The Beats Acquisition Proves Apple has Lost its Tech Edge

Does the acquisition of Beats portend badly for the future of Apple? It may even be a desultory reminder that Apple, in effect, not only doesn't have a real plan to be as radical as Steve Jobs but no longer wants to be.

Apple’s R&D program has taken a hit in recent years. You look at the product lineup and one can only wonder whether there’s a barren, impotent, arid, intellectual wasteland that replaced the formerly brilliantly sales, creative, and industrial designer groups at Apple.

Some would point to using the same products that the March results and June guidance are better than expected. They were driven by stronger iPhone demand in the back half of the 5s/5c product cycle. iPhone shipments of nearly 44M were above consensus of 38M. However, any argument in this direction completely ignores what Apple is all about.

The acquisition program to buy Beats, as it seems, is now somewhat of a desperate ploy to play off the lack of prescient plans post-Jobs.

With the departure of so many key figures in a company to be replaced by so many who have the charisma of a damp-rag, like new CEO Tim Cook, you only wonder if we’ve come to the realization that figures like Sir Jonathan Ives (to name one of a dozen or so) might be entirely irreplaceable? And this adds another dilemma: does the Apple have such structural stagnation priced in; if not, what discount would we give pivoting out of the tech space? I don't know.

What Apple does have is its ecosystem of apps and other products. However, how does Beats fit into Apple's ecosystem?

It seems less likely that it can. The stronger argument seems to be that the Beats acquisition isn't a "weird one", as Quartz or the FT would have it, if you simply look at Apple’s future trajectory (especially it's product line like the iWatch).

Many do argue it's becoming an increasingly less tech-company (not to mention less tech savy) but what do the future product line ups tell us?

Like the iPhone, the iWatch should spawn tons of innovation that is totally spontaneous, entirely based upon creating a new category; essentially a new Apple ecosystem. That would be great. However, I doubt the iWatch will either replicate the success of the iPhone, at best, or even the luxury watch market that relies on Swiss watch market as a proxy — not to say the least bit about the future threat of Samsung watches in its third of fourth iterations.

It seems likely the iWatch will be a nice attention-seeking gamble and will be irrelevant past next year's fiscal year.

Given Apple products are pushed into existing categories way after the first movers, like the iPod (usually so Jobs could identify where a new category can be created in its place and to extract enough proof of concept, market), a 600 dollar price seems fair if this is what Apple will continue to do.

The advantage of a tech company like Apple is that is does a few products really well and keeps consumers waiting, speculating, wishing for more until comes out with its explosive new product. That factor is worth a lot in the price.

But that requires there being new tech. What new tech is in the iWatch? Apple TV? The new Apple computers? This business plan worked and would work again if Apple would shock us as a tech company. It's not though.

It would be fair to say the Beats acquisition reveals that Apple is losing its leading tech company status.

Not only is Beats is not a tech product, but the lack of a overweight bias institutional investors have on APPL stock, in contrast to the likes of AMZN, GOOG, HPQ, MSFT, and others, means Apple might be better off launching a bad tech product that’s innovative, like Steve Job’s Apple TV, just to prove it’s still there... it's still the leading edge of tech giant.

 

They have so much cash. Why not put more of that towards R&D? It worked for Samsung.

When a company becomes an acquisition junkie (see Yahoo, Facebook) it really worries me because it can make a company bloated and inefficient. It would be like a rich person buying McDonald's everyday because it's easier than putting in the effort to cook their own meal and they can afford paying a premium for that convenience.

 
Skinnayyy:

Hopefully with this acquisition they can finally ship a good pair of headphones with the iPhone...

Beats - good headphones? Nonsense. In fact I dont like the fact of this acquisition become real not because Apple became even less 'tech', but because not it is marketing over quality. Every person who is at least fond of good quality sound knows that Beats are very bad and overprised. I don't see a reason Apple needs it.

There is only one way to understand it - as a ticket to media business. This may sound at least a bit logical.

