BB Private Equity Group or BB IBD?

good question. anyone have an insight?

although hours are significantly better/predictable.

I know Goldman has a Principle Investment Area(PIA) and a Private Equity Group(PEG). PEG is more of a Bo/MO-type role, doing a lot of reporting on PE fund performance to PWM and AM, tracking FoF's, etc... PIA is what you think of when someone says Private Equity, its comparable to working as a PE Analyst at one of independent PE Shops.

If its a PEG-like group vs IBD... hands down IBD.

If its PIA-like group vs IBD... I'd personally pick the PIA group just because Im more interested in PE, and because most people in IBD are hoping to get to eventually get to the buyside, working at a top bank will help them do that... which would lead one to assume that working in a buy-side arm of a top bank would position you to snap up a top spot at a top PE shop.

This is my personal opinion, take it for what its worth.

is there a sharp difference in the recruiting for PEG versus PIA?

Yes; PEG advertises on-campus; PIA in HK can be applied to directly;PIA in New York is based on banking applications I think and has no direct application process.

The one girl I've known who got a GS PIA offer got it after she got a Goldman Banking offer during recruiting and was thinking about signing somewhere else(think BX, Cerberus, etc.).

Thanks Elan, that makes perfect sense. As a side, does anyone know which of the large independent buyout shops take undergrads? I know BX takes a few and Carlyle does in RE, but what about the others?

Unless you know someone high up or are a completely stellar candidate, wouldn't you be better focusing on smaller shops at the undergrad stage?

Not trying to discourage you mate, but there are a lot of very, very talented people competing for a very small number of spots at the firms you have mentioned, that's if these firms are even taking undergrads at present, what with the current downward spiralling trends in PE....

Thanks Mr. Fish, I'm aware of how competitive the industry is, but I recently realized that I might have a few opportunities to land a PE position that are definitely worth exploring. I'm trying to gauge which places recruit undergrads/what undergrad analysts actually do and whether or not it would be a better fit/experience than staying in banking.

I'm basically looking for a breakdown of the major shops in terms of which recruit undergrads as well as any other info the experts on this site might deem relevant to someone in my position.

fair enough, best of luck to you then!

Is Goldman PIA and Morgan PE (Merchant banking or RSREF) base and bonus on the same level as banking?

PIA is significantly more competitive, to my understanding.

PEG is again, more of a BO/MO type role supporting areas of GSAM which invest in Goldman's FoFs.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Can't speak to Morgan but GS analysts are paid on the same scale and so are some of the other BB PE arms that I've seen.

the ms PE group doesn't hire out of undergrad that i know of and is on pay scale comparable to other post-analyst PE opportunities. they do have an infrastructure PE group though that is basically the same as the IBD program. real estate analysts work in banking as well as investing (msref) and is also the same as the IBD program, in terms of recruiting and pay

The use of this "back office" shit is ridiculous and I can't believe no one has responded to this statement yet. PEG is not back office by any means; it is actually a very good front office position but for those looking for fund of funds.

The difference between Goldman PIA and Goldman PEG is that the PIA makes direct private equity investments, competing with BX, Cerebus...etc, whereas PEG is a fund of funds that invests in other hedge funds, and in GSAM.

Saying that PEG is back office is absurd. That's basically saying any fund of funds is back office... PEG happens to be one of the leading fund of funds out there.

I have zero interest in fund of funds work, so there's no way I would consider PEG, but seriously, just because it doesn't make direct investments does not mean it is back office. Heck, I remember people were saying that ECM/DCM were also "back office" roles somewhere else as well

Ive heard a PEG Associate refer to it as Middle Office and several people describe the same positions elsewhere as MO/BO.

I'm sharing whatever info I know and do recall saying correct me if I'm wrong... so chill.

PEG is definitely not BO... but if I were to think of a very good FO gig, I'd think PE Analyst/Assoc at Carlyle/KKR, M&A at GS, Prop trading at GS... PEG honestly isn't in that tier.

