End of elitism

Something I've witnessed working for almost 3 years in the industry is the beginning of an end of elitism in banking. I'm at a BB and it's not just ivy league finance majors getting in. No, we've hired some finance majors from nontarget colleges, there's even some marketing research analyst folk who joined us (I think they did some certifications in financial analysis). From the conversations I have with people in the biz, it seems like the trend is toward educational meritocracy.

Your thoughts? What's your experience like?

 

Correlation =/= causation

"After you work on Wall Street it’s a choice, would you rather work at McDonalds or on the sell-side? I would choose McDonalds over the sell-side.” - David Tepper
 
Wall St:

I think this may just have come with the evolution of the internet. Now that banks open up applications to the general public online and with sites like WSO, more kids from different schools are finding out how to get a job on Wall Street.

This. It used to be that you didn't know what investment banking was unless you were from the East Coast, went to an Ivy, or come from a privileged background. That is no longer the case.
 
theteam:

I think that the senior level members at larger banks and BBs make up the majority of non-ivy league alumni at any given firm. BBs that hire junior members outside of the SA pool don't like to take chances on non-ivy candidates and most SA pools are comprised of ivy league undergrads. And when the time comes to move over to the buy-side (as so many analysts/associates try to do) the cream of the crop are chosen. That being said, those junior to mid level employees who stick it out with their BB have a much better chance of becoming an MD regardless of where they went undergrad. So I guess what I'm saying is, if you are non-ivy and lucky enough to slip through the cracks, you will most likely stay loyal to your firm, which is hands-down the most important quality to higher-ups.

Non-Ivys slipping through cracks? What? Even at BBs, most are not Ivy league from what I've seen. Georgetown, Michigan, etc. seem to have just as many or more kids than Ivy league schools, except for Penn.
 
theteam:

I think that the senior level members at larger banks and BBs make up the majority of non-ivy league alumni at any given firm. BBs that hire junior members outside of the SA pool don't like to take chances on non-ivy candidates and most SA pools are comprised of ivy league undergrads. And when the time comes to move over to the buy-side (as so many analysts/associates try to do) the cream of the crop are chosen. That being said, those junior to mid level employees who stick it out with their BB have a much better chance of becoming an MD regardless of where they went undergrad. So I guess what I'm saying is, if you are non-ivy and lucky enough to slip through the cracks, you will most likely stay loyal to your firm, which is hands-down the most important quality to higher-ups.

I lol'd
"Now go get your f'n shinebox!"
 

I guess it depends on your definition... I think most incoming classes are probably at least 75% made up of kids from what would be considered top 25 schools.

Although if you broke it down by school, the top represented would still come from Ivys by a good margin.

 

Getting into banking is systematic. Before the Internet there was a big knowledge void and you got in by knowing people. Now you can have your resume dialed in, pound out emails from linkedin and interview and model prep from a number of Sources. If you're committed and prepare you can break into banking.

 

The micro coffee drinking, American Spirit Smoking, fedora wearing neck beard hipsters are finally taking over. Students are leaving school saying " why not just work 50 hours a week at a startup, and make a ton of money in a few years on an IPO". Now you can be rich and look like the pringle's man at the same time apparently. As for me, I'm still fighting the good fight to break into good old Wall Street

 
rj1443:

The micro coffee drinking, American Spirit Smoking, fedora wearing neck beard hipsters are finally taking over. Students are leaving school saying " why not just work 50 hours a week at a startup, and make a ton of money in a few years on an IPO". Now you can be rich and look like the pringle's man at the same time apparently. As for me, I'm still fighting the good fight to break into good old Wall Street

Lol at your hipster description, that would annoy me too. i've been away from the usa for too long.

I'm of the group to work for a startup, or at least in tech, so you guys know how I feel on that aspect

re: "I'm still fighting the good fight to break into good old Wall Street" - just curious, what's your main motivation?

WSO Content & Social Media. Follow us: Linkedin, IG, Facebook, Twitter.
 
AndyLouis:
rj1443:
The micro coffee drinking, American Spirit Smoking, fedora wearing neck beard hipsters are finally taking over. Students are leaving school saying " why not just work 50 hours a week at a startup, and make a ton of money in a few years on an IPO". Now you can be rich and look like the pringle's man at the same time apparently. As for me, I'm still fighting the good fight to break into good old Wall Street

Lol at your hipster description, that would annoy me too. i've been away from the usa for too long.

I'm of the group to work for a startup, or at least in tech, so you guys know how I feel on that aspect

re: "I'm still fighting the good fight to break into good old Wall Street" - just curious, what's your main motivation?

Main motivation is making enough money to just buy all the pussy i want instead of marrying for it... Cause when you marry for it it's like taking out a mortgage for one pussy

 
AndyLouis:
rj1443:
The micro coffee drinking, American Spirit Smoking, fedora wearing neck beard hipsters are finally taking over. Students are leaving school saying " why not just work 50 hours a week at a startup, and make a ton of money in a few years on an IPO". Now you can be rich and look like the pringle's man at the same time apparently. As for me, I'm still fighting the good fight to break into good old Wall Street

Lol at your hipster description, that would annoy me too. i've been away from the usa for too long.