BR, Mark

 

Beats aren't the best headphones, but they are decent. I've got a pair of the ear buds that wrap around your ear (don't know what they are called) and they are certainly better than cheaper headphones but without even trying out other ones, I know they won't be as good as a pair of Harmon's. The one thing that I don't know of, and don't feel like researching because I don't care is that Beats do come with a lifetime warranty on them. Like I said though, I don't know what that covers or what other higher brands offer.

And anything can be better than the headphones that ship with the iPhone. I haven't even been able to get either of them so far to stay in my ear. (I have little ears)

Also, isn't that pretty much what every one claims Apple to be? High on marketing, a high price, for not that great of stuff?

make it hard to spot the general by working like a soldier
 

I'd like to see how they spin their recent heavy recruiting of bio.med. engineering hotshots and their product pipeline with their acquisition of Beats. If it all ends up in an iWatch with your full medical record, tailored fitness regime and getting you cheap insurance under Obamacare, I'll start shorting with both hands.

CNBC sucks "This financial crisis is worse than a divorce. I've lost all my money, but the wife is still here." - Client after getting blown up
 
Best Response

I think Apple has reached a plateau from an innovation standpoint and that's okay. You can only be an innovator for just so long. If you disagree show me a company that has been a leading innovator for over a decade that can compare to the cash cow the iPod, iPhone and iPad have been, especially when tied to the iTunes sales Apple has enjoyed... which is where this acquisition has come up. Apple failed to get into streaming music industry and is now playing catch-up. Fortunately Pandora and Spotfiy haven't been very good at getting paid subscriptions. Beats music seems to be fairly good considering how new it is,which is the only way this acquisiton makes sense and really makes this a high stakes grab that could go wrong very easily. The Beats headphone business IMHO looks to be a short term star, that will turn bust soon enough. These are middle rate headphones, that are selling for high end prices. The only thing good about Beats by Dre is they have become a status symbol along the lines of high-end basketball sneakers. It is possible that Beats could be the headphone version of Nike, but Nike's sneakers have some real R&D put into them whereas Beats seem like they are just trendy. Of course, "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public," so this trend might be here for the long term. What I see happening is thati Tunes Radio gets merged with Beats Music and that the headphones division gets spun-off and recoups most of the purchase price. As for Apple long term, the halcyon days of printing money are over. They will have to compete for sales in a way they are not used to and will have to be careful about throwing cash around to try to increase revenue.

Doog37
 

Market: Do something...do anything with all that cash!

Apple: Okay...we are buying Beats.

Market: You fucking morons why are you spending your cash on Beats!?

Apple: {sigh}

"Everybody needs money. That's why they call it money." - Mickey Bergman - Heist (2001)
 

I think this is a horrible sign for the company going forward. I was reading that a major factor in the acquisition was the beats streaming service. Apple has tried to get their itunes radio service rolling against Pandora/Spotify and from personal experience it does not even come close to stacking up to what already exists. I think Apple is hoping beats streaming will improve this, but its a huge red flag that Apple is having to acquire companies that have better products than what they can produce in house.

However, I have no information on the beats streaming service so have no clue if it's truly a better product.

Listen, here's the thing. If you can't spot the sucker in the first half hour at the table, then you are the sucker.
 

Apple hasn't been innovative for years. The smartphone industry is in a consolidation period BC new emerging technologies are few and far between.

It's time to put that huge mound of cash to use in more technologies. The acquisition will help in the accessory market, streaming market in mobile devices and automobiles.

 
packmate:

Anyone have any financial statistics on beats? Everyone is shitting on the acquisition, but their margins are enormous and I'm certain they are cash flow positive. If apple can improve their hardware, I'm certain beats will continue to dominate the headphone market

Yes. Suffice it to say, AAPL is NOT paying a ridiculous price for this (on a revenue multiple or an EBITDA multiple basis)

 