What makes PEG a great group is the Goldman culture combined with the unique culture in PEG, not necessarily its classification as FO/MO/BO. I'd probably say MO isn't a stretch for certain groups within PEG and I wouldn't be surprised if the PEG assoc Elan's referring to is in one of those groups.

ihavenomoneynow-- considering I've already seen you pretend to know what you're talking about and then get shot down in another thread... I'm getting pretty tired of some of the expert opinions coming from some of the prospective monkeys.

Just to clear things up...

Front office = revenue earning group
Middle office = day to day support and contact with revenue earning group
Back office = support function that is not directly in contact with revenue earning groups

Not good to stereo-type roles either (for example, IT can be back office in a bank, but front office at Google for the exact same job!!)

Fund management is FRONT OFFICE at a bank!!!! i.e. they have clients that they earn revenue from. Middle office has nothing to do with being in an 'elite' group like KKR, a middle office role would be trade support and clearing.

Fund management may be, fund reporting is not.

I was talking about very good FO positions like ihavenomoney was referring to. The prestige of the firm has nothing to do with what type of position it is. FO typically refers to S&T/IBD and comparable jobs on the buy-side. To say something is a very good from that pool, is to say its better than most. IMO PEG isn't better than IBD at any BB and many of the well regarded boutiques, it also isn't better than any respectable Sales job or Trading job at a BB, and it sure as hell isn't better than any of the FO jobs on the buy-side.

As for people looking for FoF job.... of all the people working in the proximity of a FoF, very few are there because of their unwavering love of Fund of Funds. Many just didn't know the difference between a lot of these positions and this was the best opportunity they had. Many couldn't get into straight PE(like myself) and couldn't get into IBD. What is good about GS's PEG specifically is its reputation and the opportunities to transition into what you really wanted to do, but need a 2 or 3 yr stint in PEG to get there.

I agree that it doesn't compare to PE the way IBD does, and i'm sure a lot of people apply without knowing exactly what they do. In fact, I would doubt that a 3 year stint in PEG could transition into anything other than some form of fund management? Definitely no transferable skills into actual buyside...

that's exactly right... everyone who takes a PE fund of funds gig couldn't get into PE "like yourself."
also, who the hell are you to judge what is a great "front office role" and what is a "unwanted" front office role, which in your peanut brain is a MO/BO role

this is what pisses me off on the board... the obsession with ibd and s&t and stuck up pricks who think they know it all and have no idea what they're talking about...

yes i completely agree with you, that only ibd and s&t are worth going into. Prime brokerage? back office. Private wealth management? back office. Research? back office.

you probably work for a shitty p/e firm anyway, and have fun making your huge bonus this year

ha. Peanut brain.

You're the douche bag that didn't pick-up from this entire thread where I work.

I know you go to a top school and think you know something. Keep reading books and thinking you know your ass from your elbow, then get your diploma and your "I haven't gotten laid since my baby sitter sodomized me in 6th grade" sash, come into the real world and get sodomized again.

This line of work isn't for people like you, I'm pretty sure you're coming to the same conclusion on your own.

FYI... I find it funny that you were just as adamant about what Securities Lending consisted of, until someone who actually knows something (outside of what they read in a book or on a forum) shut you down. Do yourself a favor and STFU, you're not impressing anyone. Save your asinine comments for the class room and don't post again until your balls drop.

wow did you really just look up my post history just to find something you could use to respond with? i'm not going to sort through everyone's post history to find out where they work. sorry but you're really not that important.

securities lending is not really "trading"... you're not making markets and you're not taking positions. you're helping hedge funds locate securities to short.

seriously, let's stop this for your sake

edit:
ok i realize i may have overreacted and this is silly... my posts here are NOT supposed to be a direct attack on anyone, but mainly that

1) Don't go out and say that anything other than an ibd/s&t gig is less front office...not everyone who goes into fund of funds work is retarded and thinks they are going into direct investments.

surprised this thread didnt get locked.

ihavenomoneynow, you're a tool and know nothing... stfu

Exactly. ECM is a perfect example of middle office work.

_______________________________________
http://www.drmarkklein.blogspot.com/