Greenhill & Co Question

dude, when you can slam LSE/Nasdaq on you cv you better believe your "quality of life" will be good.

GHL is a great firm. But London is by far the best office (it's where the majority of GHL's earnings come from). They do some big deals, but they also dip into the middle market a bit. Prestige of the firm is high.

Compared to the other firms you mentioned, I would go with Greenhill over Gleacher since Gleacher doesn't do many deals (although does place decently well into PE because of the prestige). Evercore versus Greenhill would be a tougher decision; Greenhill's more prestigious, but Evercore has been kicking butt lately. I'd go with Lazard over Greenhill - more prestigious, better exit opps, much stronger deal flow, & bigger deals.

In terms of flexibility, you definitely will have more. But in terms of hours, they will be slightly less but not significantly better. Hours at Evercore and Lazard are just as bad as at a BB.

One other advantage or disadvantage (depending on how you look at it) of good boutiques is that they pretty much hire exclusively from a few top schools. I think GHL just goes to the ivys and Texas. They're small so they pretty much hire whoever they want (don't need to fill quotas etc) which translates into them hiring the truly most qualified people. But this also translates into them hiring a pretty much all white male, all ivy analyst class. I wouldn't really have a problem in that environment (although working with a sexy Latina from a state school has its benefits!) being as I am a white male from an ivy, but it's just something to consider.

If you're going to a boutique, just make sure you like the people.

Thanks rat4100 - very insightful.

Rat4100 is mostly correct, with the exception of a few things. GHL recruits at H/Y/P/Wharton/Texas/Virginia and that's pretty much it. None of other ivies make the cut either. I know of at least 3-4 indians (out of total 25 analysts hired over the the 3 year period) they've hired over the past 3 years in NY office. I'm sure they hire asians as well. But the people they do hire are top-notch at their school. I know that for a fact.

Exit opps are great. Analysts have landed jobs at TPG, Provience Equity, a few other middle market PE shops as well top-notch HF. I would go with Greenhill over Lazard because exit opps. at Lazard aren't much better, hours are much better, and more access to work with senior management and clients since it's so small.

solid firm but be warned. mostly wharton hyp kids... they are pretty full of themselves.

they have problems retaining analysts for 2 years (not sure why) b/c during my interviews they kept asking if i would even think of leaving before 2 years.

solid name, great work, probably good pay and hours...but i would go evercore over them.

but from what i've heard, in the last 3 years, the top 1-2 analysts in each class has been from either texas or virginia (undergrad finace major)

i hear the comp is great

Wow, I didn't realize they only hire from HYP/Wharton/Texas/Virginia and not even the other ivys. Although I think that's a broader range than Gleacher and Evercore actually.

I do know an Indian who works at GHL and I would assume there are a few more and some asians too, as scotttwibell says. But it's definitely a very white male heavy organization (as are all of the good boutiques). I don't think an asian or indian would actually have a problem at any of these organizations though since they seem very merit based and emphasize hiring people based on their smarts/academics (and at my school at least, they have definitely gave asians and indians offers although I 'm not sure if they just don't accept).

I would go to Lazard over Greenhill since I'd be willing to sacrifice the extra hours for the better exit opps and I guess I am a prestige whore. I'm think Lazard exit opps are definitely better (more analysts sent to top PE shops percentage wise, and pretty much guaranteed admission to harvard b-school), but you're right that it'll come at a price. That being said though, from speaking with a few analyst alums at GHL, it seems like they work very, very hard. But I have heard great things about the culture and I really liked the alums I spoke with.

Also, you should note that there is a substantial difference among a firm like Gleacher and Greenhill. Gleacher is tiny - like 7 analysts, whereas Greehill has about 17-20. Lazard has about 25 and is not really a boutique. From speaking with people at boutiques, it seems that they definitely have more flexibility - they can leave at 6pm Friday if they want to have a good night out, but that might mean that have to be in the office all weekend to get something done by Monday. I hear there really isn't the face time like there is at BBs (largely because there aren't a ton of people in the middle - VPs, associates, etc.) - you get your work done and get out.

