How important is your first group?
How much does it matter (to future career prospects/plans) which IB group you worked in as analyst? Does working in some groups close more doors than other groups? Or is the main thing that PE shops, hedge funds etc will consider is the fact that you worked in investment banking for 2 yrs straight out of college?
Thanks
I think that some groups open more doors than others.
What's a good group to start out in?
Thanks, I understand that - but at the end of your 2 year analyst tenure, does the group you interned with make a significant difference to your ability to get into, say, PE...or is it more about how good of a bank you worked for, your college, etc.
Thanks
the group you work in significantly influences your exit opportunities. most PE/HF are more concerned with group than bank (i.e. a PE firm will hire a UBS LA guy over a GS Industrial guy even though GS>UBS)
Bank's prestige is important, but certainly not as important as the group. I would imagine college is no longer a hiring criteria.
Does the group you intern at pretty much the group you end up with during FT?
Holy shit guys dont flame me I just noticed this thread was from 2006.
Interesting - thanks! Does anyone know, just in very general terms, which groups are known to be the better ones for transitioning into PE after an analyst stint?
Thanks!
I think bank prestige opens more doors in general, and if you are in a good group within a good bank, that opens even more doors. But what it all boils down to is the individual.
I don't think any top tier PE firm would slam the door on anyone from GS Industrial in preference to UBS LA (just using this example because it was brought up) just because of their group. And just as a point of reference, I know someone in GS Industrial that received a top 5 PE offer, and as soon as that happened all the rest of the top tier funds came knocking.
To an extent, bank and group gets you in the door, but the most important part is you are a top-rated analyst that interviews well.
GS TMT, MS M&A and UBS LA are considered to be the best "groups" on the street and consequently place a significant portion of their analyst classes in top notch PE firms.
Gametheory is right, it comes down to how you perform in the interview. Your group only helps you in getting the interview (where the UBS LA guy will have a significant advantage over the GS Industrial guy)
Besides those three, what other groups are good? Is GS TMT in NY or SF, or both? Besides message boards, is there a good place to go to find out what groups are good?
How do you get into a good group? Do you apply directly towards that group, or do you express interest in those areas when interviewing with those banks, or do banks just place their best candidates in those groups? Any info on maximizing chances of getting into a good group once the interview process has started is appreciated! Thank you!
are all great shops. Group matters more than bank tho - Everyone in banking knows that!
for regional offices, you apply directly.
for NY based offices, you choose your top groups (after you have an offer) and then they try to match you. best way is to get to know someone senior in one of the groups and then have them pull for you.
does their own recruiting. If you contact NY HR and are a strong candidate they will pass your resume along tho.
What are groups are good? Do the rankings have anything to with consistent high placing in league rankings or something like that?
what is goldman TMT?
TMT in NY is excellent, TMT in SF is also very good... also know a TMTer in LA who got placed in TPG SF, a TMTer in SF who got placed in Silver Lake
Placement for the 2nd years who just left TMT NY was:
2 KKR, 1 TPG, 1 Silver Lake, 1 Maverick Cap, 1 Harvard Law, 1 Newscorp M&A, 1 Ripplewood, 1 Fortress Cap among others...
Last year: 2 TPG, 1 Bain Cap, 1 American Securities, 1 VC, 1 Tiger Tech, 1 McK, another smaller hedge fund...
Also heard this class that just left had 4 TPG offers... as you can see, GS TMT is straight up ridiculous, as is UBS LA / MS M&A
This past year (leaving 2nd years) - 2 KKR 1 Bain Cap 1 Hellman & Friedman 1 Ares 1 L. Green 1 MDP... (Couple got TPG offers, turned down)
Last year they had a guy go to KKR, Ares, Warburg Pincus etc.
on CS LA placement?
Not as many 'tier 1' placements. However, do get everyone in somewhere. Most of that class went to various LA based shops. Specifics from the last class include 2 LGP, 1 KKR, 1 Knowledge Universe.
LGP is the biggest recruiter - usually takes 1-2 a year. Last year was the firt time they placed into KKR. I believe that was a late hire however.
Do people in good groups like UBS LA get into private equity simply because they are already more qualified or would someone with UBS LA on their resume have a huge advantage over the same exact(same interview skills, background, etc..) person with a less prestigous group?
