If You Could Do It All Again...
(Senior Baboon, 244
Points)
on 11/2/12 at 3:30am
Moderator Note (Andy): Best of WSO - this post originally went up May 2008 and we thought it deserved to go back on the homepage for those who may have never seen it.
For those of you who have graduated college and gone off to do banking, looking back are you glad that it is something you have done? I have a friend who works at one of Goldman’s top groups and whenever I ask if he’s happy he chose banking he says, “I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t think it’s going to lead me where I want to go.”
So for you experienced monkeys, looking back, would you have made the same decision to pursue two years of analyst work?
On that note, do you think it is possible to keep relationships and your health while putting in your two years?
Actually one of the 1st years
Actually one of the 1st years was asking me this the other day.
"I honestly don't know" is the short non-answer. :) But I would lean toward saying "yes" for the following reasons:
1) Learned a lot since I did not come from a finance background. More than I would have elsewhere, by far.
2) Made some great contacts in the industry (both co-workers and people elsewhere).
3) Have some great experience if I ever do want to go the PE/HF or business school route.
4) Saved a lot of money since I was frugal. (this is nice but lesser than the other reasons)
I don't think my 2nd year was as valuable as my 1st year, partially because the market tanked and pitches pretty much replaced deals, and partially because the learning thing does slow down in your 2nd year.
However, since I'm not following the more usual path after banking, it's a bit hard for me to say, "Yes this was definitely the best decision I could have made." It was certainly better than some of the alternatives I was looking at at the time, but I'm not sure if it was the absolute best.
It's challenging to keep relationships and health intact. Both of mine went downhill in my 1st year, but improved when I started working a bit less this year. Relationships (as in romantic ones) are much easier to keep alive if they are long-term e.g. you didn't start while on the job or just before.
Health - well, I've written about this one before, but you can definitely do things that limit how out of shape you get. But it's difficult to stay in top shape simply because you're sitting still for so long each day.
Resounding No
I am a bitter banker. I am finishing up my second year now and will likely do a third next year.
I would definitely go the consulting route if I could do it again.
In the last two years, I have went from being athletic to poorly out of shape, upbeat to depressed, and in a relationship to single.
One has to really decide what his priorities are before getting into this. When my relationship was going sour in my 10th month of banking, I had to make a decision: quit or let her go. Needless to say, the $90,000 bonus ball and chain won.
Why do I continue? Because I have already made so many sacrifices to be here.
Advice: Do not try to keep relationships up when in banking. The stress of having to be pulled in two directions is unbearable. If you are serious about banking, pretend you are married to it and want to spend infinite amount of time with it. Because you will be.
Interesting - I guess I have
Interesting - I guess I have a different viewpoint. I still consider banking to be my best job. Curiously enough, while the hours were bad and I didn't get along with a select few people (but not nearly as many as you'd expect), my relationship stayed intact through my time in banking (it wasn't until private equity that the relationship ended, ironically - but it had nothing to do with the job). Additionally, I felt like I was only marginally unhealthier than I am today.
I just started in IB. I have
I just started in IB. I have been doing an Investment Banking traineeship in Amsterdam for a year now and hope to move to a BB in the future. The harder I work, the more I love my job. At the moment it is the best choice I could made career wise.
I have a thing with spreadsheets and fixed income so as long as i am employed in this field after my traineeship.I would have no problem.YOU REALLY HAVE TO LOVE WHAT YOU ARE DOING!!!!!!!
With regards to health and relationship...In Amsterdam it is very much OK since the hours are not anglo typical.
I am in CorFin now and usually I am in the office from 8.00 - 19.00. When I was in S&T for 2 months, it was from 07.30 - 17.30.
Personally, After the end of my traineeship (August), I am planning on moving to London but finding a job at a BB there in these market circumstances will be quite impossible since the "normal" recruiting cycle is over.
Definitely would do it again
I believe I wrote something similar to this post a few months ago when this topic was last brought up.
I would definitely do my time as a BB analyst again. I was miserable most of the time, badly treated, over worked, etc. However, the $$$ and the experience were worthwhile. The real question is, what else could I have done where I would have had a better life/career/whatever. I can't think of anything, consulting would have been almost as bad a life for a lot less pay. I really don't know anyone with a job that would be talked about on this website who didn't work a ton their first two years (not truly comparable to IB but still alot of work).
