The demise and now rise of UBS?

So I just read that UBS is trying to revive its once notorious public finance division by bringing some top dogs from JPM and WF. Is this UBS trying to become more competitive all while they've been shrinking their IB division? Doesn't make much sense. Maybe I should look at some earnings calls.

Pre-crisis:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/06/business/worldb…

A decade later (paywall):
https://www.bondbuyer.com/news/ubs-taps-hill-geny…

Interesting to see them start in a mature industry with tight commissions on munis and uncertainty in capitol hill. What do you all think? Strategic or desperate?

 

Public Finance is an area that will always be around. Regardless of the proposals to cut advance refundings and public purpose financings, there’s still plenty of money to be made. Yah the PF guys are pulling in $7/bond on AAA credits, but that’s still money. I think it’s just another avenue for them to make consistent revenue. Bankers can do like 50 GO/Sewer Water Rev deals a year, and when you do volume that shit adds up. That’s just my two cents.

 

I think it'd be the opposite, actually. UBS has been known to try and take the same route MS is taking; to strengthen their wealth management arms and provide better products to their clients. I mean, they are one of the largest private banks and are strong internationally. Could be a way of allowing oversees customers to buy into US markets through munis. But it still seems weird to see them pour resources into a new PF division when their IB has suffered so much from being top 5 pre-crisis

 
themilkman:
I think UBS is gonna take a big hit...spin off...not sure...what divisions do you think?

I've seen articles floating around that they may spin off wealth management, but I find that hard to believe. Also they are top 6 in M&A activity so far this year so it seems odd to spin off IBD.

 

IMO, if they were to spin off a division it would be their IBD. The bread and butter of the company is their commercial bank in Switzerland and their Wealth Management Division. I believe they have the largest number of financial advisors in the world. This business also tends to stand up better in a recession.

Bloomberg reported today that they may fire 8,000 employees across all divisions.

 

internal memos can say whatever they want... they still split into 3 separate divisions, right? didn't they say the weren't going to do that too? mgmt will do whatever the hell they want w/o having to explain to anyone

 

They've been partly nationalized, but they won't be the last bank to do so. At the very least they can start returning to business as usual. They turned a profit this quarter, which in and of itself is a feat given the conditions. IMO they're not going anywhere. Maybe they spin out IBD down the road, but right now who's going to take that from them unless it's at firesale prices akin to Wachovia/Lehman/Bear?

I will say this though, I think they would've been wiser taking money from sovereign wealth funds like CS did. The Swiss regulators and that new 9% stake may force them to take some crazy capital restrictions, which would obviously hurt their ability to take advantage of their big balance sheet (which some would say is their strongest asset).

 

[quote=gomes3pc]They've been partly nationalized, but they won't be the last bank to do so. At the very least they can start returning to business as usual. They turned a profit this quarter, which in and of itself is a feat given the conditions. quote]

They did NOT turn a profit this quarter.

 

the top talent is leaving because they can't get paid - the prize US IB business were Healthcare (IBD), Equities (S&T) and FX.

The latter 2 businesses have seen steady defections since the end of 07 - even before the nationalization wave - because UBS pays bonuses largely based on firm-wide performance, so Rates/FX/Equities/High Grade got paid shit, just like HY/LevFin bankers/mortgage and structuring desks.

Most of my friends in UBS IBD are/were in LevFin, FIG, and Industrials, so I'm not sure how healthcare is doing (although they lost an analyst from the 07 class in fine fashion, remember that great exit letter?).

I'd say the American investment bank is done for - they'll eventually sell off divisions to garner what value they can before people quit. Wealth/Investment Mgmt will maintain a strong global presence, and IB will be moderately strong outside the US.

 
yesman:
I'd say the American investment bank is done for - they'll eventually sell off divisions to garner what value they can before people quit. Wealth/Investment Mgmt will maintain a strong global presence, and IB will be moderately strong outside the US.

You do know that the groups in NY are global, right? They handle deals all over the world...I believe that makes a difference.

 

The surprising thing is that DB has so much money to throw around. They've been hiring right, left and centre.

All banks that have been crunched are bleeding people (ML, Citi), so it's not a UBS-specific phenomenon. Although, the 80% fall in bonuses didn't help either.

