Yes HW is awesome. Out of those I would say by far, but your guy is definitely not considering Houlihan as MM and probably not Jefferies. I would put Jefferies in the top 3, especially given their bigger presence in NY than the others.

That is, I think, the biggest downside of those banks, that they're centered in not NY (ie. HW - VA/MN, Blair - Chi, etc.)

Harris Williams that high up? Interesting.

I was under the impression that people usually only go to MMs for two reasons; 1) they couldn't get into a BB (unlucky, bad grades, non-target, etc. etc.) or 2) for some extremely pressing personal reason they want to stay in a city where a BB does not have a strong presence.

I always thought MMs usually had roughly the same work level (maybe slightly less) for slightly less pay. Either way I may be mistaken, someone please correct if there are other reasons one may go to a MM. I would also add BoA, Wachovia and RBS to that.

it depends on why you are BB averse. if it is because you are not good enough to get in then yeah, look going to a second tier. if becuase you don't like the culture, then look at a top boutique - Greenhill, pwp, Evercore.

In addition to the reasons listed above, some people want MM because they desire to work with clients who have actually built their companies from the ground up as opposed to mediocre corporate executives lacking in anything resembling entrepreneurship or creativity. Some of these guys built companies and are now seeking a private placement or IPO that, either way, could personally net them a couple of hundred million dollars. In my mind, however, the only firm that really stands out in the MM is, as I mentioned on the other thread, HLHZ. There could be some others with niches, but Houlihan is generally going to be the best MM option. Although I will say that the level of person they're hiring will be very high and could potentially get into a 2nd tier BB if he so desired. In other words, if you're looking at MMs as a backup to BBs, this isn't going to be a great option.

And as for Gleacher and Rothschild, while they are boutiques, they are definitely not MM firms. Most of their deals will in fact be multi-billion dollar deals (AT&T, Tata, etc.), so they compete with the BBs, much like Greenhill and Evercore.

Another reason, and one that made me choose MM, is if one wants to specialize in an industry that is more difficult to do at a BB, in fact, some MM firms cover certain industries much better than some of the BB firms.

is that they tend to be hit the hardest by economic downturns. There are a lot of them that are doing well now, but we're in record M&A times - once that's over, MMs get hit bad. A lot of them close, and the ones that don't will fire like crazy. Before everyone goes crazy, I KNOW that BBs fire a lot too, but I have checked with a lot of senior bankers at BBs and MMs, and they all agree that MMs are far more at risk when it comes to people losing their jobs or losing out on bonuses. It's just a fact of life, when there is no M&A activity, B of A can supplement the investment bank with commercial banking revenue but Jefferies can't.

Believing that people in the middle market are less qualified or couldn't get a job at a bulge bracket is not correct. It might be directionally correct for someone who eats, sleeps, and dreams banking but for the normal person it is off. I have worked at a bulge bracket and a top middle market bank and there were analysts who received offers from a middle market bank and accepted the bulge offer and vice versa. This board loves to talk about GS, MS, CS, etc. but as someone said before there is no shortage of morons working there compared to any other investment bank.

As an addition to the list of middle market shops you can include Edgeview, BGL, Barrington, Lincoln, Raymond James, Simmons, Stephens, and Wachovia (to an extent).

I couldn't agree more with GenghisKhan and inhd. I have worked at both bulge bracket and middle market firms, and the distribution of geniuses and dead weight was the same at both. At the junior level, you should be much, much more concerned with your experience as an analyst or associate, not with the firm's prestige or with compensation (believe it or not). At the junior level, it's all about a) where you feel you fit best, as you'll be working non-stop with these people for a couple years, and b) where you can learn to be an effective investment banker, not just an investment banking analyst. Big difference. Your exit opportunities and future will depend on your ability to glean what you can from your seniors, and in their faith in you. When it comes time to apply to grad schools or move on to greener pastures, demonstrate your understanding and participation in your firm's deals from origination to close, and how you made an impact. The banner under which you did all this matters very little, seriously. It's the experience that counts at the analyst/associate levels. Then worry about the big bucks and your lifestyle.