On the other note, its up to you to keep up both. Luckily, I didn't really abuse the free food and kept myself moderately active so my health is as good as it was in college. I'm also getting married to the girl I was dating going into banking, so no difficulties there. Relationships don't fall apart because of work, they fall apart because one side of the party can't negotiate the right bargain in terms of what is expected and needed by the other party. So, analysts dating people who work in 9-5 jobs who don't understand the job don't have a high success rate.
So, yes, I moved to a good exit, got paid, got laid, didn't let my health go, and learned a lot. Plus, I would never EVER want to be a consultant.
--There are stupid questions, so think first.
Financial Modeling Training
Banking Resume
Agreed on the relationships
Agreed on the relationships part, Power Monkey.
Hmm
I asked this to my interviewers while I was doing PE interviews. I was unsure as to whether I wanted to do 2 years of banking/consulting before moving to PE.
They told me that they didn't regret it, but if they could, they'd go straight into PE (obviously biased, since they were trying to recruit me), but the sentiment was repeated later when I met them informally (after I got the offer).
They told me that while the breadth of work is smaller, but the level of responsibility is much higher than banking. In the end, every employer wants to know only two things: if you're competent and whether they can trust you, with a great emphasis on the latter. What you will be doing can always be taught.
i think banking is a waste of my time
that said, i have learned a ton; it just isn't the career path i want to pursue; i would like to work on the buyside for awhile, but ultimately, probably soemthing very different altogether
that said, thinking about the broader picture, sometimes it is both a blessing and a curse to have the opportunity to go to a top tier school and get these relatively high-paying jobs. it means we will rarely be daring enough to do great things, like start youtube for example (unless you go to stanford). we are content with structured success (unless you go to stanford), and that is kind of a tragedy, if you think about it. great things rarely ever come out of structured career paths, be it in any discipline. even in finance: ken griffin started investing using his conv arbitrage model, out of his dorm room at harvard; warren buffet started out after banging on benjamin graham's door and buying a gas station; peter thiel started clarium after starting paypal (although he was a trader at cs first, but still, a godfather of modern day entrepreneurial success; he definitely does not fit the wall street mold; plus he is nuts). but how often do you see this happening, especially so early? i don't think it's becaue ppl at these top schools are good, but just not good enough; i think it is because unless we are really daring, we are not willing to give ourselves a chance to see if we're good enough, because we don't have to, and the pressure to not lose out on guaranteed "success" is just too much. and hence the "best" of us will work at goldman, then at xyz pe fund, and then become a PM at sac capital or something, and the rest of us will do something similar if not exactly the same path. and this is fine. but it just begs one to wonder, what else could we do given how smart all of us supposedly are? i'm not saying there's anything wrong with going this route; i'm just saying, because these immediately gratifying routes are so readily available to us, and the risk reward ratio is so high in our favor, we are quick to discount anything else. i think of it as a conflict of successful mediocrity.
i don't know, just food for thought; for more eloquent and persuasive arguments in favor of this mindset, refer to the following:
www.paulgraham.com/articles.html
www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/
Takeaway food for thought
that said, i have learned a ton; it just isn't the career path i want to pursue; i would like to work on the buyside for awhile, but ultimately, probably soemthing very different altogether
that said, thinking about the broader picture, sometimes it is both a blessing and a curse to have the opportunity to go to a top tier school and get these relatively high-paying jobs. it means we will rarely be daring enough to do great things, like start youtube for example (unless you go to stanford). we are content with structured success (unless you go to stanford), and that is kind of a tragedy, if you think about it. great things rarely ever come out of structured career paths, be it in any discipline. even in finance: ken griffin started investing using his conv arbitrage model, out of his dorm room at harvard; warren buffet started out after banging on benjamin graham's door and buying a gas station; peter thiel started clarium after starting paypal (although he was a trader at cs first, but still, a godfather of modern day entrepreneurial success; he definitely does not fit the wall street mold; plus he is nuts). but how often do you see this happening, especially so early? i don't think it's becaue ppl at these top schools are good, but just not good enough; i think it is because unless we are really daring, we are not willing to give ourselves a chance to see if we're good enough, because we don't have to, and the pressure to not lose out on guaranteed "success" is just too much. and hence the "best" of us will work at goldman, then at xyz pe fund, and then become a PM at sac capital or something, and the rest of us will do something similar if not exactly the same path. and this is fine. but it just begs one to wonder, what else could we do given how smart all of us supposedly are? i'm not saying there's anything wrong with going this route; i'm just saying, because these immediately gratifying routes are so readily available to us, and the risk reward ratio is so high in our favor, we are quick to discount anything else. i think of it as a conflict of successful mediocrity.