UBS have, historically, been known to buy the top talent when they need it, so don't worry, when the markets turn around uncle UBS will make sure that the ranks of rainmakers are full again.

With regards to the junior bankers, I have no idea. A lot depends on the future market conditions.


Just my 2c.

__________ Just my 2c.
 

I see it as an opportunity to junior bankers in the future ---> there will be the need for senior people in 5 or 7 years, so who is starting now has a good chance to get these positions (also consider that some of these senior guys are taking or will take this opportunity to open their very own boutique bank - like happened in the past when these M&A cycles were down)....

 

[quote=awm55]http://news.hereisthecity.com/2011/05/05/rumours-of-mass-defections-at-…]

+1. I was about to post that. Can't put all that much value on rumors and chatter among little pre-pubescent boys on internet forums. UBS is a bulge bracket bank, no matter how you slice it. At this point in time there's no indication that they're going the way of the dinosaurs to say the least.

‎"Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to become the means by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of other men. Blood, whips and guns or dollars."
 

well it has been a while since i was pre, or even recently-post pubescent. Hereisthecity is based in london and tends to be eurocentric. I think most ubs haters would even acknowledge the strength of the brand in Europe, and many of the hires that article touts are in the Eurozone.

But, that article is taking a short-term view of a problem that has been going on for a while. Yes there were some big singular losses (though they excluded the the head of comm banking leaving to go back to CS 2 weeks ago) and apparently some hires to fill some voids, but they seem to ignore the fact that entire teams that have left in the last 2 years (energy, healthcare,,,). Those are things that have not been corrected, and a few hires in Austria aren't going to do it.

Not saying they're dead by any means, but i don't think the exodus, especially in the US, have been exaggerated.

 
Argonaut:
I think at this point you are not just beating a dead horse - you are beating off a dead horse
Very contrived. Normally, your repartee is funny.

I don't think UBS really is a dead horse. Can't we all appreciate some fucking hyperbole every now and then? Had things turned out differently and I only received an offer from UBS, I would have gladly taken it.

 

i'd say beating off a dead horse is an even better metaphor for the futility of an effort than beating a dead horse. So CAN you appreciate a f-ing hyperbole?

It looks like the topic is a personal one for you; why don't you tell your story instead of reposting links from the internetz and expecting us to understand why you feel so worthless, or why this is of such interest to you.

More is good, all is better
 

I feel like UBS is having a hard time in IB. I don't really know how it was before the crisis but now UBS is clearly lagging behind its competitors in IB.

If you look at this link, you'll see that UBS revenues are significantly smaller than any other BB (apart from MS, any explanation on that ?)

http://www.efinancialnews.com/gallery/in-pictures-q1-results/7

And it also shows that GS is still above everyone else in the street in term of size. I don't really know if the same activities within each bank are taken into account in these numbers though.

 

I actually just talked to a buddy of mine at UBS this afternoon to see what the hell is going on over there, the wheels are apparently starting to fall off. He said on a typical day over the past month, up to half his entire group, from senior MDs right on down to 1Y analysts, wont even be in the office because they're out interviewing at other banks. Its apparently so commonplace, people just accept it now.

 
prescient1:
I actually just talked to a buddy of mine at UBS this afternoon to see what the hell is going on over there, the wheels are apparently starting to fall off. He said on a typical day over the past month, up to half his entire group, from senior MDs right on down to 1Y analysts, wont even be in the office because they're out interviewing at other banks. Its apparently so commonplace, people just accept it now.

I have always wondered this. What happens if it gets this bad? I mean how can you run a business that requires this much dedication if people know they aren't going to get paid well for the job they do?

UBS was moronic for not paying well this year, they knew their top guys would get poached and now they are in the position of having to give enormous guarantees to get people to come over from other banks (god knows how much they had to pay to get the energy team from MS). All this does is reduce the bonus pool for everyone else.

Of the main investment banks they are BY FAR the best capitalized, so they have the resources to pay but they just don't seem to be ponying up. Not a good idea in this industry.

 

Lol 1Y analysts are probably recruiting for PE positions and not for Jefferies. Can't speak for the MDs.

