I have 3 job offers, which one to take?
Seeking opinions and thoughts here..
I have an offer at Bloomberg to work on their Terminal help desk with advancement into advanced help essentially or sales, they call it "analytics" but really customer service from what I read. Pay and hours is unmatched: 40 hours a week for most part and $68K base with $4k bonus. Only thing I'm concerned about is the long term transferable skills.
Offer from AIG for a commercial RE underwriter role. Pay is $68K with same $4k bonus but hours will be more during busy season with a fair amount of Saturday's. This is basically doing research on claims it seems and analysis. They didn't break it down too much.
Duff and Phelps RE Advisory: Pay is much higher at $80k base these, but the hours would be a fuckton more. Bonus depends on group performance. A lot of DCF work and sales support.
Seems my best case would be AIG as the skills would be transferable elsewhere while still being able to have a life. What y'all think about these different opps though?
For those wondering: I go to a semi target, have a 3.65 GPA and did 2 internships, one at a Big 4 firm in Tax.
Exit opps out of Bloomberg depend on your focus (Equities, Fixed Income, etc..) and a lot of it has to do with clients you get as an Account Manager. Meaning your first year when you're on the desk there's very little exit opps outside of other data analytic providers. Again this depends on the person/situation, but just broadly generalizing it.
AIG role sounds like something you would move up the ladder there for or maybe a mortgage underwriter or structured finance type of exit opps.
Most people on this board would suggest Duff and Phelps since you're gaining skills and there's good exit opps, but it depends what you want.
On my internship last summer I met an ED who started at Bloomberg in a similar division. Because they ended up learning basically every function on a Bloomberg terminal and knew a lot about the product (in this case FX) they got hired into FX Sales. Probably not every day that happens though...
AIG or Duff.
first job? always take the money
Completely disagree here. For your first job (and a lot of your 20s actually), developing relationships and transferrable skills is far more than a few extra K on your annual take home. If you manage your career properly, 20k salary difference will be a rounding error on your net assets in the long run.
I think it is a safe bet, at least in finance, that the job willing to pay the most i.e. most desirable and competitive, will give you the best opportunities for networking and skill development.
But to be sure, if we compound $20K for 43 years at 10%, characterizing $1.2 million as a rounding error is insane.
D&F will get you further, whether you want to stay in real estate or transition to other finance roles.
Duff and Phelps for sure.
Avoid the help desk. I personally would opt for the most pay. Also, it seems like they gave you a better break down if what you will be doing.
I would write off bloomberg analytics
D&P
Two questions:
1.) Is the work at D&P sustainable for you for 2-3 years?
2.) Do you like the people there?
If the answer to both is yes, take D&P.
Otherwise take Bloomberg. Way back when dinosaurs roamed the earth and analysts had to walk uphill both ways to and from work, I worked on a team that is now in Bloomberg Analytics. You will probably not pile up a nine figure retirement doing it, but it's a nice life.
Nice! A little confused, did you work for bloomberg analytics? If so, it looks like you transitioned into HF?
Again, you won't pull down a seven figure bonus in this job, but it's enough to be comfortable.
Duff & Phelps - not even a contest, but Bloomberg is a distant 3rd in my opinion.
Duff
Duff & Phelps - believe they put you through Analyst training which would make you valuable when trying to jump ship. Aig Underwriting is niche and could be one of the first roles let go if RE cools off. Bloomberg sounds like it'll develop your soft skills which are valuable for face to face interviews, but sounds like you're basically a internal sales rep pounding the phones?
Personally I'd do Duffs, if you're looking to stay in finance.
Duff reminds me of the brand Homer Simpson drinks, nice.
D&P, but ultimately look at the environment that you see you can grow in, though.
I agree with everyone else. Bloomberg is s distant third because everyone sees those jobs as tech support. There's no respect in them.
You guys do realize that hedge funds- particularly systematic strategies-- sign six and seven figure contracts per year for data vendors like Bloomberg etc?
You guys realize that as the machines have us approach the Nash equilibrium for the market, a sizeable chunk if not majority of the profits are going to the data, right?
You guys realize that half my analyst class at Lehman in analytics is now working somewhere on the buyside, often as quants right?
I'll concede there's a little sketchiness to the helpdesk, but generally speaking I wouldn't short Bloomberg or a career in their analytics department.
Some other kid is going to take that job and at age 30 he'll be selling my firm a seven figure per year data service. And he'll be home at 6:30.
But it doesn't sound like his offer is with the Bloomberg Analytics team. It's sales...
Yeah but it sounds like mostly sales and customer support, and I'm not sure if that is the best job for someone who wants to work in investing. I guess it depends on how much actual analytics is involved. Just saw your post above about having worked in a team that is now part of Bloomberg analytics, so I'll trust your judgement on this.
Duff and Phelps RE Advisory. Why is this even a question?