i don't know, just food for thought; for more eloquent and persuasive arguments in favor of this mindset, refer to the following:
www.paulgraham.com/articles.html
www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/
Really good post, I think in some ways going into IBD or Consulting is less risky because the career path is so structured and the goals are generally always visible (if not always attainable). Not like running a start-up or something, where it would seem that you are really living from one day to the next and never in complete control.
well said
wallstreetguy is right on point. say what you will about how risk-averse and financially rewarding banking/pe are. intellectually, it's mediocrity.
GREAT POSTS
This post is pretty interesting. Everyone knows that banking is not rocket science (in my opinion almost every type of enginerring is more quantitative). But yet, so many of our countries' "smartest" kids from Harvard, Penn, Stanford, etc are jumping into banking by default.
I think the top business kids just jump into IB or PE/HF because it is simply what you do. At Wharton 48% of the class of 2007 went into a BB bank. 48%! I wonder what they could be doing with their time/brain.
Waa waa wee waa!
This post is pretty interesting. Everyone knows that banking is not rocket science (in my opinion almost every type of enginerring is more quantitative). But yet, so many of our countries' "smartest" kids from Harvard, Penn, Stanford, etc are jumping into banking by default.
I think the top business kids just jump into IB or PE/HF because it is simply what you do. At Wharton 48% of the class of 2007 went into a BB bank. 48%! I wonder what they could be doing with their time/brain.
Wow, 48%! But surely that trend is not evident at undergrad level, i can't imagine that 48% of the world's "smartest" undergrads would go to B-school...surely not?
Also guys do keep in mind
First, I think the points that have been made so far are great ones.
Despite all the hype, banking is indeed not right for everyone. In fact, it's probably right for very few people.
And do keep in mind - just because finance is "hot" now doesn't mean it will always be the case. Just look at the late 90s when startups and the dot-com craze were the hottest thing around.
I think wallstreetguy25's point is also interesting - some famous investors today started out in "unconventional" career paths, e.g. by something independently, whether we're talking Warren Buffett or Ken Griffin.
it helps to have money,
it helps to have money, contacts, some experience, a fall back plan, exposure to diverse collection of people, stamina to work a 90 hour week etc, especially when you're thinking along the lines of starting up your own business. Going into banking gives you access to all this which is very hard to gain in other fields in such a short space of time. I spent my summer at GS and made so many friendships and met so many people, junior and senior from all over europe and the world in the space of 3 months. I don't reckon I would have been in this position had I chosen to spend my summer helping a friend with his start up, or working on my own ideas when I would have to resort of credit cards to finance it.
As long as you keep your sanity intact and keep working on any great ideas you have, banking could be a rather clever stepping stone for greater things (by that I dont mean PE/HF!)
there is no question of that
prettyspectacular is right, and in fact, some people have done just this. it's just that most don't, and the predisposition of most who go into banking/law/etc etc is to not have the menatily described above.
of course, i think that prettyspectacular is right, and this is what i am banking on (excuse the pun) within the next few years!
Excellent posts!
prettyspectacular hit the
...
To hell with banking, I'm
putneyswope raises some
Chiming in with the start-up
I second the motion...
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
- Ronald Reagan
What about once we have made
interesting posts
yes there is
Great thread with some
And one point no one has raised...
Wallstreetguy - Those are
....
Financial Modeling Training
Guide to Finance Interviews
Banking Resume
well
to ideating
btw, for those wondering what ideating is referring to
To AltESV
Power, ambition, and
probably relevant to this discussion
Yes
AltESV wrote: I grew up
Financial Modeling Training
Guide to Finance Interviews
i think altesv is being real
Sorry if you think I'm a
I think I would define my goal as financial freedom
to wallstreetguy
Financial Modeling Training
Guide to Finance Interviews
Banking Resume
It is funny how a
Fair enough, I haven't
Good discussion all around
security=good
[Quote]I grew up fairly
CompBanker
Nicely put
.
It's just more acceptable
...