That being said, http://nyti.ms/kjuPSZ says they picked up a dealmaker from DB, and http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/ubs-hires-2-energy-bankers/ shows a couple more higher level people from MS that followed Langford over to UBS.

Banking is a revolving door lol. Situation at UBS is pretty meh compared to that at JPM, but it seems the people most concerned are senior staff at UBS over pay and WSO monkeys who don't have jobs in the industry/want to make their job at Jefferies/Piper/HSBC/MacCap look "bulge bracket." At the end of the day, "prospective" BBs never really join/joined the ranks, while "struggling" BBs never left them unless they sold out to another firm.

 

That would be incorrect, my group alone has received 20-30 resumes from UBS over the past month or two from analysts trying to lateral out. To your claim more broadly, no, a stampede for the exit sign of this magnitude does not happen at other banks. Its cute you're trying to defend your bank, but this is a situation that is very uncommon, why else do you think the WSJ and Dealbook have deemed it so bizarre they've each run multiple articles calling it a "mass exodus"? The upshot is that prospective monkeys on this board would be well-advised to avoid starting their career at a sinkhole like this.

 

I think its a domino-effect dynamic thats taken root over there; people see everyone around them leaving and before you know it you have entire teams of people (like their whole Healthcare group) peacing out.

 

I have a couple of friends that work(ed) in their US group. I would suggest staying away as there is alot of uncertainty surrounding their employment status, compensation, and the bank's ability to generate new work due to the scandals. If you can't get in anywhere else, a BB is still a BB. That being said I would plan for a swift exit once you start networking.

 
nauprillion:
I'm hearing HSBC is pretty well-establised in Asia. Citigroup is probably your best bet out of the three you mentioned... and yes. boutique over UBS

1 year ago, UBS was def tier 1 BB in Asia Pacific, while HSBC was at most at 2nd/ 3nd tier BB. I totally agree there is uncertainty regarding the investment banking division in the future. However, based on its last several months performance/ league table in Asia Pacific, UBS IBD still remians as top 3 BB.

 

For UBS specifically, I would definitely NOT apply to their IBD division, but go for AM / PWM, for the reasons mentioned (i.e. shrinking IBD, focus on AM/PWM).

The rest of the questions depend a lot on desk / division, but a good GENERAL rule of thumb is go for the best name (in like-for-like situations). For example, if you had AM UBS and AM HSBC, I would say UBS, but obviously it depends on what your career aspirations are, what group you want to be in etc.

 

UBS is a great bank. I would choose it over evercore and greenhill

"Look, you're my best friend, so don't take this the wrong way. In twenty years, if you're still livin' here, comin' over to my house to watch the Patriots games, still workin' construction, I'll fuckin' kill you. That's not a threat, that's a fact.
 

Uhh...what?

Where do you see the "connection" between UBS and CS, other than both banks happen to be Swiss? UBS has been cited for terrible management at the top: buying lots of assets to build up the firm during boom years and now facing the consequences of being a colossal firm in a down cycle. Also as has been mentioned on this forum before, they hired far too many in the boom years and go on firing sprees during low markets.

So certainly UBS is a cautionary tale for the other banks. But again, fail to see how they are particularly similar to CS...? Obviously the concern of a balance sheet is tangible for CS, but they have been among the top-5 for global M&A for a while, are leading in emerging markets, and lead IPO underwritings in 2012.

Your question (IMO) is akin to asking if Citi/BAML fails, why not GS/MS!? They are all American banks and GS/MS don't have that big balance sheet like JPM (OMG!).

 
mountainvalley:
Uhh...what?

Where do you see the "connection" between UBS and CS, other than both banks happen to be Swiss? UBS has been cited for terrible management at the top: buying lots of assets to build up the firm during boom years and now facing the consequences of being a colossal firm in a down cycle. Also as has been mentioned on this forum before, they hired far too many in the boom years and go on firing sprees during low markets.

So certainly UBS is a cautionary tale for the other banks. But again, fail to see how they are particularly similar to CS...? Obviously the concern of a balance sheet is tangible for CS, but they have been among the top-5 for global M&A for a while, are leading in emerging markets, and lead IPO underwritings in 2012.