I'm of the group to work for a startup, or at least in tech, so you guys know how I feel on that aspect

re: "I'm still fighting the good fight to break into good old Wall Street" - just curious, what's your main motivation?

Outside of money? 2 reasons really... 1. I actually found M&A to be rather interesting. You can learn so much about how to run a business, how to pitch an idea, and really influence a companies decision making process.

  1. There is a chip on my shoulder. Coming from a non target school, I'm always told you aren't good enough. I want to prove myself among what the world considers "the elite." Wallstreet is a place for the hyper competitive. That fits my mindset perfectly.

Chances are i'm not going to have a shot at IBD again until after an MBA. Didn't receive an off after Internship.... still looking for work. Also that description of Silicon Valley was just a joke. There really are some very bright people there. I wonder why they don't have a Silicon Valley Oasis lol

 

Good points. I agree with most. Just to add my view. Not to get philosophical, but I feel like IB is adjusting to the new world. It's a world where educational credentials matter increasingly less and less and employers just want proof that you can kill at the job. An extreme example of that are coders who can make fucked up amounts of money without ever having even gone to school. I know IB is very different, and is probably the most conservative industry still out there. But we're changing, guys. And maybe it's just my limited perception, but I feel like "target schools" will be a thing of the past.

PS I've got no horse in this worldview as I finished my finance & econ honors at a Canadian target.

 

Two trends are responsible for this.

First, the top students from the best colleges are not going into banking like they used to before the crisis. They're either going into tech, straight into buyside, or Phd programs, also MBB to an extent. Second, at least in S&T, given the move towards algorithmic trading, banks are looking to hire kids with strong mathematical and programming skills and value that skillset more than the college on their diploma. Of course, a strong CS kid from say MIT/Stanford will have no problem going into S&T, but school alone is not the defining criteria.

I think this is healthy in many ways. It's dangerous when recruiters at top firms basically delegate their vetting process to admissions officers at our best universities. Sure, admission to those schools send a signaling effect, but that presupposes that college admissions is an objective meritocratic process, which it certainly is not.

 
MBAGrad2015:

Two trends are responsible for this.

First, the top students from the best colleges are not going into banking like they used to before the crisis. They're either going into tech, straight into buyside, or Phd programs, also MBB to an extent. Second, at least in S&T, given the move towards algorithmic trading, banks are looking to hire kids with strong mathematical and programming skills and value that skillset more than the college on their diploma. Of course, a strong CS kid from say MIT/Stanford will have no problem going into S&T, but school alone is not the defining criteria.

I think this is healthy in many ways. It's dangerous when recruiters at top firms basically delegate their vetting process to admissions officers at our best universities. Sure, admission to those schools send a signaling effect, but that presupposes that college admissions is an objective meritocratic process, which it certainly is not.

That's what I would have thought too, but the majority of the kids in my S&T SA class come from non-STEM backgrounds, including myself. That may be because my firm has a separate quant SA program.
 
wilder01:
MBAGrad2015:
Two trends are responsible for this.
First, the top students from the best colleges are not going into banking like they used to before the crisis. They're either going into tech, straight into buyside, or Phd programs, also MBB to an extent. Second, at least in S&T, given the move towards algorithmic trading, banks are looking to hire kids with strong mathematical and programming skills and value that skillset more than the college on their diploma. Of course, a strong CS kid from say MIT/Stanford will have no problem going into S&T, but school alone is not the defining criteria.
I think this is healthy in many ways. It's dangerous when recruiters at top firms basically delegate their vetting process to admissions officers at our best universities. Sure, admission to those schools send a signaling effect, but that presupposes that college admissions is an objective meritocratic process, which it certainly is not.


That's what I would have thought too, but the majority of the kids in my S&T SA class come from non-STEM backgrounds, including myself. That may be because my firm has a separate quant SA program.

Ok; that surprises me. I thought S&T desks have moved towards hiring almost exclusively STEM kids. When I talked to S&T desks while in my mba program, they all said that they prefer hiring undergrads from STEM backgrounds since they can do the work that MBAs do while being half the price.

 

My boss basically said every non-target intern that has come through our shop has sucked, but he always liked giving kids a chance. If you can learn and have drive you're valuable. The problem was that all the non-targets just wanted to do finance because they liked the idea of making a lot of money, they weren't prepared to actually contribute and use their brain. Therefore, my boss has given up on non-targets.

 
NESCAC:

My boss basically said every non-target intern that has come through our shop has sucked, but he always liked giving kids a chance. If you can learn and have drive you're valuable. The problem was that all the non-targets just wanted to do finance because they liked the idea of making a lot of money, they weren't prepared to actually contribute and use their brain. Therefore, my boss has given up on non-targets.

And you believe that? What a terrible generalization.
 
NuclearPenguins:
NESCAC:
My boss basically said every non-target intern that has come through our shop has sucked, but he always liked giving kids a chance. If you can learn and have drive you're valuable. The problem was that all the non-targets just wanted to do finance because they liked the idea of making a lot of money, they weren't prepared to actually contribute and use their brain. Therefore, my boss has given up on non-targets.


And you believe that? What a terrible generalization.

