client service or market dominance. In respect of their performance as investment banks it is a matter of semantics whether such financial conglomerates include or exclude banking alongside their many other businesses.