Your question (IMO) is akin to asking if Citi/BAML fails, why not GS/MS!? They are all American banks and GS/MS don't have that big balance sheet like JPM (OMG!).

Think the demise of UBS is overdone in the media. It's still the #2 wealth manager globally. It is still the #1 bank in Asia for IBD/ECM and solid for DCM (think #4) there. Still solid in Europe. The US is the big weakness really. Equities still doing reasonable on par with DB, etc... and fixed income actually still exists (albeit less complex) post the restructuring.

 

FYI- and as mentioned above, UBS is experiencing the consequences of over-hiring and now they are cutting staff that the bank's performance has gone down. They are really experiencing the biggest problems in the US, and they continue to have solid (not great) performance in Europe and Asia. Wouldn't think there is much of a connection between them and CS.

 

Totally understand the GS/MS argument with Citi/BAML, but my fear is that UBS/CS are more closely tied given that the economy of Switzerland is more heavily reliant on banking as a whole. I would tend to say in the US it's not as big an issue. Not trying to make any statements whatsoever, just looking for info. I'm starting full time at CS this summer, and just wanted to see what people thought. Thanks for the responses.

 

It is actually a valid question in at least two ways. 1) that the Swiss regulator has been unusually focused on Credit Suisse, ostensibly for bringing greater risk into a more conservative, wealth management-oriented Swiss banking system; they are still finding it hard to digest that a non German-speaking American is the CEO and 2) that after the pop in UBS's share price, investors may pressure Credit Suisse into delivering similar results (their share price, as with most investment banking firms, has been lagging).

The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be the shepherd.
 

I will keep a lookout for other opportunities if I were you. Regardless of what people on this board tell you (that UBS is too big to fail, and will always be a BB blah blah blah - that kind of shit obviously comes from UBS analysts), UBS IBD is now fraught with uncertainty.

That bank's like a black hole now. A few months ago, there were saying that IBD is a core part of their business. Now they are saying that IBD will be reduced substantially in size and product lines. Who knows what happens in a few more months? Maybe shut the entire IBD down with pink slips all around?

 

Based on UBS' recent statements, it's difficult to pinpoint what exactly they mean when they reference "the investment bank." When UBS references its investment bank, it is talking about IBD** AND all the capital markets functions (S&T, prime brokerage, derivatives, etc...)The wording leads me to believe that the proposed withdrawal from "investment banking" actually means: - put the brakes on proprietary trading - partially/entirely withdraw from structuring exotic fixed income products - reduce IBD headcount to match the decline in market-wide dealflow (as all banks are doing)

**To be clear, I'm using the term "IBD" to describe sector coverage, M&A advisory, and equity/debt/LevFin/etc product activity.

To address the OP's question: I'm not sure who on this forum is interpreting UBS' treatment of "IBD" vs "Investment Banking" correctly. Delirium2 is correct to point out that there is clearly a shitshow at UBS right now. However, think the most recent announcements signal substantial layoffs in trading and structuring functions but seem to indicate that IBD sector/product activity (what your friend will find at UBS LA) will experience milder layoffs.

 

Bury Bonds, I could not agree more that it sounds like they realize their losses stemmed from a small part of the business, and they are going to pull back on that. They surely understand that doing IPO and M&A work is profitable for them.

But I wonder how much dealflow will slow if they get worse about using capital to attract business (why Moelis left), or about underwriting debt deals. And also, how a spinoff would affect an analysts' experience there. Do you think that 2 years down the road, PE firms and HFs will still look favorably upon UBS analysts, and realize that it was just unlucky timing?

Another thing: I don't think a spinoff of the bank would be too bad for bankers if done properly and good leadership is put in place. But what are the chances it is sold to a competitor BSC-style?

Any and all opinions are appreciated.