Unless you've got a GS offer or maybe a top group at MS, I think GHL is a great choice. And even if you have a GS offer, I think you could probably end up in a relatively similar place after your analyst program from Greenhill (if you are a top performer at both places). I know people at my school who opted for the top boutiques over GS.

From speaking to friends of mine who work in IB, and/or tried to get a job at Greenhill, I got the feeling that the firm is VERY selective only hiring outstanding candidates by which I don't mean nerds who got Firsts with 95% but people who excelled in BOTH academia - say very good First- as well as ECAs(in London pretty much 80% are from Oxbridge, which might be result of the fact that they only present at those two universities).

I think the comparisions between exit opps are irrelevant since sizes of analyst classes at different firms differ widely; even between Rothschild/Lazard and GHL; apparently GHL's global analyst class was <20 last year which is surely much lower than those at aforementioned independent banks.

Also, almost all of their analysts had offers from bulge bracket banks (apparently another inofficial application criterion)and still decided to go to Greenhill. I found it especially funny that quite a high proportion of them got offers from Morgan Stanley -seems like an eternal rivalry between Bob Greenhill and MS;)

Also, they seem to be starting up their private equity business in London which means that as an analyst you will be working on both M&A deals and PE deals. I feel that that is a clear advantage for anyone who's considering going (or at least trying to..) into private equity. Apart from GS Principal Investment there is no bank where you could work on those deals straight out of uni.

Re Business school: Admission tutors are looking for a diverse class so I guess everything else being equal being at GHL wouldn't put you at a disadvantage compared to Goldman or MS, if at all I think it might improve the chances given the tiny analyst class. Also, Bob Greenhill donated a lot of money to HBS some time ago and they have named a building after him- this relationship between him and HBS might again be helpful.

I am currently applying for an internship there- if I get a place i would rank it above an offer from GS(except PIA).

is surely much lower than those at aforementioned independent banks.

Also, almost all of their analysts had offers from bulge bracket banks (apparently another inofficial application criterion)and still decided to go to Greenhill. I found it especially funny that quite a high proportion of them got offers from Morgan Stanley -seems like an eternal rivalry between Bob Greenhill and MS;)

Also, they seem to be starting up their private equity business in London which means that as an analyst you will be working on both M&A deals and PE deals. I feel that that is a clear advantage for anyone who's considering going (or at least trying to..) into private equity. Apart from GS Principal Investment there is no bank where you could work on those deals straight out of uni.

Re Business school: Admission tutors are looking for a diverse class so I guess everything else being equal being at GHL wouldn't put you at a disadvantage compared to Goldman or MS, if at all I think it might improve the chances given the tiny analyst class. Also, Bob Greenhill donated a lot of money to HBS some time ago and they have named a building after him- this relationship between him and HBS might again be helpful.

I am currently applying for an internship there- if I get a place i would rank it above an offer from GS(except PIA).

The analyst I know worked on banking side for a few years and now works in PE group within Greenhill. He had offers from MS and Lehman. The 4 analysts that I know who work there are very intelligent and social. They like to go out on the weekends and party it up. One guy worked on UAL restructuring as 1st year analyst and was working directly with their CFO. So tremendous levels of responsiblity and exposure. As for Bschool, they only recruit at H/W, so I'm sure you'll have just as good chances getting into HBS as you would at Lazard or GS. Plus there's only 3-4 analysts applying and not 20 or more at other banks.

agreed that a stint at Greenhill will provide an experience and exit opps on par with GS...without crushing you. seems to be an old school place that still cares about its employees.

Though I don't know if they took anyone this year. But it's definitely VERY VERY selective. They (and Gleacher) had the most extreme requirements to even apply of all of the IBanks.

"To Know Me Is To Love Me"-Jebus Price

I work at greenhill, they recruit at ivey (CDN)

^ I smell BS. There's no way you work at Greenhill, just look at your other posts.

Greenhill took 1 junior from NYU-Stern for their SA class this past year. It is highly selective.