From what I've heard, the previously mentioned shops do their own recruiting, which effectively narrows the pool of qualified candidates (by their standards, anyways). So they can afford to be a little pickier. That being said, their culture (in the case in of UBS/CS LA) lends itself to a long history in high yield/lev fin/LBOs, so you become exposed to some quality live deals and transactions in your two years there with significant learning opportunities from the senior guys (ex-DBL/DLJ).
I've also heard that at UBS at least, all models are created by scratch. While this may not be warranted in all cases, more oftentimes than not complex, multi-billion dollar LBOs have many moving parts and are better off being created by scratch anyways. This is also a quality that many of the top tier shops look for, the ability to model from soup to nuts...evidenced by the 3 hour modeling exams some of them are known to give. In this respect, the analyst being forced to model from scratch on a daily basis obviously has the leg up.
This is my impression, but I don't work in LA.
Also, UBS LA specifically there is so much deal flow in terms of # of deals (not neccessarily size) that analysts are constantly busy. As much as this sucks in terms of lifestyle - you learn a lot. Many of the deals have debt components so you become more competent with those scenarios and that skill is directly transferable.
As far as candidates go, I would say that the LA candidates are top tier so thats a helper. However, many people coming into banking have similar credentials (tier 1 school, 3.8+GPA, extensive ecs etc.), so I would say experience is the main differentiator.
Another thing to note is the associate's job at UBS LA becomes to almost 'check over' analyst work. There's no modelling etc at this level. Often DD visits, mgmt pres etc are all done by analysts. THe added responsibility given to the analysts makes them more polished as well for interviews.
Last point. They have extensive records of good PE placement from back in the DLJ / DBL days. You learn a lot of intracicies in the process talking to ex-analysts etc.
Besides UBS LA, MS M&A, and GS TMT, what are some other top notch investment banking groups? Also would a 3.5 econ major from a top ivy with good extra cirriculars(club president, team captain) have a good shot or is the GPA too low? I would like to know where to focus and try for. Thanks, I appreciate your help.
Those credentials would give you guys a good shot.
other good groups:
Lehman Media, M&A, Sponsors CS Sponsors JPM M&A Blackstone Restructuring Lazard Restructuring Goldman FIG MS FSG
Pretty much anything M&A / Sponsors. Each bank has a few execution focused industry groups that are good as well..
You seem to know a ton about ibanking. Any reccomendations of strategies of how to place into good groups, maybe things to say during the interview? Also, not counting groups that recruit separetely, will banks give you an offer for a group or do you have to make your decision based on bank, and they they place you into a group?
banks give you a general offer and then later place you into a group.
Sometimes group is placed after the interviews (ie. Goldman).
As far as getting into key groups, be proactive and meet as many group specific people as possible. If you are interested in UBS / CS LA then makes sure you find out which recruiter is responsible for those offices and go contact the offices directly.
Other than that - get good grades, good resume and make connections in the group that you can leverage come group offer time.
How is JPM's real estate and lodging group? Worth taking up?
Lol, I interviewed w/ UBS LA and was under the impression they were quite lousy.
you mean by the people you met or just didnt know about teh groups rep?
does LA mean anything other than Los angeles
LA=Los Angeles
Is it better for begin I banking in an industry group or execution group? Thanks.
Almost no one went to their info sessions where they gave away a bunch of ipods
I assumed stuff outside of NY wasn't as prestigious
Guy at the interview was nice though, but I was put off by the accounting questions because I told him before hand I had no accounting knowledge.
they usually have info sessions along with UBS NY -atleast thats how it was at my school. (one of their targets)
Ours was just UBS SF and LA
Target = ivey, michigan, wharton
Semi Target = Pomona / Claremont, UCLA , Berkeley, Stanford, Harvard
Just started doing info sessions at USC, never taken anyone.
on the West Coast, UBS and CS LA are known to prepare their analysts well. exit opps are great. Goldman TMT is also top notch.
how is GS Lev fin?
has to be strong....most groups at GS are top 3
How much does it matter where you start out? (Originally Posted: 06/02/2010)
I was doing my bi-monthly Linkedin stalking re-ranking all my connections in excel and was shocked to discover that this girl I know at a semi-semi-target happened to land a MBB gig and an IB internship at a BB the summer before.