I have to agree with @Doog37 about hitting the innovation plateau. Apple has developed amazing products that have revolutionized several business areas but lately well have sucked goats ass. However the acquisition of Beats was something that was long in the horizon since Beats was first born. It is a natural progression of the core LOB's they want to truly dominate i.e. music, computers, and cellphones. There will be a stop to the iPhones someday..iPhone 2050 where it looks like the one in Will Ferrell's SNL skit. If you carefully read the open source reporting on Apple you will see that they have a very lucrative area that they have not even tapped...wtf am I talking about?....800 million iTunes customers. In comparison Amazon has close to half of that. They are developing something that will really place a killer shot to Paypal (there goes the automatic flower orders!). IMHO Apple will probably begin to seek a new LOB in television..."Dude that's old crack!" . Yes it is but it is an area that they have been exploring and tweaking....Tell me no one doesn't watch Vikings on AppleTV with their sexy shield maiden bringing in the brew?! (not this guy but I wish) The BL is that Apple made a purchase based on its core business values and will continue to do so.We shouldn't expect them to change much just because we demand a "drop like it's hot" spending spree. This is a long term greed move ladies and gentlemen act accordingly.

Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
 

I don't get where all the negativity is coming from.

I didn't actually see any part where you specifically spoke to why this acquisition is a bad idea. If you think this is all about the headphones then you're not paying attention to what's really going on here.

Apple wants to own the media game. They almost do now, but not quite. Streaming in particular is their weak point. iTunes Radio blows and everyone knows it. This is their ticket out. Want to compete with Spotify? Buy it pre-made. Fill in your media catalog, and there you have it. Not to mention, this is one less competitor when it comes to drawing up deals with the record label.

I think this is a great acquisition. We've been hearing about the demise of Apple for about 30 years now....still hasn't happened, and almost all the claims are based on subject, emotional options. And they're always wrong.

I'm not saying they're infallible...but I am saying they haven't really put a foot wrong yet. And they certainly have plenty of room to do so.

"When you stop striving for perfection, you might as well be dead."
 
IvyLeagueVet:

You must be younger than 25 BC Apple had been on the verge of bankruptcy for most of the 90s.

I am, however I'm also aware of their rough financial times in the 90s. They went through that period of time because they were the opposite of who they were now. The corporate leadership was just so out of touch with what made the company successful that they damn near drove it into the ground. Gil Amelio was the worst CEO that company ever had and he about killed it before Steve came back and put things right.

"When you stop striving for perfection, you might as well be dead."
 

This deal has nothing to do with the Beats by Dre headphones. Apple sees something else, this is about using Jimmy Iovine to leverage mechanical royalties (ASCAP & BMI) and licensing fess with record labels. Just look at how many of the Billboard 100 artist are under Jimmy's label, even the music playing on commercials and television shows....

 

You hit the nail right on the head. The deal isn't to buy Beats, but to acquirstreaming Cone Jimmy Iovine.

@"FranchiseTag", Universal Music Group (of which owns Interscope Geffen A&M, the label that Iovine's Chairman of), has a stake in Beats, so that definitely delivers on the ability to leverage contacts and connections without Iovine. The Beats deal is a massive stream of money coming in and it can set the stage for a partnership with Apple for streaming music, which of course means more revenue generation for everyone. I think what your missing with Iovine is that he is coming on in an undefined creative role. You leverage the man who helped produce so many amazing Albums and created Interscope Records by allowing him to be creative and do what he does best. That's what Iovine is for Apple - he's a new creative force to help guide at least part of Apple's business.

Who knows... Iovine's guidance may end up being a godsend for Apple and help them improve on their entire means of digital distribution and tie their best innovations in streaming media to other products in the works or it could entirely screw Apple over. That's the beauty of Jimmy Iovine - he gives Apple a chance to reignite the creative spark it has slowly lost.

 

I don't see the negativity. Apple could easily use the Beats brand for: 1) the headphones they package with the iPhone; 2) to improve the speaker on any of their phone, tablet devices, or the iWatch/iTV; 3) Beats streaming service to add to their iTunes Radio.