 

Those are questions that I obviously don't have concrete answers for. My comments:

re: Dealflow and capital usage If I recall correctly, the one place they seemed over-reluctant to deploy capital was leveraged loans. That decision turned out for the best. Using capital to win deals will still go on. For example, the recent KCI/LifeCell deal ($1.7B) was a cash deal and I'll bet that a decent chunk of JP Morgan's change was involved somewhere along the way. However, this is nothing like last year when banks were effectively buying league table cred via massive LevFin commitments (if you want a neat example, read up on the package Credit Suisse offered in the hopes of attracting a rival bidder for TXU last year). If your friend is joining a group that has a strategic M&A focus (as opposed to sponsor-driven/financial M&A), then he probably has less to worry about.

re: Spinoff I don't work there, so I am only going by what I read. The consensus seems to be that the investment bank could not be carved out because it wouldn't be adequately capitalized. Divesting it to competitor is probably impossible at the moment given that it would require substantial appetite and funding on the part of the buyer (neither of which seem to exist right now).

re: Exit opps If the analysts are still getting decent deal experience, I would venture to guess that opps will not be massively compromised in the near future.

 

A rumor that I heard from several senior people is that HSBC is involved with Olivant. Nobody knows to what extent. Whether their role is simply as a generic prime broker or whether they have some sort of interest in parts of UBS remains to be seen.

A good deal of people at UBS are taking a look at their options. I said it yesterday, but I'll say it again. Uncertainity at the bank makes it extremely hard for them to retain and recruit talent. Yes, it is a horrible job market right now, but everyone on all levels are checking out their options.

I agree with Bury_Bonds in that the "Investment Bank" and IBD are quite different. Headcounts will be reduced, but the severity will depend on the divisions and its contribution to the current situation.

One last note: There was a good deal of reaction to Rohner's comment that the PW/AM/CB would no longer subsidize/finance the operations of the IB. Many people took that to mean a seperation or a major cut in products. If you read UBS report on their subprime losses published on Monday you will understand how the losses were created. Basically (I am not a trader) it was a carry trade financed by a low cost of funds (swiss deposits..ect) which bought higher yielding but risk free assets (by selling the first 2% of losses) and immediately generated profit at a risk free return (cough cough LTCM). They did this on such a huge scale and over several divisions and managed credit but not market risk, and this was their main flaw. From what I took of it, this scheme was being shot down by Rohner in his comments and does not nessecarily mean as draconian cuts as some believe.

 

Too early to tell. 2010 will be crucial. If they are not out of the woods then (in terms of it's WM - no-one gives a shit about IB or WM US any more) then road to recovery will be painful, very slow and UBS will lose what is left of its prestige and clout. Then they will be known as the poster child of the credit crunch as WM was considered to be the money machine that would be working no matter happened to the world or IB, but as the 50% drop in it's WM arm show, that is painfully not the case. If in 2010 they post a profit, get some inflows in WM, WM US and GAM then they'll rebound into top league just as they have post LTCM. But in all Q3 result really means nothing in terms of UBS outlook, just that we'll have to wait a little longer till we get to the cross-roads.

__________ Just my 2c.
 

UBS is exiting its U.S. operations. Sure if you wanna be in Europe or Asia, it's a fine bank, i sure wouldn't do anything with it for the long term in the united states though. rather work at JEFFRIES ROFL

 

If you haven't see anything new on it you haven't looked. This was widely documented and reported.

Go to their investor relations website and they'll show you which areas of the IB are staying and which are going. It boils down to this - they're mostly scaling down prop trading, and other types of trading. Most core trading and IB groups (M&A, LevFin, Corp Lending, etc etc etc) Are staying and may even grow.

 

we went for a slap up lunch with two of them recently, then to sushi samba, they bought the champagne and food. was a good day....the next day, they were let go

but com'on, The Railway, they could do better than that surely

"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
 

People on this site literally talk about UBS like it's run by high school dropouts out of the third floor of some strip mall in the middle of bumblefuck nowhere. Is it a GS/MS/JPM? No, but it's still UBS for Christ's sake. Dismissing them as a player would be a mistake.

 

People on this site just get too caught up with hating on places like UBS and Piper Jaffray. At the end of the day I know analysts from both that ended up successfully going to PE at solid MM shops.

Additionally, you're still in a much better position to lateral to a JPM / MS / GS coming from UBS than Big 4 accounting or something. I'd be interested to see the ratio of kids on this site that even got past the phone screens, and then the conversion rate from that.