I never said I personally believed that. My boss comes from a 'non-target'. Everyone is just throwing shit at me for being the messenger. I have friends who work at top shops (the BB's, the MF's, etc) that are non-targets. The problem is that the ratio of prepared kids to unprepared kids at non-targets is a lot smaller than at targets. Have I met people who went to HYP who I think are complete morons? Absolutely. I'm sure WSO has a ton of prepared kids who come from non-targets that will eat anyone's lunch any day of the week. However, at the end of the day it's a numbers game people; stop being butt hurt for Christ's sake.

 
NESCAC:

My boss basically said every non-target intern that has come through our shop has sucked, but he always liked giving kids a chance. The problem was that all the non-targets just wanted to do finance because they liked the idea of making a lot of money, they weren't prepared to actually contribute and use their brain.

Yeah cause the targets aren't in it for the money, only the non targets are.

Lol you're funny kid

And while the median intelligence level is probably higher at top schools, there are still extremely smart kids who literally don't even know or care what "prestige" is and go to non targets for a multitude of reasons

 
theebreadwinner:
NESCAC:
My boss basically said every non-target intern that has come through our shop has sucked, but he always liked giving kids a chance. The problem was that all the non-targets just wanted to do finance because they liked the idea of making a lot of money, they weren't prepared to actually contribute and use their brain.

Yeah cause the targets aren't in it for the money, only the non targets are.

Lol you're funny kid

And while the median intelligence level is probably higher at top schools, there are still extremely smart kids who literally don't even know or care what "prestige" is and go to non targets for a multitude of reasons

I was not implying that only non-targets are in it for the money. Everyone is in it for the money. But the non-targets that we interviewed just didn't have the same drive/depth of knowledge that the targets did. Is this always the case? No. That's like saying everyone who goes to community college is retarded -- which is false. The top CC kids could very easily compete at the top private colleges and universities. There are non-targets that would kill to have half the chances some people on this forum have and have done their homework. The ones we have come across apparently just suck, but my sample size is limited. The general attitude from the non-target kids was sort of a 'Oh I saw Wolf of Wall Street, it seemed pretty sick and I want to make a lot of money'. Half these interviews are bullshit, but at least have the decency to make up a good story. Someone told me they got their news from the reddit econ section-- seriously wtf? We gave a non-target an internship because of a family connection, and I had to stop what I was doing to explain what an investment bank does, and what EBITDA is. I don't mind explaining, but at least go on investopedia before you ask me such basic questions to make both of our lives easier. However, I digress--going back to OP's question: it's exactly what theebreadwinner said...the median intelligence level at top schools is higher. I can pick a random kid out of a hat and they'll be a better candidate 90% of the time. As long as this is the case, elitism will exist on the street.

Honestly, I'm just bitter that our interns have contributed a net negative output and most have happened to be non-targets. Correlation is different from causation, but I think a bit of both are at play here.

 

In my very brief career - and having recently been in the job market - this often arose in conversation. Coming from a non-target, I always had a tough time competing with the kids from the Ivys - on paper. When I was able to speak with someone, whether it was on the phone or in person, it was a bit of different story.

During my internships (ER, trading (buy side), and ops) as an undergrad, I spent time with some absolutely brilliant kids from Wharton, Princeton, Hopkins, Michigan, ect. Some of these kids, although extremely smart, felt that they were "above" completing menial office tasks. For example, if pitch-books needed binding or an analyst needed coffee, they'd pretend not to hear the request until someone else complied. I was also told that when you're spending banking hours with someone, good personality traits are equally valuable.

Also, I think @MBAGrad2015" is correct. Many of my friends who studied in areas that could have easily translated into a career in banking, elected to go toward toward tech or pursued MBAs in engineering. The stigma of wall street has changed and the faint of heart are searching for job security + work life balance.

 

If you're great at what you do you will be found and you will make it. It doesn't matter what colour your fucking skin is, what fucking school you came from, or what your fucking last name is. (albeit, they can be somewhat advantageous) Point is, shits getting more and more competitive out there which is good for the industry IMO. Get out there and work like hell and make a name for yourself. Do what your boss asks and surpass his expectations. If he asks you to take a shit, you ask how big?

 
PeeHoleFarts:

If you're great at what you do you will be found and you will make it. It doesn't matter what colour your fucking skin is, what fucking school you came from, or what your fucking last name is. (albeit, they can be somewhat advantageous) Point is, shits getting more and more competitive out there which is good for the industry IMO. Get out there and work like hell and make a name for yourself. Do what your boss asks and surpass his expectations. If he asks you to take a shit, you ask how big?

Strong username and avatar. And strong post content to username ratio.

 

Generally I see more non-target folks roaming around today than when I first started but having a good school on your resume absolutely helps during hiring/interviews/networking. It doesn't have to be undergrad though, it can be masters or mba, but having an ivy league or ivy-equivalent institution in your profile definitely makes you stand out, all else equal. I don't think that will change.

 

A lot of smart students prefer the Google's / Apples of the world as well as other tech firms. And the Tech sector is so cash rich that they can pay talented junior developers very competitive base salaries, not to mention better hours and perks than is offered at IBs. This has been the trend since the crisis. A lot of the brightest grads head to Silicon Valley over Wall Street.