Without knowing their intentions, that's easily worth such little cash for Apple. Not to mention that they can spin off the brand and recoup some of the costs if it truly is catastrophic.

Apple's not an innovator company- they take prior technology, streamline/simplify it, and put it in one good looking package. Seems to be the case here.

 

This pervasive idea that Apple has consistently been disrupting new industries 3-4 times a decade always shocks me-has anyone noted that they essentially had 1 product for their first 20 years (which, it should be noted, is when your business textbooks say they should have been the most disruptive)? Additionally, innovation doesn't necessarily require new product classes ex. there's some validity to the thought that they could enter the mobile payment space with the combination of their fingerprint scanner and ibeacon.

I don't like Apple products and I'm not long the stock, but trying to argue that Apple can't find a replacement for Steve Jobs (or anyone else) and that they'll never innovate again is premature.

Life's is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
 

First off, settle down buddy. If you didn’t want people’s opinions, then you shouldn’t post.

Second... Except, has Apple lost its Tech Edge with this acquisition? I think it goes without saying that not every acquisition can be valued as simply as you are putting it when you are getting both products and people. Look, I know you think your analysis is spot on, and its definitely lost amongst your writing but that's a whole separate story, but like I said before (echoing @"FranchiseTag" on the point that this was a 3.2 Billion Dollar Acquisition Hire on Jimmy Iovine), they are using this as a springboard to bring a new creative genius on board.

Let me educate you about Jimmy Iovine. Iovine got his start in the music industry in 1972. Care to guess how many albums he was involved with the production of? Over 250. Between 1972 and today, Iovine worked with many famous artists including Bruce Springstein (including what is arguably Springstein's best work Darkness on the Edge of Town, B.B. King, Bob Seger, Joan Jett, John Lennon, New Kids on the Block, Patti Smith, Rod Stewart, Tom Petty and U. In 1989/1990, he cofounded Interscope Records. Interscope became a major player in the Gangsta Rap Genre and then blew up in the mid-90s, signing acts like Nine Inch Nails, No Doubt and Marilyn Manson. In 1996, Iovine would begin his rather lengthy partnership with Andre Young, who was founder and CEO of, what would ultimately become an Interscope Geffen A&M Imprint, Aftermath Entertainment. Also, in 1996, MCA, Inc - the company that would ultimately become Universal Music Group, acquired a 50% stake in Interscope. In 1999, Interscope merged with Geffen and A&M to form Interscope Geffen A&M, which would become UMG's preeminent label. In 2008, he and Young formed Beats Electronics, LLC. Over the past few years, between American Idol, Beats Electronics and UMG/Interscope Geffen A&M plus whatever other investments and plans he may have in the works, Jimmy Iovine has been busy being Jimmy Iovine.

This leads me to the big question - why didn't you discuss Jimmy Iovine? You are all high and mighty on innovation and the fact that Apple's big deal is doing something brand spanking new to result in innovation making it a leading edge tech company. If I recall, two of Apple’s biggest successes, the iPod (See: The Diamond Rio, Creative Nomad, Archos Jukebox) and the iPad (See: Nokia’s N800/N810 and the Samsung Q1 Ultra), were not trailblazing products but, as you said, improvements on existing products. One of Jobs’ strengths was reinventing the wheel – he took a product like a portable media player and turned it into the iPod and spawned a great degree of innovation from it. It required someone with a creative vision. One of the biggest factors of this deal has been that Iovine and Young would be brought on in advisory roles. All the rumor mill has said is that Iovine will be brought on in a creative role. We don't know what the strategy behind his role is, but while he is not necessarily a successor to Jobs, he is being brought on in a creative capacity. It's not out of the realm of possibility that this acquisition is the second coming of Apple, not that it is the loss of its tech edge. So here's my question to you, why do you make the blunt assertion that Apple has lost its edge when we don't know the truth about how this purchase will play out. It's one of the hardest things to consider, all said and done. I wouldn’t put the cart before the horse just yet. Let’s see what happens and if Iovine gets put in a position of creative power before saying that Apple has lost their edge as a Tech innovator.

