Gleacher vs. Guggenheim vs. Lincoln Int'l Full Time Offers
Which would you take? I am having trouble deciding since I interned at one of the places and have offers at the others.
I like Gleacher but are they in bad shape? Seems like they still work on some good deals.
You have some balls if you decide to join a bank that has already announced its on the block. The fact that they 'still work on some good deals' means that there is still some franchise value there is a decent likelihood a sale will happen eventually. Its anyone's guess who buys them and where they might find redundancy if GLCH is sold. There are a number of ways that could play out, but if you had offers elsewhere I would err on the side of caution.
I'd take Lincoln. Solid shop.
Lincoln. Good shop. And I was pretty impressed to hear what their total comp is for analysts.
what did you hear that it was? I haven't seen the offer sheet yet, I just got the decision verbally.
take lincoln if you are set on MM. and def take it if you interned there and enjoyed it. good risk management.
Gugg is not a bad place to be. they do big deals and you will learn a shit ton. They are always bringing on top senior level talent. great in the HC space.
So Gleacher seems to be a non-factor to you guys
I'd take Guggenheim
Year before last, I was told by a senior guy at Lincoln that first years get 70 or 75 base and 100% bonus.
i don't think lincoln gets 70 or 75 base. i heard its lower than street. but then again, that might be for chicago?
I'm not familiar with their differentials based on city, if any. A NY Lincoln MD specifically stated the pay in an info session. Unless they decided to cut their base salary in the last year, it's either 70 or 75. I can't remember for sure if it was 70 or 75, but I believe it was 75.
Guggenheim will do some larger transactions than Lincoln will, sometimes. But Lincoln does a lot more deals and a lot of M&A work.
I've talked to a few people at Guggenheim. Really solid shop and they seem to be growing tremendously.
Do offer letters usually contain info about the bonus? Does it give historical numbers or maybe allude to a % of salary?
How would someone who doesn't know about differing bonuses make a decision if it came down to something like lincoln and miller buckfire?
What if MB had a bonus of 20k and lincoln was 70k? That's a huge difference so how is one expected to know that?
Stop worrying about that. The marginal difference firm-to-firm can not be wide enough where it is a concern for you, otherwise they would have a difficult time attracting and/or retaining talent. They aren't going to give you historical numbers. One is expected to make a reasonable assumption that they will be paid in-line with what their comparable peers receive in similar roles. They could give you a $5 bonus without recourse, but one is expected to know that that isn't rational or at all likely.
This is from a year ago, but I believe 1st year base was $70k + $10k sign-on like rest of the street, don't know if that has changed though and not sure about bonus.
i thought this would be an easy win for Guggenheim seeing that Gleacher is dieing and Lincoln is more MM focused and kind of plateaued. guggs is growing and a solid platform and pulling huge deals for such a small IB team. seems like good exposure for analysts...
thoughts? thanks!
I know this doesn't matter but I saw that Gleacher is still ranked no.2 on vaults compensation ranking.
Should have also mentioned: OP, Guggenheim has a solid 5 year plan in place. Heard they are also moving to a new office.
Word is that gleacher IB group not strong. Used to be better. Morale not good. They may be trying to rebuild but may be better for you to go somewhere else.
which offices btw? I heard Lincoln Intl new york office has some great people
.
I've worked at Gleacher and it was terrible. I don't think they have many people left so if you interview, ask them to show you where everyone works. It's probably pretty dreary. I think only 2 of their 9 analysts from last year are still there.
I call bullshit. Especially since I know for a fact that there are more than a handful of analysts there.
I can attest to the exodus – 100% accurate. But seriously who cares... we're talking analysts. There are still some very solid groups within the bank (real estate comes to mind). If you can get a spot, and don’t have a slew of better options, take the money (salary that is, bonuses are dismal if existent) and weather the two year sweat slog to a top PE shop.
I would have definitely said Gleacher a couple years back, but given their current situation I think it'll be a tough call between Gleacher and Gugg. Personally I'd go with Guggenheim.....esp. if you're interested in tech/media
what did you end up taking?!?
Still haven't decided since I have until November 15th. Leaning towards Gleacher though.
where did you end up signing? congrats either way
Only one analyst from 2nd yr still left. There's still some good folks there, but also some real problems.
Just out of curiosity, can someone clarify the nature of the analyst leaving? are we talking guys ending up as head hunters, jumping to buy-side or going to a different bank ( of lesser or greater in reputation)?
person i know left banking to go to consulting after his two years at Gleacher and only had negative things to say about his experience there
can confirm this. i know 2 gleacher analysts and they hate it. firm is going downhill as of 2011 and is a shell of its former shelf. horrible hours too and inferiority complex culture.
Gleacher used to have top-notch placement into PE not entirely because of good deal exp like other boutiques, but because they were more proactive about "placement" and helped their analysts jump to good PE shops. Granted, a lot of smart kids from ivys and what not worked there, so it was a talented pool. Given the current state of the firm and a lot of departures, not sure if that still stands, at least that was my perception when I was in the recruiting cycle a while ago.
From my understanding Gleacher has been focusing on S&T (i believe where most of their revenue is coming from) and I know they are building up their MBS/ABS teams
I know more than one analyst in recent times that left gleacher before their 2 yrs up. Most left banking to go to other industries and did not go through buy side recruitment. There were also more than a couple fired. They all had negative experience which led to the pursuing other fields of work. Just my opinion but the banking field really wastes a lot of talented young resources, kids that really are smart and hard working. Times and the economy are not what they once were and it is arrogant to squander all this talent. Some of the best and brightest either leave or will not go to banking in the first place with the attitudes that prevail. When the $$$ were rolling in the hardships were ignored...but that is changing.
Lincoln International
Gotta love a college kid throwing out his opinion on an 8 mo-old thread.
I would go with Lincoln since Gleacher is crumbling badly.
Nam consequuntur delectus quisquam commodi itaque cum voluptatem. Rem voluptas velit sunt magnam sunt nulla. Nihil ipsa et et alias et atque consequatur a. Molestiae et reprehenderit pariatur ipsa nihil.
Perspiciatis sit et ex vero. Necessitatibus voluptates perspiciatis et optio. Quis libero et nam debitis.
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...
Placeat occaecati rerum eos officiis numquam qui labore. Dolor quae possimus omnis sit est ipsa molestiae. Reprehenderit deserunt quia nihil illo exercitationem.
In omnis aut ipsum. Ad nisi quas nihil quis sed quibusdam.
Necessitatibus vitae minus aliquid numquam quo qui consequatur. Odio error at repellendus. Ab rerum totam quis neque ut.