do you think it could be possible that IB's consider offering their top SA picks slightly different salaries depending on how bad they want them? this is not a question of negotiation, but rather the possibility of HR offering people different rates to begin with.
| +66 | Any tips for sleeping well? | 32 | 17h |
| +46 | Post-IB Paths (non-buyside) | 11 | 1d |
| +38 | Background check issue IB Full Time | 19 | 3h |
| +38 | Wealthy Parents / Jaded | 10 | 2h |
| +32 | The Impossible Triangle: Speed, Quality, and Managing Directors | 9 | 2d |
| +30 | Venezuela Debt Restructuring - LAZ vs CVP | 8 | 20h |
| +27 | Q dealflow slowdown | 22 | 2d |
| +27 | How are hours rn for SA (interns) | 17 | 1h |
| +24 | HL vs WB | 19 | 33m |
| +23 | UBS GIG, LevFin, FSG Interns working Sundays and 85 hour weeks their first week? | 11 | 1h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
Never heard of it happening
Analysts are a cost center. No way this happens.
UBS offered me 1200/wk plus 5k sign-on/reloc. This is after I received the offer and told them I had Evercore/Lazard
isnt the 1.2k standard? the 5k seems a little bit higher than usual tho.
1200 is standard, I've heard of people getting +3k on their sign-on if they had competing offers though
I got 1360 a week. No "bonus" though.
No offense guys, but regardless of how "strong" an SA candidate you might be, you're still going to be pretty terrible compared to any experienced FT analysts.
Also, it doesn't make much sense to pay an above market price for a commodity.
Obviously the large majority of candidates will be offered the basic pay, but there is a definite opportunity to be offered a higher wage if you reall stand out as a candidate. (From UK standpoint)
This is normally the case with GS, who are known to pay summer interns as much as £1200/week ($2400) to secure thier services. As you said interns are cheap labour, so three four grand here and there to claim the best talent makes sense. Although many think this is 'unfair', this may generally stem from people thinking 'know one can be that good'. I think paying the best candidates more makes sense. I.e you wouldn't want to miss out on the next Eric Mindich or Dinaker Singh...
Even within a BB SA or analyst class I think there is an absolutley massive gulf between the strongest and weakest candidates....
Also they are not paying them market price for a commodity, for the best talent they are paying the futures price (ie based on potential)
I'm not going to spend the time picking apart the obvious flaws in this analogy.
Please note, however, that regardless of how talented an SA or FT analyst believes they are, they are still most certainly a commodity. A little humility never hurt anyone.
I wouldn't waste time negotiating. Worst case you piss off HR by being a problem candidate, best case you get a marginally higher number that, after witholding, you won't see half of until the following year.
5k is definitely on the high side. I received a 2k signing/relocation bonus.
why would they consider giving a SA higher pay? SAs have the lowest output per employee and may not necessarily even accept their offer at the end of summer
Are you just telling them that you have other offers and they offer you a higher signing bonus? Or are you telling them that you are going to accept the other offer? I am just curious how this works...
Nesciunt voluptate similique sunt est sit. Porro ea soluta tempore. Quo eligendi id perspiciatis eius ipsum ut sit ea. Voluptatem asperiores eius sit tempore et sequi expedita. Ipsum dolorem dolorum non molestias tempora rerum similique. Placeat sed ut culpa aperiam consequatur.
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...