 

Yeah....also keep in mind that there's a few schools out there which are technically "non targets" due to a lack of any OCR but still will reach out to the school's career services offices to see if there's any current students who are interested. In some cases it's due to location, in others it's due to low enough numbers that it just isn't worth the flight. They'd rather fly out the one or two candidates from that school who make the cut.

Ironically enough I've heard the exact opposite assessment of "non targets". As I've mentioned before my main point of contact in my professional association hears repeatedly from recruiters that they're interested in expanding their non-traditional recruiting pipelines due to the entitlement mentality and declining work ethic that they've found to be endemic among alumni of "prestigious" schools. The difficult part is finding sources that reliably provide the kind of mental firepower required.

 

And five years later, you still have a chip on your shoulders. Will you stop bringing up state school engineering programs in every thread that remotely has to do with school? At first it was funny, but now it's getting obnoxious and reeks of state school insecurity. You remind me of those girls who were ugly growing up and then blossomed into hotties and now rub it in everyone's faces. For someone as smart as you, it's unbecoming.

 
MBAGrad2015:

And five years later, you still have a chip on your shoulders. Will you stop bringing up state school engineering programs in every thread that remotely has to do with school? At first it was funny, but now it's getting obnoxious and reeks of state school insecurity. You remind me of those girls who were ugly growing up and then blossomed into hotties and now rub it in everyone's faces. For someone as smart as you, it's unbecoming.

Dude you claim you joined the forum a month ago. If you're going to pretend you're not Brady, can you keep your story straight?

I don't think there's any insecurity associated with going to a state school... I'm very proud of where I went to school, as are you. Nobody gets accused of being insecure for being proud of going to an Ivy, and I don't think going to a state school should garner the same accusations, especially when state schools outrank most Ivies in Engineering. :)

So... what is there to be insecure about?

 
opsdude1:

At the MBA level, the decline of finance - and the lowering of standards - is pretty shocking. At Kellogg, 88% of people who applied got IB offers - only people who failed were those with poor english skills. Even at worse programs in the 15-20 range of MBA (e.g. UT), most people seem successful.

As I've mentioned before, some of the programs in the 15-20 range have gotten VERY good at identifying candidates with potential for IB, grooming them to be interview well and be technically competent, and using their alumni network to get jobs. I know of one school in that range which placed 100% of those seeking IB jobs into front office roles.

 

I can only speak for London and the rest of Europe but it seems you have a point. Whereas traditionally, London was filled with LSE, Warwick, UCL and Oxbridge kids (and the odd from continental schools) we're seeing a larger influx from a wider range. ESCP, Bath, Durham and even Rotterdam are placing well.

 

yeah, elitism is definitely not over - it simply that more kids from target schools want to go work in silicon valley or non-profits. Their daddy already went to BB killed it and they don't need to worry about dick measuring anymore. their family already has the nice cars and the yachts. That means you need to go elsewhere to fill the ranks. Those new kids will have to work 3x as hard and lick more ass than anyone and still will be looked at down the nose. simple as that. call me a cynic. call me an asshole. call me a ninja in a zentai suit. truth is truth ( dramatically drops mic on stage and leaves).

"I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player. Or nothing. " -GG
 
the_gekko:

yeah, elitism is definitely not over - it simply that more kids from target schools want to go work in silicon valley or non-profits. Their daddy already went to BB killed it and they don't need to worry about dick measuring anymore. their family already has the nice cars and the yachts. That means you need to go elsewhere to fill the ranks. Those new kids will have to work 3x as hard and lick more ass than anyone and still will be looked at down the nose. simple as that. call me a cynic. call me an asshole. call me a ninja in a zentai suit. truth is truth ( dramatically drops mic on stage and leaves).

Love this post lol

 

Non-targets are also trying to break into tech, because it's a booming industry in a way that banking is not. Has nothing to do with whether their parents are wealthy, because tech workers, at least at the entry level, make on par with entry level bankers and with way, way better perqs. And there is absolutely no trend of rich kids going to work for non-profits more so than at any other time in the last century.

Well at least the denials are getting more sophisticated.

Part of who I am is that I enjoy shoving my non-eliteness in the face of a guy who has trolled relentlessly about prestige- with thousands of posts about ridiculous resumes, fake emails from HBS pals, MAD SWAGGER, etc. That's not insecurity, that's just Rodney Dangerfield having fun with Judge Smails at Bushwood Golf Club. I own my lack of prestige, my thrift, and my cheap vehicles.

Back to my rusty honda. (Parked in the middle of the seventh hole fairway. No, I'm not worried about the tire tracks.)

 

The real insecurity here is Brady not just owning being Brady. Dude's our local celebrity, right up there with Eddie, Ant, Dick, etc. Own being the heel and they will love you, Brady, or at least love to hate you.

Commercial Real Estate Developer
 

From my personal experience, my hs band class sent multiple kids to every single top 15 school. But the ones who went to lower tier Ivies are the biggest brand whores of the bunch.

Also the difference in student quality at Ivies and top tier non Ivies like Duke or Chicago is decreasing fast. I remember when I was applying to college 5 years ago there was still a sizable gap in the SAT/ACT avg. (I think the midtier Ivies had a range of 33-36 and Duke would be a few points below). I think test scores are nearly identical now.