 

The quality -to-price ratio for Beats headphones is horrible. There are many better headphones at about half the price our better.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." --Abraham Lincoln
 

I believe the Apple stores have been carrying their headphones along with ipods for sometime now. So this acquisition does provide good synergy as Apple tries to establish a presence in the headphone market as well. Cant comment on the price as I don't know anything about Beat financials or the state of the headphone industry. I do wonder whether Apple will be acquiring and bringing in house other third party accessory makers as well, like the makers of ipod docks etc.

Too late for second-guessing Too late to go back to sleep.
 

Well apparently Beats have about 70% of the luxury headphones market share, so the price will probably be easy to justify.

As for the headphones itself - every friend I know has broken them easily, the build quality really isn't that good, sound quality is probably above average, but haven't heard anyone calling it excellent.

 

Hah. Just heard about this. Apple would do such a thing. Beats by Dre has an excellent marketing machine, that's it.

Dr. Dre just took Monster Products and pimped out their headphones by making big names like Lady Gaga/David Guetta/Lil Wayne/Justin Bieber the faces of the brand and gave each their own limited edition lines to reach out to different subsets of the product's target market. And Dre has a bandwagon of other celebs (Kendrick Lamar, Snoop, Eminem) behind him that he's helped produce to drive the brand.

If you want headphones w top-notch sound quality/louder bass/don't leak any sound, buy Monster Products. I couldn't ever justify buying overpriced Beats. Don't care how hyped up the product gets by DJs/artists/kids. Monster's the king for sound quality and their comparable products are ~half the price.

With that said, Apple and Beats are perfect for eachother. I'm excited to see the mega-marketing machine they'll roll out together.

 

I've been trying to wrap my head around this, not really sure why they would do this. There's no technology that they could possibly want, Beats headphones are pretty basic and cheap inside but with tons of marketing slathered on top and a price tag about 50-200% too high depending on the model.

Are they hoping to revamp the brand and do something interesting with it? 3.2 billion is pocket change to them, they could light that much money on fire and it wouldn't matter. So I'm honestly, genuinely confused. I've been trying to think of a good reason since I first saw the story break but I still can't.

"When you stop striving for perfection, you might as well be dead."
 

If they buy Beats what will they do with it?

If they ditch the Beats brand it seems completely pointless as surely Apple could build a better headphone from scratch a hell of a lot cheaper.

You have to assume they will keep the brand (Apple Beats) but I just don’t see that much value in the brand going forward for Apple. If anything the Beats story proves that people are fickle. I genuinely believe long term success is a result of innovation and top quality product and Beats is neither innovative nor top quality.

This is all about the brand. Beats has absolutely no unique capabilities. It does not do anything that Apple is not capable of.

I wonder could a big part of the motivation here be to take Beats out of the game so a new Apple headset could gain traction a little bit down the road?

No doubt about it wearable’s are the thing of the moment. You have watches, glasses, monitors that strap to various parts of the body but one thing we have not heard much about is a truly innovative next gen headphone. Headphones have always been just headphones, some are better quality than others but on the whole you plug them in and listen. Could Apple have an eye on developing something and they worried that Beats dominance in the space could stymy the idea before it got out of the gates?

Possibly a stretch but this just seems like a strange’un.

Of course it is also possible that Apple is flat out of ideas, panicked and threw a pile of cash at the only thing they could think of.

 

shiiiiiiiiiiiet

Disclaimer for the Kids: Any forward-looking statements are solely for informational purposes and cannot be taken as investment advice. Consult your moms before deciding where to invest.
 

competes directly? It's more like that cousin half your age who compares himself to you but you don't even remember his birthday.

Frank Sinatra - "Alcohol may be man's worst enemy, but the bible says love your enemy."
 

Interesting to see where Apple would take this. Historically, they've taken a lot of smaller relatively unknown technologies and built upon it. But this acquisition seems to be more for the branding which is quite odd. Not clear what the strategy is here

 

Bleh. Would have liked to see Apple design and produce their own in house headphones/audio products - or at least acquire an upper scale audio company like Harman Kardon.