They are totally different groups. HC would probably win since HLHZ was never that strong in M&A. It's a top tier for restructuring though, and there is no way to compare HC vs restructuring, it's about what YOU prefer. They are very very very different groups.

thanks. any more suggestions?

Jefferies is known for being a scrappy sweat shop whereas HLHZ tends to be more selective in the types of deals they do.

jeffries m&a, hlhz restructuring

i am close to both of these firms, and feel that i should offer my 2 cents.

jef is known more of a full service bank versus hl which is still more boutique/advisory focused.

jef offers sales & trading/research/etc versus hl which is just pure advisory.

jef is about 3 times the size of hl. roughly 3000 versus 1000.

both firms have reputations as scrappy middle market firms and have groups that are sweatshop status. i personally enjoyed working with most people i happened to work with at both firms though, so the hours are much more doable that way. jef might have a bit more of a reputation as the firm that does deals perceived as too risky for other firms to undertake. that is starting to change though after lorello joined and has brought greater discipline to the firm.

hl is more focused on teh middle market (restructuring deals are big though, tends to be big creditor deals, but does some good sized debtor ones too) versus jef is looking ot expand into bulge bracket deals (has done so already in healthcare, energy, and a few other sectors)

jef also has a strong restructuring practice, but not as strong as hl's. plus moelis poached a good chunk of the restrucutring team at jef, so it shoudl be decent considering restructuring was moelis' bread and butter for a few years. strong groups at jef that immediately come to mind are healthcare, restructuring, levfin, energy, shipping/maritime, and m&a. might have missed a few.

overall, jefferies has the bigger name (given its research and capital markets presence) and a more global presence. hl began their expansion overseas a little bit later than jefferies if i remember correctly. both are banks that started in la. jef moved to ny once baxter turned the ceo-reins to handler. hl's headquarters is still in la, but it's ny office is now bigger than the la. jef started off as a high yield shop by ex-drexel guys after the fall of drexel (well, it's investemtn banking started then. prior to that, it was a brokerage firm). as a result jef has always had a strong levfin practice. hl started off as a valuation shop, valuing esops. and has stayed more on the advisory side of things, and has remained private since its foudning.

but if i were choosing, unless i couldn't see myself working with the people at jef, i would go to jef healthcare over hl m&a. jef healthcare has a bigger name and will expose you to a breadth of deals (both advisory and capital raising) versus just m&a advisory at houlihan. healthcare banking doesn't get too much better than it does at jefferies.

any firm that's hiring... google MM IB firms and reach out to each and every one

piper jaffray

Financial Technology Partners.

1

harris williams, william blair, robert baird, moelis & co., lazard MM, houlihan lokey,

all of the above are solid. i'm leaving some off so ppl feel free to add to the list.

2/6/10

thomas weisel, gca savvian, imperial, jefferies, piper, cowen, sagent,

i dont really think moelis specializes in mm but it does some deals in that space,too ( then again, who doesn't)

Ive notived a lot of application deadlines were 2/6 or 2/7....

piper recruiting is over...

Evercore, Lazard, Greenhill, RBC, Imperial Capital, Jefferies, Harris Williams, William Blair, Robert W. Baird, Moelis & co., Rothschild, and RBS (even though everyone rips on them, as they rightfully should, for your situation RBS might be a good place to start late in the SA recruiting year.)

And HSBC.

Jefferies, Evercore, Greenhill, HLHZ, Rothschild

Those are the among the more solid middle market players.

Stifel Nicolaus... they are expanding their NYC office. Nothing formal for SA's, but a good experience.

To they guys who said Evercore, GHL, LAZ etc

a) the kid asked for MM....these aren't really MM b) What makes you think he can "apply" there this late and get offers, These places are harder than BBs to get in. If the kid didn't get BB, chances are he has no shot at these firms this late.

OP--- HW, Blair, Baird, Mccoll, Houlihan, Edgeview, JMP, PJ, Jefferies, Lazard MM kind of firms. Chances are their spots might be filling up fast.

HW was done with their SA recruitment a month ago... I contacted a Director back in mid-January and he said it was too late.

If someone did get interviews over the past months, it's because he/she was waitlisted or someone didn't accept an offer.

.double_post.