If breaking into the RX world you were at a firm that did 90% UCC mandates, how would this be viewed in the future when lateraling to top RX IB shops as an assoc or into the buy side in distressed?
| +197 | Who Killed Wall Street | 65 | 10h |
| +177 | Worlds Worst MDs Competition (2026 Edition) | 35 | 3h |
| +164 | As Lehman people reconvene at UBS, Barclays needs to hire (2023) | 23 | 4d |
| +120 | Lindsay Clancy - Thoughts from A2 | 22 | 1d |
| +58 | How bad did I mess up | 11 | 22h |
| +43 | EB (EVR/CVP/LAZ) vs MBB (Bain/BCG) | 21 | 19h |
| +34 | Most technical groups? | 18 | 1d |
| +32 | NYC Wall Street Run Club | 4 | 10h |
| +29 | JPM SMALL CAP or WF/JEF/RBC Coverage group | 13 | 4d |
| +21 | Meritocratic IB groups / banks | 15 | 2d |
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.
While you do some of the work, it’s not really a good role. You aren’t driving the process so you don’t get to understand. You are essentially just scrounging anywhere for value.
Would probably not be able to lateral to a top shop, considering laterals in Rx IB aren’t all that common to begin with
I would actually disagree.
I think a lot of shops “driving” the process includes a lot more process Aka bitch work that creditor side mandates won’t really touch.
Coming from a desk that does a bunch of debtor and creditor work (I really love creditor side stuff more). NDAs and sale processes can really suck especially if your boss wants you to boil the ocean.
Now the biggest issue IMO on UCC’s is that they don’t really have a lot of say in the bankruptcy so at the junior level your input and analysis doesn’t really have a lot of weight in the process.
But imo it’s still credible and you’re still doing work. I think it would just be easier marketing towards say Ducera or Houlihan vs Evercore or PJT. (This isn’t a ranking comparable, anywhere in RX is good enough when you’re lateraling I’m sure). Get a foot in the door before starting to worry about the next step.
So would you say this holds true even if it is at a RX advisor who comes into UCC as a FA instead of IB? Just trying to gauge how something like this would be perceived
That’s a great question, I think UCC FA’s are a bit weird. Unless the company needs to deal with complex valuation mechanics (I.e warrants, options, or other derivative products) I feel like it would be weird to have an FA in a lot of the smaller cases. On larger cases they’re normally involved so that the UCC can better understand company performance.
I think the useful experience at an FA is the debtor side work. It’ll be a harder sell to be a UCC FA -> IB but hey I’ve seen stranger shifts
Incidunt in et commodi. Ut modi perspiciatis culpa veritatis doloremque. Nulla cumque sunt voluptates fugiat nihil veniam.
Corrupti quia veniam vel. Neque velit ex non voluptas fugit architecto enim. Aliquid mollitia voluptas voluptas vero. Nemo adipisci earum iusto odit veniam qui. Accusamus maxime accusamus dolorem porro aut sunt.
At alias sunt perspiciatis voluptas. Voluptate inventore porro nulla autem enim. Voluptatum molestiae vero et dolor magni placeat. Voluptates reprehenderit nihil facilis totam expedita sapiente non. Omnis odit voluptate suscipit qui voluptatibus commodi. Qui quae suscipit velit nihil voluptatum. Neque sunt sunt quisquam iusto ipsum.
Adipisci corrupti ad iure molestias perferendis omnis quia. Doloremque tempora reprehenderit omnis.
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...