Beats/Monster make shitty products that then market the hell out of them. $200 headphones probably cost $15 to make, and then $150 to market. It's a backwards business model from what Apple has historically done.

I really don't understand this acquisition.

 

I think this makes sense. Both Apple and Beats make products that are largely driven by marketing and luxury branding. Any audiophile who knows anything about headphones will never buy a Beats product. If you head over to head-fi.org, you'll see guys talking about brands like Sennheiser, HiFiMan, Beyerdynamic, Grado, Ultrasone, etc, but never Beats, and if they do, it's only to deride the brand.

Same goes for Apple. iPhones are largely getting trounced by Android products now but are still priced in the top tier. You can get a PC laptop with higher specs and cheaper price than an equivalent Macbook, and it's the same story with iPads.

So I guess with Apple acquiring Beats, the 2 brands can combine their marketing experience to sell ever shittier products at ever higher prices.

 

I use to DJ as a kid. I use Technics, Pioneer, Denon, and Stanton headphones.. they quality and durability was insane... Incredible products.

then out of knowhere these Beats came out and I thought, oh waw they must be pretty cool to use.. yea not a chance, music quality is shit on Dre Beats and price is insane. 300 bucks for a rookie pair of headphones that are red?.. the same exam headphones but better are built by Pioneer DJ for 99 bucks and their durability was 1million times better.

This is clearly a marketing strategy play.. nothing more. The Dre products blow, all of them. nothing to crazy is going into the technology here and frankly speaking, Dre cheapass use the crap stuff.. stupid acquisition. I wonder how many other stupid rappers are gonna start releasing products because there is now a chance of an Apple buyout.

.
 

Ahhh, WSO getting off track and into a head phone circle jerk. Most of the name brands we buy are shit compared to lesser known and cheaper products. Hence the value of branding. I would never buy beats because people are fucking douche bags with them on now.

I remember when the only head phones were those large, dumb looking things. Then ear buds came about. We've come full circle with thinking that having donuts on your head look cool.

Apple should pay a monster dividend or buy back shares. They are a cash cow and a mature company. Start acting like one.

 

I was like you, until I tried the PSB M4U 1. Just try them and you'll see by yourself. If you have some extra money to spend you can add 100$ and get the M4U 2 with noise cancelling system if that's your thing, and if you're aren't a BSD with your own limo yet I think it's money wisely spent.

 

Aut ut nihil nisi quod est possimus ut. Aut cupiditate labore laboriosam necessitatibus iste. Et repudiandae illum ea molestias.

WSO Content & Social Media. Follow us: Linkedin, IG, Facebook, Twitter.
 

Laboriosam qui possimus ipsam officiis odit quibusdam occaecati. Non quae impedit qui et voluptates harum vitae. Omnis praesentium ut et dolor dolores consequatur.

Sit id tempore quibusdam. Dignissimos reprehenderit corporis molestias recusandae eligendi tempora dicta. Soluta harum qui qui quibusdam accusamus reprehenderit voluptatem. Consequatur vel aut veniam deleniti laudantium saepe. Ea adipisci amet omnis neque facere libero. Nam laboriosam voluptatem repellat modi consequatur maiores. Minus nulla sed adipisci impedit est adipisci.

Enim quos esse praesentium impedit aut asperiores. Maiores facere mollitia doloremque labore numquam est molestiae beatae. Voluptas veniam quos distinctio rerum odio iste fugiat error. Impedit recusandae praesentium quod quia vel atque. Similique sint delectus qui aut. Excepturi nam ut nisi nisi iusto sunt.

 

Molestias consectetur non commodi dolorem. Et accusantium ipsum et quisquam sint. Unde accusantium quam cumque laboriosam. Reiciendis ipsam quidem culpa et sed voluptate. Neque officiis et dicta. Eligendi dolore beatae dolore libero. Ratione consequatur vel eum sapiente et consequatur quia.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”