All the years I've known her I didn't really expect this to happen because she didn't stand out as some hyper intelligent savant or someone with a lot of talent. Apparently she worked pretty hard joining a bunch of business groups, taking leadership positions, and pursued a lot of good internships. Maybe it was pure luck and her really good looks, but I was impressed by the results.
It made me wonder if where you start out really matters in being super successful, everyone always says the first job you get into is the most important. While not her first job but school, this girl just worked her ass off and now is a baller given her school's typical recruiting regulars. I always thought the guy at GS TMT would forever be more baller than the guy who starts out at RBS or Rabobank but I had to pause for a moment.
Come on now. It's not the rule, but of course there are people who unexpectedly excel. You make it sound like you're shocked that something like this could happen. Lewie Ranieri (Liar's Poker) went from back office clerk to head of the entire mortgage department at Salomon Brothers. Who do you think would have been more likely to ascend to that position at the time? One of the recently hired Harvard MBAs or Ranieri, who didn't have anywhere close to that kind of education, or even finance experience? Someone I know at a random state school is going to be a GS S&T SA this summer. Being at the most coveted stage in life (Harvard, Goldman, McK) sets you up better for continued success and will probabilistically make you "forever more baller", but certainly not always.
I'm just going to assume it's not a troll. First, in the long run if you're smart and hard working it probably won't matter. Second, starting out at the top makes everything easier (ie- breaking into PE from IB, you want to be at a great firm; breaking into HF from research or something, you want to be at a strong place, there, too).
It doesn't really matter in the long-run. Bottom line is people who start off at point X sometimes get a head-start, but what REALLY matters is how quickly you grow. That comes down to raw intellect, thirst for knowledge, and hard work more than anything else.
If you choose BMCC over Yale or Scottrade over GS, you might be setting yourself back by three or four years, but in the long-run, it doesn't matter that much- other than a few years of retirement. You're going to grow your career at the same pace, either way, and the pace is really what matters in the long run.
This might be a bad/weird analogy but it struck me the other day...this whole thing is like a multi-story parking garage. You can either drive your car to the top, use the elevator or walk every floor. Some people are lucky and start at a higher floor than others so getting from 6 to 9 is easier than getting from a lower floor obviously. What floor you start at depends on things like your high school GPA, the high school you attended, what college you get into, the GPA you get while you are there. Whether you get to take the elevator to a higher floor instead of driving or walking depends on networking and contacts and luck.
Probably sounds ridiculous but the point is you have many ways to get where you want to go, some are faster and some are slower, but if you want to keep going you can. And to be clear, I started in the basement and have been walking to the top given my community college background, but eventually will get there. Luckily I recently accepted an offer, so I feel like I am, at the very least, driving now, and hopefully I will get to catch a ride on the elevator and can skip a few floors somewhere down the line.
Oh, whats all this ranking of LinkedIn contacts in Excel? Do you have a lot of time on your hands? How do you do that and whats the purpose? Not judging you, just curious...never heard of anyone doing that.
Regards
This is a bad analogy because my goal in life is to always park on the lowest floor possible, but I get your point. :D
and some people spend their whole lives waiting for that elevator...
the purpose of ranking is to see who has the most potential out of all my myriad of connections. after that I will proceed to network with the top 5 with a friendly phone-call. some people wait their whole lives for that call.
Consequatur magni facilis pariatur ut eius. Minima nihil accusamus animi sapiente officia occaecati nihil. Explicabo minus autem tempore quis quia nam soluta. Dolores voluptate minus ut nemo. Beatae aut et in et ullam sed. Vel id nostrum laudantium nesciunt.
Delectus perferendis ducimus debitis reprehenderit quia sit. Qui soluta nihil suscipit sed nobis cumque laborum. Facilis a in harum est itaque.
Quidem et occaecati aut dolorem non libero debitis. Et labore odit recusandae quis vero facilis minima. Quibusdam iure earum quibusdam eveniet inventore et nulla. Nobis sunt numquam unde.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Error omnis ab ex soluta labore. Repudiandae illo recusandae perspiciatis magnam qui in. Distinctio quam ab illo et reiciendis facere. Hic aliquid voluptates nisi nihil. Sint aut numquam accusamus dolor autem animi.
Dignissimos totam eum totam provident. Sed labore aliquam voluptatem qui necessitatibus sint. Libero maxime fuga iure est ea cumque. Molestiae atque consequatur rerum recusandae.