Can I get some info on these ibanks please: ML, JP, Lehman
(Gorilla, 509
Points)
on 11/9/07 at 10:59pm
I'm looking how they compare, their rankings, and what their specific strengths are. Like GS has M&A, what are each of these banks' strengths and weaknesses.
Experiences, gripes, praises, basically anything in-depth, useful, or stuff that you could only know from working/interning their is appreciated.
actually GS does not have
actually GS does not have M&A, they do all M&A in their industry groups. MS is known for its M&A group. Lehman's strong groups are Natural Resources, Consumer/ Retail, and Communications. JPM's has a really good Lev Fin group (but the market sucks) and decent M&A. ML has pretty good FIG and Healthcare. Hope that helps
agreed...ML really does have
agreed...ML really does have a solid FIG group but mid-run future doesn't seem too bright for that...jpm has a strong restructuring practice, that may be a good place to be in
JPM strong FIG. Lehman very
JPM strong FIG. Lehman very strong in debt. ML is a terrible firm, so I know nothing about them.
Thanks for the info guys.
Thanks for the info guys. How do they compare to each other? It doesnt really affect anything since I'll go with whichever firm takes me, but in the rare case I get an offer (summer analyst btw) for more than 1, I'd like to at least know which I'd fit in with best.
Furthermore, which firm would help me most to get into buy-side, or is that irrelevant?
I'm actually very interested in restructuring, so hopefully JPM gives me a chance.
What I'd really like is some feedback from people who've been through the summer internships. I'd just like to know how it works and what really goes on.
ML is a terrible firm How
ML is a terrible firm
How so? Is it because of this whole CEO fiasco? or is ML really falling apart?
"ML is terrible" - talk
"ML is terrible" - talk about some bullshit right there. Strong groups include M&A, Healthcare and FIG, amongst others. GLT group is best on the street for what it does. Analysts are highly regarded and have significant opportunities at top firms (I personally know people there going to top-tier PE shops, the ones that people here worship). Just because they lost a boatload of paper doesn't mean they are terrible. Given the choice of those three, I would take ML, Lehman and then JPM, in that order.
JPM then Lehman. I would
JPM then Lehman. I would never work at ML. I don't care how much ML lost in the recent crisis; the firm has the worst culture on the street. "Analysts are highly regarded" - you really want to talk about bullshit? Analysts at ML are worked harder than slaves and given absolutely no respect. Even bad compared to ibanking industry standards. I've heard this is especially true for Asian analysts, but I can't say whether this is accurate.
^ I find this hard to
^ I find this hard to beleive since their former ceo was black and former co-head of ibanking was asian...
^ I find this hard to
^ I find this hard to beleive since their former ceo was black and former co-head of ibanking was asian...
ML is still a great firm; of
ML is still a great firm; of course when it comes down to the non-GS/MS firms its all about group selection; FIG & M&A are amazing... overall i still think ML ranks behind Lehman & JPMorgan however, though above firms such as CS and UBS
Citi M&A vs. ML M&A
what do you guys think? I think Citi has the upper hand.
Citi M&A vs. ML M&A
what do you guys think? I think Citi has the upper hand.
I disagree and think ML's
I disagree and think ML's M&A is year in and year out ahead of Citi. They place extremely well into PE and HFs, and from my experience they're more highly regarded. Then again, you can't go wrong with either and you'll have a similar experience regardless.
I think "b" is still trying
I think "b" is still trying to figure out what he's going to do (http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/node/10347 11/12/2007 @ 12:57 AM) and is mildly upset that Merrill slighted him. I don't think he has much of a clue about culture at ML and of analysts being "worked like slaves." First, it's banking, so don't expect a cakewalk, and that applies across the street. Second, culture at ML is quite laid back, however, you are expected to perform (like at every major bank).
I agree with NYstateofmind - ML M&A over Citi M&A, however both are solid.
And "b," from reading your post that I had cited above, you allude to having offers from JPM and Lehman. You want to work in Asia, so why not search the many threads on this forum about it and you'll see plenty of opinions about Lehman not being strong in Asia. So there you go, choose JPM.
To the OP, assuming you're talking about NY, choose wherever you fit in best and in whichever culture you could see yourself being successful. If it were me, I would go ML first.
"Even bad compared to
"Even bad compared to ibanking industry standards. I've heard this is especially true for Asian analysts, but I can't say whether this is accurate."
1) learn to write proper english
2) they don't discriminate, you were probably a geeky weirdo in your interview
3) I'm asian (Japanese)
I never said I wanted to
I'm happy, for your sake,
lehman is definitely the
wow. what a useless bump.