 

Most of the kids from non-targets that got SA offers at BBs just took it on themselves to be elitist and pretend they were god's gift to financial services, even though it was their family connections who got them a middle office role. And like it was said before, a lot of kids from top schools chose to do something in tech or a non-finance field, and those in finance were a lot more nonchalant about it.

Really it depends on the person but there are definitely compensation issues.

 
chobani:

Most of the kids from non-targets that got SA offers at BBs just took it on themselves to be elitist and pretend they were god's gift to financial services, even though it was their family connections who got them a middle office role. And like it was said before, a lot of kids from top schools chose to do something in tech or a non-finance field, and those in finance were a lot more nonchalant about it.

Really it depends on the person but there are definitely compensation issues.

Let me guess, you're from some EB like Lazard and by your definition of "non-target", you're specifically referring to Columbia undergrads, right?

Seriously my time in NY left me convinced that insecurity about and obsession with prestige is maximized for students who missed Harvard by an inch.

 
IlliniProgrammer:

Let me guess, you're from some EB like Lazard and by your definition of "non-target", you're specifically referring to Columbia undergrads, right?

Seriously my time in NY left me convinced that insecurity about and obsession with prestige is maximized for students who missed Harvard by an inch.

I think the elitism and arrogance isn't centered around the school, it's around the person and what they want to do with their lives. I've met an unbelievable number of prestige-desperate people at state schools. Whatever's hot at the time, Wolf of Wall Street, Bulge Bracket (cause wtf is Citadel right?) or bust, the whole "incoming summer analyst" thing on Linkedin, it's all there. I have connections at Ivys that do the same.

Those are the finance/econ kids. The tech kids are a lot better, because they always seem to want to go to a place where their work will help the company the most (i.e. growing startup). Obviously Google/FB/Uber are cool but within the CS program no one really worships them like econ kids do BB.

The last group are the STEM kids who are very bright but don't care at all about prestige. I like them the most because they don't bs you, and pump you full of crap about recruiting/prestige/status. They like the work they do/academia. Also they're the most genuine out of all of the people listed.

Those who obsess over prestige and status are kids with chips on the shoulders/insecurity about what they bring to the table. If you know you're good and don't have a chip on your shoulder because you aren't in the Ivy League/a BB, it's whatever.

 

Fresh graduates can nolonger 'make it big' in S&T due to regulatory requirements and automation.

M&A is doing well but will it impact analyst/associate bonuses, by how much, and is the deal flow here to stay?

Banking is no longer a get rich quick opportunity like the old days. Tech entrepreneurs are the new barbarians at the (logic) gate. The growth rates and payouts from IPOs are crazy. Established players also pay really well.

Tech companies become more popular/selective, hire more targets, thus leaving room for more non-targets to enter IB.

>Incoming Ash Ketchum, Pokemon Master >Literally a problem, solve for both X and Y, please and thank you. >Hugh Myron: "Are there any guides on here for getting a top girlfriend? Think banker/lawyer/doctor. I really don't want to go mid-tier"
 
hamilton714:

How does it surprise anyone that Ivy league students are targeted by investment banks? Hm let's see - who was a better student in high school and did better on the SAT? A (non-legacy) Harvard undergrad, or one from the University of Wisconsin? It isn't elitism - it is a straight up meritocracy.

Like I said before though, it's a false comparison. I had the chance to talk to some Badgers and it sounds like Wisconsin does a decent job with it's IB prep program. Increasingly programs like that are used to screen for the kids who are as capable as the Ivy Students and who are interested in Investment Banking. Hell, I know about one state U's IB program that is placing people in GS/JPM/ML and Blackstone every year.

 

Who cares how they did in high school while their parents were looking over their shoulder, though? How did they do when they were on their own? About 20% of the seats at HYP are for sale to the highest bidder through the schools' development programs, and as referenced by other threads on Asian admits (I am not Asian) undergrad admissions is hardly about hard work or academic or intellectual merit- things a meritocratic hiring process should be looking at.

More importantly, this ignores the fact that you're only as good as your last job/class. Nobody cares about what I was doing three years ago. Why should I care how a college junior did in high school? I am more concerned about your college GPA.

That's not to say it shouldn't be a surprise when 30% of Wall Street comes from an Ivy- just to say that school shouldn't necessarily directly factor into merit.

 

When computers were just for nerds and large corporations, Elite could get away with arrogance, insularity and sexism. They were building products for people that looked just like them.

David Wilson Criminal Defense Lawyer Indio Personal Injury Lawyer Indio http://cabreralawoffices.com/
 

I do not understand why this thread became a shit show. Tech is sexy now and the financial services are routinely demonized in the press. Kids from top schools have a wide variety of premier and well paying jobs to choose from. They are choosing tech or other "prestigious" jobs right now and fewer of them are going into banking. Non target kids have less of these "prestigious" options and tend to seek out the highest paying of them (aka finance in general). Also, investment banking isn't a technical field. Finance grads from state college can't break into Google or Lyft without technical skills. They can break into investment banking though with a standard and formulaic approach.