 

Perhaps too much enthusiasm on my part. Bunch of guys from here just left for there and I'm thinking about doing the same. Everyone left at the same time and their understanding is that they're being bought in before the fat is trimmed out.

Get busy living
 
TheKid1:
I can confirm, that they are trying to hire senior people, that can bring business, cause of the amount of top MD they have lost. As far as analyst and associate go, I dont know. But I know someone who works at a recruiting agency and are tying to get group heads and MD from other banks.
Are the MD's bringing over thier entire groups, or are they building new teams? I'm thinking that this is a good time to quietly go in and start working my ass off. One of the people they took from a buddy's firm isn't anything special, so I'm trying to figure out the logic.

There's no rush to jump, but the best time (for me at least) to go to a company is during/right after severe bloodletting because it's wide open for a while and there's plenty of chaos to take advantage of.

Get busy living
 

The purpose of a consultant is for mgmt. to take credit when things go well and blame the consultants when they go bad. So I'd relax trying to take credit for something that UBS paid you good money to devise. At the end of the day the management team of UBS could have gone a different direction, but decided not to. They deserve credit there, and more importantly deserve credit for executing on it. Not to bash on the consultants, but if you give someone a good idea and they can't execute then your idea is worthless in my humble opinion.

 
bootsnapper:

The purpose of a consultant is for mgmt. to take credit when things go well and blame the consultants when they go bad.

Oh, I know. This is why I left consulting. You are, however, incorrectly assuming that we didn't run the implementation effort for many, if not most, of the changes. I agree with you - an idea is worthless if you can't execute it.

 

^Yeah i know that, but i just don't how much my contact will be able to help me if they are on a hiring freeze. Do you think recruitment for F.T will pick up for UBS this fall? Or will they give out less offeres for SA and then pick up during the fall. It just worries me since i go to a non target and have very few alums that are in and very few who are responding back..

 

Tough call, a few years ago when there were hiring freezes some of the BBs only took from the SA class and didn't do any FT recruitment in the fall, but hopefully this shouldn't be as drastic. You should just try to stay in touch with your contact, but remember it is the summer so things are probably slower and people tend not to respond since they're on vacation.

 
Bobb:
I've spoken to hiring managers at MS, UBS and JPM within in the past week and they all seemed to be hiring. Not sure if its certain groups/areas being hit or what
My understanding as well. I'm thinking that by September they will resume the regular recruiting.
Get busy living
 
TheKid1:
Koho:
JPM only taking 40% of interns.. not a good sign for those applying for FT in the late summer/fall

I hope this is true, this would be a good thing, if they are going give out less F.T offers to S.A they might beef up F.T recruiting for fall. I guess only time will tell. Shouldn't offers be given out in the next 3 weeks?

I hate to burst your optimism, but the 40% rate is pretty normal now due to a) larger intern classes and b) tougher market conditions (=fewer FT analysts hired). Making fewer offers to SAs may give the impression that there will be more spots come FT recruitment in the fall (I used to believe that too), but that won't be the case. JPM has a very strict method of recruiting FT analysts, which now is really through internships only (in fact, they last year stopped recruiting any FTs in London, so that everybody now has to do an internship beforehand, but at least they offer 4 cycles vs. traditional summer-only). The only candidates they will possibly consider (who haven't done an internship there) are people from GS/MS (and the likes), or at least that's what someone working there said. I actually only know of one person so far who got a FT offer and didn't do an internship there before (and he went to a top boutique). But GS FT recruitment will probably not be much better either. They did quite a bit of additional hiring earlier this year, but may now have a super low SA-FT offer ratio. I've heard some numbers from people working there and they are so terrible, I don't even want to post them here.
 

All support level hiring at JPM has slowed down. The business leaders are essentially trying to discourage hiring of support level staff through a complicated process that has to be done for support level position hiring.

 

I don't believe that that JPM is taking any fewer interns than normal.. It's not going to make them want to do FT recruiting, I think they really stopped doing that (and with good reason, in my opinion). Although their intern class is fucking ginormous this year so the % accepted may go down.

JPM is expanding several IBD groups right now. Don't know anything about support staff stuff as mentioned though.

