I've been a fan of the show, but my patience is beginning to wear down. It's repeating the same schtick and dynamics repeatedly: Harvey being a charismatic dick, Mike always trying to be the white knight for his clients, Louis being a weirdo, etc. I like that Mike has jumped ship to finance, but the season premiere was remarkably dull (aside from the fact that they got the finance totally wrong).

 

I have to agree. Perhaps most obvious is Rachel just becoming a sex icon on the show. In Season 1, she actually had a distinct character to her, rather than just being 'Mike's girlfriend.' It seems as the show has gone on, that has completely disappeared. Also, it was interesting to see how Mike's new secretary is like Donna, and Mike's new boss is like Harvey. It should be an interesting season, especially given the last scene.

 

Yeah I just watched it (slow day at work) and I was fairly disappointed. The previous seasons it was slowly turning into a drama, and now, it's gone full drama, and you never go full drama.

Also, pardon my ignorance, but if they are buying companies to get positive returns off the company, wouldn't that make them private equity, not a hedge fund? I was just assuming that they said hedge fund because more people know what a hedge fund is vs. private equity.

make it hard to spot the general by working like a soldier
 
Best Response

@whatsapp12 I'm just assuming that it's going to be more and more drama every single episode and less and less humor and wit like in season 1. If this is the route they are taking, I kind of hope that this is the last season so I don't have to worry about waiting for a season 5 :/ No character has to be a defined character anymore. Everyone just has a purpose now.

I also think it was said just to be relevant to the plebs out there that don't understand the differences of finance. It's like someone name dropping to say they work for JPM IBD when they are a BO assistant.

make it hard to spot the general by working like a soldier
 

"30% returns? Anything less than 50% is unacceptable. We're a hedge fund not a charity."- Sidwell

Kind of made me doubt my future viewing of the show when he said that. It is obvious that the producers didn't do their basic research when they named Mike's new employer SIG... The most painful display of slack research by production--like what someone else already mentioned above me--was when they plainly told the audience that he's going to be an investment banker, and then go on to suggest that he's part of an activist hedge fund. I'm going to try to keep watching it, but it's definitely annoying knowing that the series is going to have more of the same crap as the first episode.

Also, Mike reminds me of how Shia LaDouche's character was portrayed in Wall Street II. One moment he was a trader and in another he was trying to fund a nuclear fusion solution.

 
redrocksky:

"30% returns? Anything less than 50% is unacceptable. We're a hedge fund not a charity."- Sidwell

Kind of made me doubt my future viewing of the show when he said that. It is obvious that the producers didn't do their basic research when they named Mike's new employer SIG... The most painful display of slack research by production--like what someone else already mentioned above me--was when they plainly told the audience that he's going to be an investment banker, and then go on to suggest that he's part of an activist hedge fund. I'm going to try to keep watching it, but it's definitely annoying knowing that the series is going to have more of the same crap as the first episode.

Also, Mike reminds me of how Shia LaDouche's character was portrayed in Wall Street II. One moment he was a trader and in another he was trying to fund a nuclear fusion solution.

Yeah, now that its no longer law, which i am not as familiar with but Wall Street, which I have a good understanding of this is too dumb. The fact that they would conflate 3 professions into one is pretty embarrassing for the production team. Also, Mike's a bit young to have a chauffeured Range Rover...

 

Good lord guys - it's a TV show, relax! The finance does not have to be accurate.

And @"Skinnayyy" - there are some not so legitimate websites where you can watch immediately - for free. Google it.

 

I actually was able to watch it on USA's website the morning after it aired. I was quite surprised. It was even on Hulu too! I figured it would take at least a day to get put up on those.

Also,

@setacros does have something going. Now that I am thinking, in last season Sigwell worked for someone else(can't remember the name, still too early in the morning), and at that point they were investment bankers. NOW he's running a hedge fund. So I guess that part checks out. But the rest of it is still a load of crap.

make it hard to spot the general by working like a soldier
 

I think you can 'explain' the finance aspects, though it requires a great deal of rationalisation.

Sale of distribution centres has a 30% return, but we aren't told the size of the division, nor are we told the timing of the funding (it's not like the company buying this rocks up with cash).

IB's run internal HF's. SIG is a spinoff (maybe?) of the other financial corp - we don't know the full corporate relationship here.

Finally bottom line HF's can do PE stuff. I was never under the illusion it would be PE though as it's obviously public market-facing.

 
setarcos:

I think you can 'explain' the finance aspects, though it requires a great deal of rationalisation.

Sale of distribution centres has a 30% return, but we aren't told the size of the division, nor are we told the timing of the funding (it's not like the company buying this rocks up with cash).

IB's run internal HF's. SIG is a spinoff (maybe?) of the other financial corp - we don't know the full corporate relationship here.

Finally bottom line HF's can do PE stuff. I was never under the illusion it would be PE though as it's obviously public market-facing.

no, just no.
"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
 

Maybe they will tie the finance story together; I would like to see some semblance of reality in the show. I'm not expecting the producers to be CFA holders or something, but blatant contradictions are a turn off, especially when you have people outside of the industry noticing, @"Dingdong08".

One redeeming quality about the show is how Mike is sacking up now, which is refreshing. It will probably be interesting to see the evolving dynamic between him and Harvey. Hopefully, his whining/therapy sessions with Rachel are done too.

 

Voluptatem nemo exercitationem aperiam praesentium sed qui similique. Temporibus doloremque rem nisi.

Est et ut est aut atque. Molestiae optio ipsam sed consequatur incidunt et. Voluptas tenetur et necessitatibus earum. Ad autem corporis numquam voluptatem laborum. Aliquid officiis ipsa sed suscipit autem nobis quam.

Corrupti quo tenetur occaecati numquam ex. Molestiae natus ducimus consequatur eveniet aut et vel. Asperiores totam optio enim. Velit consectetur nulla illo voluptatem voluptas porro quisquam. Tenetur itaque est quis sit dolorum. Voluptate voluptatibus reprehenderit dolor et voluptates amet autem qui.

Unde molestiae voluptatem ea nihil est autem. Quam est quas sapiente unde. Quam maxime et laborum cumque qui et. Est repellat ut ut hic earum vel dolorem. Tempore in eveniet aperiam voluptas et. Id facere eum aliquam deserunt atque illo rerum.

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 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

April 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

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (87) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (146) $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

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...”