Tech will blow up and people will cycle back into finance, legal, medicine, whatever. Career choices ebb and flow.

As for prestige and snobbery, who cares. Make good money, save some and live your life. At some point in everyones life they just need to accept what is and make the best with it. You can't go back in time and the more you dwell on the past the more you waste value time you could be improving or enjoying your life.

 
TNA:

I do not understand why this thread became a shit show. Tech is sexy now and the financial services are routinely demonized in the press. Kids from top schools have a wide variety of premier and well paying jobs to choose from. They are choosing tech or other "prestigious" jobs right now and fewer of them are going into banking. Non target kids have less of these "prestigious" options and tend to seek out the highest paying of them (aka finance in general). Also, investment banking isn't a technical field. Finance grads from state college can't break into Google or Lyft without technical skills. They can break into investment banking though with a standard and formulaic approach.

Tech will blow up and people will cycle back into finance, legal, medicine, whatever. Career choices ebb and flow.

As for prestige and snobbery, who cares. Make good money, save some and live your life. At some point in everyones life they just need to accept what is and make the best with it. You can't go back in time and the more you dwell on the past the more you waste value time you could be improving or enjoying your life.

Very well put. I was thinking about posting then this.

 
TNA:

I do not understand why this thread became a shit show. Tech is sexy now and the financial services are routinely demonized in the press. Kids from top schools have a wide variety of premier and well paying jobs to choose from. They are choosing tech or other "prestigious" jobs right now and fewer of them are going into banking. Non target kids have less of these "prestigious" options and tend to seek out the highest paying of them (aka finance in general). Also, investment banking isn't a technical field. Finance grads from state college can't break into Google or Lyft without technical skills. They can break into investment banking though with a standard and formulaic approach.

Tech will blow up and people will cycle back into finance, legal, medicine, whatever. Career choices ebb and flow.

As for prestige and snobbery, who cares. Make good money, save some and live your life. At some point in everyones life they just need to accept what is and make the best with it. You can't go back in time and the more you dwell on the past the more you waste value time you could be improving or enjoying your life.

Solid post

 

Don't know about BB, but top hedge funds and top PE are still very very selective. Citadel, highbridge, GSO, KKR etc do not fuck around.
Now is everyone Ivy there no, but they are usually pretty damn impressive.

As a whole I think the industry is still pretty selective

 

Depends on the firm. Spoke to someone very senior at a very prestigious pe firm and he could not care less about what university someone went to.

If you can do the job, you can do the job.

 

I work for a fund like one of those mentioned and we definitely hire from state schools. Actually one of our most successful researchers hails from UIC.

At the level some firms hire at, credentials often go well beyond school. This isn't necessarily to give the college senior at UW OshKosh with a 3.3 GPA hope that he can get hired tomorrow- just to give him reassurance that a lot of people in his shoes did something amazing and wound up somewhere awesome a few years later. And the right kid studying engineering at UC Berkeley, Georgia Tech, UMich, UT Austin, etc can get hired into a QR or FO dev role. (A PhD is sometimes helpful, but there's nothing wrong with a SUNY undergrad, Berkeley PhD)

Harvard, Yale, and Princeton can't really predict how successful you'll be in 5-10 years because they can't predict how hard you're willing to work for that success. That's something that really only YOU can predict. And I think students at those schools would be surprised to find out how many people are willing to work harder than them.

 

Also claiming that UIUC, UT Austin, UMich, UC Berkeley, Georgia Tech, UW Madison, (aka non target) etc graduates don't have awesome options in tech- perhaps better options than most Ivies- is a bit silly.

There's a very good reason UC Berkeley ranks #1 (four way tie) for CS and Harvard ranks #30. That Google recruits more heavily from Berkeley than any Ivy. Berkeley graduates know their shit. They're not busy reading Moby Dick and the Odyssey. And while Princeton and Cornell have excellent CS programs that can at worst hold a serious candle and at best compete at a level playing field with Berkeley, they're at a huge geographical disadvantage.

I suspect that in 100 years if tech replaces finance, the new acronym could easily be BSCM (Berkeley, Stanford, Caltech, MIT) to replace HYP. New targets will get created and old targets may be replaced.

 
IlliniProgrammer:
Google recruits more heavily from Berkeley than any Ivy

I wonder if that has something to do with their headquarters being next door and the amount of interested students

If I am looking to hire someone for a technical role I want to make sure they at least have the basic level of technical skills needed. But, given two candidates with a roughly equal level of technical skills, I would be looking for something more

 
Going Concern:
IlliniProgrammer:
Google recruits more heavily from Berkeley than any Ivy

I wonder if that has something to do with their headquarters being next door and the amount of interested students

If I am looking to hire someone for a technical role I want to make sure they at least have the basic level of technical skills needed. But, given two candidates with a roughly equal level of technical skills, I would be looking for something more

Don't disagree but it sorta discounts the argument of "kids at target schools are now all choosing tech firms". The solution seems to be a bit more nuanced. For instance I don't think Duke or Georgetown is going to become the next top target for tech. And I think schools like HYP are going to have to compare themselves to Berkeley and UT Austin with more humility. Especially when Yale's own CS undergrads are writing open letters to the school to complain that their program sucks. Finally don't forget that part of HYP's advantage for Wall Street was location as well.