 

^^^agreed

The time frame between when FT offers are made to SA's and when OCR recruiting starts is hardly even a month

there is no way that over the course of a month a huge bank like JPM will all of a sudden decide "oh shit the market has done a 180 and we really need to beef up our incoming analyst hiring"

Banks will pull from their summers first, and prefer to hire them, as its cheaper and lower risk. FT recruiting is expensive, and that why these SA programs have become so important as a recruitment screen.

Lower % of SA's hired = Less spots for OCR, sorry

 

JP didn't recruit in the fall due to a high retention rate from their summer analyst program. Apparently that was not enough to meet their staffing demands, as they circled back in June to pull in a few more to finish off the numbers. In anticipation of this happening, they increased their summer analyst program up to maintain the workload. UBS is in a similar situation, trying to hire a few more analysts before the new hires are brought in. The freeze does not directly affect junior hires, but could very well become a factor when extending full time offer to summer analysts.

Play the long game - give back, help out, mentor - just don't ever forget where you came from. #Bootstrapped
 

I'd honestly like to know how many high schoolers with no grasp on the industry are posting in these threads.

This report (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240531119039999045764669224484985…) is a direct contradiction of this thread and recent Dealbreaker article. God knows how much UBS paid a guy with 20+ years at Lehman.

Replacing 20 lost bankers with 18 thus far shows a pretty strong commitment to the business, guys. Focus on getting jobs.

 
no homo:
I'd honestly like to know how many high schoolers with no grasp on the industry are posting in these threads.

This report (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240531119039999045764669224484985…) is a direct contradiction of this thread and recent Dealbreaker article. God knows how much UBS paid a guy with 20+ years at Lehman.

Replacing 20 lost bankers with 18 thus far shows a pretty strong commitment to the business, guys. Focus on getting jobs.

If you think UBS has only lost 20 bankers then you're crazy. I can name 20 people that left within a month of when I left this year. That place is definitely a sinking ship. Thank God I got out of there. Only people left behind in my old group are those who couldn't get a better job and that's why they are at UBS.

 

A hiring freeze does not mean that headcount across all divisions and all groups is static, it just means that overall across the firm, headcount will not rise appreciably.

The fact that is that there is a "freeze" and headcount is on a tight leash...just look at the dealbreaker article.

Your link to UBS's hiring of a Lev Fin banker doesn't really mean anything at all.

 
09grad:
A hiring freeze does not mean that headcount across all divisions and all groups is static, it just means that overall across the firm, headcount will not rise appreciably.

The fact that is that there is a "freeze" and headcount is on a tight leash...just look at the dealbreaker article.

Your link to UBS's hiring of a Lev Fin banker doesn't really mean anything at all.

Oh, it's completely relevant. It says that if the firm is willing to spend well into the seven figures to replace just one recent departure they are not going to "keep things static" and avoid giving interns offers as Dealbreaker suggests.

Regardless, you've proven my point. You don't work in the industry and are citing Dealbreaker lol.

 

Enim in praesentium nostrum cum. Placeat ut iure aperiam. Dolores aut aspernatur molestias quasi voluptas aliquam quasi. Cum corporis ipsa velit est placeat quibusdam ut sunt.

Excepturi voluptatibus nihil voluptas recusandae sunt mollitia vel. Corporis maxime sunt et iure.

Velit aut nesciunt eum error. Fugiat mollitia exercitationem facere tempore natus consectetur. Delectus libero ea labore sapiente.

Saepe dolores sit corrupti distinctio aut. Repellat suscipit praesentium adipisci. Earum voluptas vel a consequatur cum aspernatur. Modi nesciunt quo optio error ut.

 

Aut sunt modi quos molestiae labore deserunt iure. Cum consequatur earum aspernatur eos. Nihil adipisci ullam dolore a aut beatae. Voluptatum officia consequatur cupiditate ut voluptate. Dolorem magni velit quia earum ipsum.

Aliquam quibusdam necessitatibus mollitia officiis fugiat aut. Dolores earum vel id quisquam officiis quidem autem. Consequuntur blanditiis doloribus a veniam dolorum. Maiores excepturi vero eaque soluta nam adipisci veritatis fuga.