You know what is worse than working tons of hours in your 20s?
Working tons of hours in your 30s when your physical conditions is not that great and you have more social responsibilities while getting less paid than your peer because you didn't work hard enough in your 20s.
raises hand
Early 30's, and salary expectations I aim for are around 90k-120k for my engineer roles. A strong developer can pull much more...but the hours I can't stand, you're looking at weekends and 9-9 M-F.
Dear Tech_Vestor,
No problem. A few things that I like to point out.
There are two type of human capital - i) physical energy and ii) mental energy. And any career that you do - as you move up the career ladder should require less of your physical energy while requiring more of your mental energy. As you get older, the physical energy will decline while your mental energy should continue to increase due to i) having the experience to deal with problems, ii) having more technical knowledge in your job, iii) having the ability to lead a well functioning team, and iv) having the ability to bring in clients for the firm.
Now to address your question, I am not an engineer but if I assume that a fresh engineer is considered more as an analyst/associate type of role (i.e. doing grunt work) and if I assume that a developer is doing more of a VP/Director role (i.e. managing his own team, coordinating firm's resources and dealing with the clients): I should expect him to work less hours. If for any reasons, he has to work more hours, I can see that there are a few things wrong and he shouldn't be in this position. A few reasons that could possibly make him work longer hours:
Inability to manage the client. Bringing in too many needy clients that don't pay well (should have fired them already). Spending too much time pitching for work (should already have good track record and relationship with clients that time should be spent on executing rather than pitching). Cannot manage client expectations (i.e. none of my clients call or bother me over the weekend - I get everything done as I promised).
Having a dysfunctional team. When you are junior person, you can blame that the manager has shitty leadership skill. But you are the manager, you better make sure that you have a well functioning team. Building a strong team will take time in the beginning but will save you a lot of time later. Hire the right people who have a basis skill set and are coach-able. Train the ones who have good attitudes but lack technical skills. Fire the assholes and lazy bastards. Be attentive to the needs to your subordinates. Be tough on them but be fair. If the team members are not functioning well - it is a part of your job to fire the bad one and move on.
Ability to demand resources at the firm. If you are a rainmaker and you control important clients, you will have the attention of the senior management to pull in all the firm's resources to make your life easier. If you see that people across the departments or product lines are not being helpful and you cannot make them do what you want, you either have i) no people skill that people hate you to work with you - that is your problem and ii) you have no power within the firm - then you should have left already.
That's just my personal opinion.
With Love, Harvey
I semi-agree with both points made above. Yes 20k is mostly insignificant, but I also hate the people who always argue for following passion,happiness, balance etc. At some point, money starts to matter, that points varies for each person, but money can always be significant. With that being said, I don't agree with IlliniProgrammer comments above
Thinking of the missed 20k the first year as 20k/year for 43years at 10% isn't really the right way to think about it.
Not taking the first job that pays 20k more doesn't mean you're going to always be paid 20k less for the rest of your life.
Taking less money, but having better mentors and transferable skills could pay off very quickly.
To provide some anecdotal evidence I know a guy who opted to stay in bus ops at a company instead of moving over to a sexier Corp Dev role because he liked the role and had and had a manager that he really liked. What happened was the boss left but promoted him into the manger role. The guy stayed in the manager role for 2 years and when the guys former manager got a massive gig at a top tech company, he pulled the guy along with him. Now that former Bus Ops guys is the head of a division and is under 30. Company is pre-ipo but will mostly likely IPO in the next few years. Given his rank and tenure with the company, I'm sure he has enough options to make millions. Would Corp Dev have paid him a little more? Sure, maybe 20k or so.
TL;dr go with your gut, if you need the extra 20k and will feel shorted by taking a job that doesn't pay you more, take the higher paying job.
If the lower paying job feels like a better fit, go with that. Things will all end of working out in the end.
Quis tenetur eos aperiam suscipit ut et eum. Id ea nemo ex exercitationem iure praesentium. Est quod quam dolorum et amet sapiente ducimus. Autem similique itaque recusandae sunt et. Similique ullam occaecati sequi voluptatum tenetur.
Rerum veritatis consequatur est minima sapiente impedit aliquid. Aliquam non distinctio sunt in dolorum incidunt.
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...
Ea quia et beatae omnis distinctio iusto atque. Et quo quidem autem sapiente velit et. Sint qui nostrum facere assumenda voluptatibus laudantium sit. Dolor aut commodi voluptatem harum qui. Et labore odio tempore dolorum in aut blanditiis.
Voluptate provident voluptatem officiis. Sint nesciunt ut corrupti minus magnam aliquam rerum qui. Sequi praesentium molestiae eum blanditiis libero. Non cum quibusdam dolor vitae. Optio temporibus aut dolor quam sed. Cupiditate quia reiciendis omnis ut ab. Pariatur error voluptatem sit dolorem accusamus perferendis perspiciatis.