I'm not sure why there's this defensiveness coming from target schools. HYP are still at a huge advantage... but the gap has narrowed somewhat. I don't think any of the order statistics are changing... just the distribution and perhaps the weight on the tech rankings vs. finance. Having more diversity of educational backgrounds in the front office means better ideas, so I don't see how this is bad news for anyone.

 
IlliniProgrammer:

Also claiming that UIUC, UT Austin, UMich, UC Berkeley, Georgia Tech, UW Madison, (aka non target) etc graduates don't have awesome options in tech- perhaps better options than most Ivies- is a bit silly.

There's a very good reason UC Berkeley ranks #1 (four way tie) for CS and Harvard ranks #30. That Google recruits more heavily from Berkeley than any Ivy. Berkeley graduates know their shit. They're not busy reading Moby Dick and the Odyssey. And while Princeton and Cornell have excellent CS programs that can at worst hold a serious candle and at best compete at a level playing field with Berkeley, they're at a huge geographical disadvantage.

I suspect that in 100 years if tech replaces finance, the new acronym could easily be BSCM (Berkeley, Stanford, Caltech, MIT) to replace HYP. New targets will get created and old targets may be replaced.

Well stated. Take a look at the current ranking of top 10 engineering schools: the only "prestige" schools on the list are MIT and Cornell.

A lot of people don't understand that most Tech positions have fundamentally different requirements than finance/consulting jobs. Most techies work in "back office" technical jobs with little client interaction. There's also a massive cultural difference. One thing that's going to be extremely difficult for folks on here who've never lived outside the North East to understand is that most areas of the country don't really give a rat's ass about "prestige", with a few subcultural exceptions (Asians to be honest, Southern Preppies, to name a few). In a lot of areas which golf club you belong to or which church you go to matters a lot more than which school you went to, and if you get into fields where the mentality is more hipsterish( like Boulder) they don't give a flying fuck that you went to a "prestigious" university, lived in the "prestigious" dorm and were a part of the most "prestigious" extracurricular clubs on campus.

Hell even some of the older tech companies are like that. I've got a friend who is making 6 figures at Microsoft, with a day of work from home privileges, and who get her degree from the "non-prestigious" Oklahoma University.

 

By no means does seemingly more non-target kids getting into banking spell the end of elitism on the Street. Sure there are more schools represented in bigger numbers than ever before but this isn't killing elitism. Instead it expands the traditional view of the elite Ivies+NE schools ruling the financial world to now (somewhat) include these other previously non-target schools. So now they are seen as being at least in the same ballpark as the traditionally elite schools and thus can be considered, in a way, "elite" as well.

I definitely agree with what others have said in that this greater diversity is brought on by: 1) kids learning (through WSO/career center/whatever) what it takes to get a job on the street, 2) more ivy grads preferring tech jobs, 3) the industry realizing that anyone with above average intelligence can learn how to do well.

 

[quote=da chief]

By no means does seemingly more non-target kids getting into banking spell the end of elitism on the Street. Sure there are more schools represented in bigger numbers than ever before but this isn't killing elitism. Instead it expands the traditional view of the elite Ivies+NE schools ruling the financial world to now (somewhat) include these other previously non-target schools. So now they are seen as being at least in the same ballpark as the traditionally elite schools and thus can be considered, in a way, "elite" as well.

/quote]

That's a good way of putting it. It sipmly expands the pool to include non ivies that have good relationships or good IB programs.

 
Best Response

I was going to be done with this thread, but saw this article and saw the above article and felt compelled to chime in one more time.

1) The best jobs are easily obtained from top schools - Fact and isn't going to change. With affirmative action and Ivy's trying to socially engineer their class rooms it is "easier" to get into these schools without going to the best private schools, etc. Also, lets just be honest. The standards to get into a top schools (AA aside) are pretty damn high. Sure, being rich helps a lot, but that doesn't mean the kids aren't smart. That's just life.

2) There are plenty of very good schools that provide ample high earning jobs. It isn't just 10 schools in the US that can place you in finance or tech. There are probably 50-100 schools US schools (maybe more when you consider regional schools) that can place into these blue chip jobs assuming you are smart. If you went to West South Dakota state and have a 2.5 GPA you probably aren't getting into the best jobs. I fail to see how this is somehow unfair and not reflective of effort before and during college.

3) Life doesn't end if you aren't in the 1%. If you aren't in NYC and you are married to someone of equal intelligence and education, you can easily be in the top 5-10% of earners by your early 30's. Two accountants can be making a combined $150-200K pretty easily after a number of years. Assuming a modest lifestyle you can own your own home and save a lot of money.

This site and this country and become too fixated on what the rich do and how life fucking blows unless you are making millions. You don't need a G wagon and a private jet to have a nice life. It is absolutely ridiculous this concept. The American Dream (house, two cars, savings) can happen easily if you marry someone educated and work in any number of careers. The issue is college students max out their student debt for low paying jobs, complain cause they aren't rolling deep 24/7/365 and then bitch how their life isn't as good as their parents.