Officiis non temporibus possimus animi. Maiores optio vel architecto sint dignissimos voluptates. Ab consequuntur earum qui rerum aut et dolorem. Repellendus repellat ea aut dolor rerum.

Voluptates enim voluptas enim quisquam. Vero ut quia minima consequatur. Quia odit odit velit atque quasi.

 

Omnis tempore omnis et impedit ut et hic sequi. Magni in totam est aut earum. Quae temporibus ea sit voluptas earum.

Aperiam quia incidunt ea magni reprehenderit quis assumenda. Ut dolores alias veniam et blanditiis ab ratione velit.

Rerum odit ducimus velit blanditiis. Dolorum eaque asperiores inventore provident doloribus. Rerum voluptates vel sed laudantium a a nobis. Eveniet eos optio iure voluptatibus. Aut magnam aspernatur nobis reiciendis.

 

Et modi nam rem rerum ut. Delectus inventore et magnam provident. Quisquam et id non culpa. Veritatis modi facilis non consequatur et.

Deleniti non sint in quod ipsum cupiditate. Sapiente aliquid perferendis numquam minus non. Sunt ut impedit recusandae ut. Eos ea natus qui omnis sapiente numquam doloribus iusto. Ex commodi natus impedit similique ut.

Omnis vero eos nostrum dolorum itaque. Debitis itaque pariatur autem qui voluptas atque accusamus. Autem voluptatum ratione qui ipsa ipsa ex eligendi non. Cum fugit molestias occaecati. Incidunt non provident culpa excepturi. Quae occaecati atque hic qui.

Eum dolore sapiente cumque numquam atque maiores. Nemo rerum ea magni cum. Molestias quaerat delectus quo et aut in saepe. Nam odit sapiente est autem fugit aspernatur enim non. Ab sunt numquam unde vel quae aperiam est.

 

Qui ab qui et sint quo neque. Velit facilis odit natus consequatur eos qui alias. Et soluta dolore velit velit voluptatem veritatis neque quis. Possimus reprehenderit animi voluptatem in hic eaque. Expedita fugit praesentium asperiores quod labore dignissimos eveniet molestias. Quaerat voluptas hic nam et. Perspiciatis autem quo natus sint minima est. Quae et ea magnam.

 

A eaque magnam esse placeat perferendis. Ut expedita cupiditate dolores. Quae voluptas voluptates eligendi. Autem harum ea error voluptatem. Sapiente dignissimos occaecati velit.

Aliquid voluptatem sequi veritatis magni tenetur libero sunt officiis. Iste accusantium aut expedita veritatis voluptatum. Consequatur natus eos ad unde rem quos quis perferendis.

Unde officia aut esse libero. Iusto adipisci laborum illum modi officiis. Voluptatem ut autem nobis nesciunt earum cum. Dignissimos ea nesciunt eaque reiciendis minima aliquam.

 

Necessitatibus voluptatem est quia. Perspiciatis reprehenderit consequatur autem dolorem velit dolorem dolorum. Molestiae et rerum voluptatibus est voluptatem.

Sapiente sint id sed molestiae molestias dolores. Nulla est accusamus laudantium iure et quis pariatur. Dolor non suscipit laudantium alias perspiciatis. Eaque omnis fugit dicta et quaerat nisi voluptatem. Excepturi sapiente animi debitis deserunt. Voluptas recusandae quae eaque ad. Quibusdam similique non iure corrupti suscipit perferendis asperiores.

Est ut qui consequatur id pariatur qui. Animi at veniam perspiciatis excepturi maxime et laboriosam et. Sed et omnis quasi iste nisi. Iste ut similique quas.

Porro qui nesciunt possimus aspernatur. Vel sed quis ab quia qui accusantium. Adipisci iusto nobis amet quo et aut.

 

Quis rem perspiciatis ipsum et ipsa mollitia. Ut aliquam unde culpa maxime. Alias velit assumenda ut repellendus magnam enim. Aut voluptatem quae laboriosam totam molestias provident non quos.

Velit sed aut alias rerum fuga. Iste delectus aut aut.

Vitae natus aliquid enim rem ipsa dolor et fuga. Quia culpa esse sit et consequatur voluptas.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

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

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 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

March 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

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $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...”