Or on this forum people complain that if they didn't go to Harvard they should kill themselves because life isn't worth living without a million in the bank. I attribute the absolute comical disconnect from reality promoted on this site because the majority of the posters are college kids watching Wall Street and Wolf of Wall Street.

Go to a good school, study, try and minimize how much debt you take out and work hard at a good firm and build up your resume and network. Savings > Debt and enjoy life in moderation. And with the multitude of masters and graduate programs being offered by top schools, if you feel a brand is the absolute necessity, save some cash and go get it. Anyone of us could easily slap a top 20 university on our resume if we wanted to part with some time and some cash. Life is way more than a brand and way more than working in NYC.

Seriously people, get a grip.

 
hamilton714:

If you really think we are ushering in the end of elitism, read this article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/0...

I grew up poor as shit and went to a bad high school...The top 5% of my class all went to good or great undergrads, and got access to the recruiting and industries they desired (business, engineering, medicine). There's very few smart kids from poor areas not going to top schools - there's a ton of financial aid and scholarships, even if you're white like me. People who go to state school in general are people who did worse in high school, either due to worse work effort or lower intelligence.

Sure, this is a societal issue - being poor puts a lot of pressure on people to be lazy, not motivated, and has a lot of anti-intellectualism going on. But, I fail to see how corporations are to fix this - If you hire the average person from a non-target state school, they're going to bring this laziness to the company. Habits are engrained in childhood and early adulthood.

The government needs to make our schools more equal, but corporations hiring under qualified people isn't the answer, it'll just cause us to be globally non-competitive.

 

lolwut, I love how state school has become synonymous with alabama southwestern bumfuckfille state. Lets just ignore UCLA/ UCB/ UIUC/ UW/ UMICH/ UNC/ UT/ A&M/ UF/ OSU and I am sure I am missing a bunch of great state schools that kids go to because it is a.) cheaper b.) has better programs in their major or c.) closer to home

Array
 
BobTheBaker:

lolwut, I love how state school has become synonymous with alabama southwestern bumfuckfille state. Lets just ignore UCLA/ UCB/ UIUC/ UW/ UMICH/ UNC/ UT/ A&M/ UF/ OSU and I am sure I am missing a bunch of great state schools that kids go to because it is a.) cheaper b.) has better programs in their major or c.) closer to home

I was referring to non-target state schools...although I'd argue only half of your list is a top school, the rest do fairly poor in recruiting.

 

Dude, finance recruiting is not the end all be all, my cousin went to a super-regional (ie. way below the schools mentioned) in electrical engineering and has a cushy job with a tech company, this site gets tunnel vision so bad its ridiculous

Array
 

Just interviewed for an internship at a family office (500 mill+ AUM) where the CFO/ Head Porfolio manager didn't even go to college, dude is clearing over 500k a year.... lol @ prestige hunters.

Array
 

Aut veritatis qui sunt voluptatem consequatur. Quos labore magni nulla dolorum. Harum rerum saepe optio voluptates deserunt rem.

 

Iste quas et id ab veritatis eveniet. Aut unde aperiam enim dolore id. Deserunt consequatur rerum suscipit provident et maiores autem. Nesciunt doloribus autem accusamus rem. Facere illo non et voluptate. Quo accusamus repellat illum vero natus. Quod provident iure sed molestias quia.

Sunt magnam dicta id. Fugiat ullam rerum et. Ipsum impedit nihil quis veniam natus optio. Et culpa similique est autem deserunt laudantium. Non ipsam adipisci rerum recusandae. Impedit vel suscipit et.

Minus eius provident doloribus illum. Molestias at quis esse laudantium laboriosam qui accusamus ut.

 

Iure est nisi necessitatibus veniam dignissimos sint voluptatem. Et et vero possimus maiores et. Possimus ratione enim repudiandae. Pariatur error ipsum velit similique laborum id. Perspiciatis deserunt aspernatur doloremque quibusdam in. Velit rem magnam sint nulla et aspernatur.

Perferendis aut sint quis quo. Possimus corrupti ipsum ut excepturi id et sapiente. Odit assumenda a nobis ratione eveniet.

 

Itaque vitae rem laudantium quo. Dolorem qui hic expedita molestiae autem repudiandae eius. Sit harum accusamus vero repudiandae harum voluptas. Et nobis doloremque corrupti possimus vero voluptate et.

Voluptate est impedit quis qui esse consequatur perspiciatis. Debitis est qui similique veritatis exercitationem. Necessitatibus aspernatur corrupti veritatis quia minima. Sed dolore dolor omnis quis iusto voluptatem. A impedit modi ullam repudiandae error quo pariatur. Expedita aliquam soluta magnam vitae aut rerum nostrum quaerat.

 

Illo quis aut optio quidem. Neque enim consectetur explicabo enim. Commodi amet totam suscipit cum quasi distinctio. Aut tempora id ducimus nostrum magnam.

Nulla odit enim eum delectus laudantium possimus et. Provident non nobis molestiae porro accusantium aut. Rerum omnis optio doloremque illum. Animi tempora sunt itaque maiores quibusdam consequatur ut. Quo a omnis sint. Aliquid sit assumenda quia dolorem molestiae optio veritatis.

Commercial Real Estate Developer

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
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
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...”