Interesting offer decision - what would you do?
Got what I needed - thanks!
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +134 | Restructuring: Anti-climactic Experience | 36 | 3h |
| +109 | IB Net Worth / Savings Check | 51 | 3h |
| +99 | Woman who emptied Knicks trashcan on street then stole it was DEI exec, worked at JPMorgan Chase | 25 | 1h |
| +81 | Stop sleeping on UBS - it’s pretty good | 28 | 1h |
| +52 | 2026 VAULT PRESTIGE RANKINGS | 30 | 4m |
| +39 | AI + Financial Modelling | 12 | 1d |
| +31 | Hardest interview experiences? | 16 | 1d |
| +28 | Summer before college | 17 | 18h |
| +26 | Current State of UBS in North America | 8 | 2d |
| +23 | Cold apply for FT recruiting? | 5 | 3d |
Career Resources
Why wouldn't GS/MS/JP offer you a full time position if they already know you are graduating AND have a full time offer elsewhere? Obviously I don't know the whole situation but seems like they aren't fully confident in your abilities if they know you are a senior and have a FT offer. That should speak volumes to you IMO. Thus by taking the SA you are opening up a ton of risk. Top performers at lower BB's will have no shortage of exit opps too btw.
OP might be based in EU. Common for BB's to offer SA gigs to graduating candidates (due to headcount issues for FT). Happens when a) candidate fails to get return offer and applies for FT on the street but there is no headcount or b) fast-track recruiting/networking during the summer.
I come what agree with Quaneaser's post. The risk is huge if you do the summer internship because you could either dislike the team/culture completely and/or might not receive a full-time offer. You then have to apply after graduation and risk getting nothing.
Don't read into the lower tier/upper tier too much. It's a moot point for someone willing to put the work in and be a top performer.
Thanks for the insight - would your answers change if it were indicated that there was a very strong chance of conversion to FT?
And @Quaneaser, @rumplesmoothspin is spot on - FT headcount issues and only offered the SA because of networking during summer
They would, but marginally. You have to factor in the risk of working with a team you might not like. That becomes unbearable very quickly. Additionally, if you feel like you can perform well at the 'lower tier' BB, and can make your own exit ops because of that, the trade might not be worth it.
Did you interview for the position and go through the whole assessment/super day process or was it a recommendation from a senior figure and a few formal/informal interviews?
The formality of the process can give clues. If headcount was a constraint and someone really liked you, you could take that as a positive sign. If however you had to go through the formal process and are not guaranteed a job after your internship, that can be worrying.
It was the former rather than the latter - a senior banker I know got me an interview and I bypassed the whole application process (online application, online testing etc). I went in for two rounds of interviews and was told I have wide support from the team.
A bird in the hand..... If I'm not mistaken, all BB's are Tier 1 for PE recruiting.
I think you might be mistaken, I haven't heard/read the same thing and I've seen the opposite...I could be wrong but that being said, I have little to no interest in PE anyway. I'm more concerned about the type of transactions I want to work on (Option 2 bank does more of them), b-school applications etc.
In my opinion the Risk / Reward heavily favors Option #1. If Option #2 does not pan out you are unemployed and have already graduated. Failing could mean that you never break into high finance and could be forced into a less desirable position. I don't think it is worth the risk for what you perceive is a difference in prestige. B-Schools don't draw lines in the sand with BBs the same way that WSO does. Also, having not worked with team #2 yet, there is a very real chance that you end up not enjoying working with them. Team #1 is a known quantity and they clearly like you. Don't throw that away.
Thanks, I have read a lot of your posts on WSO and respect your opinion and will consider it seriously. That being said, I have a few follow up questions. Some follow up info (mentioned above but consolidated here for ease) to consider: I get along with and like the team at the top bank, and am more interested in the kind of transactions they work on. I am also interested in moving to an international office of the bank (NY, London etc) after a couple of years, and the opportunity seems more likely at the top bank, and the difference in reputations is more marked in the overseas offices I want to move to.
1) Would your answer change if it were indicated that there is a very high possibility of conversion to FT? As an example, this past summer (when I did my SA and got my FT offer) my bank, like many others, had 30% conversion rates, whereas the top bank I'm talking about had a > 80% conversion rate (hence the no FT headcount and SA opportunity instead). Given the historical (albeit one data point only) conversion rate, if it were indicated there is a very high chance of conversion, would that affect your decision? 2) Where do b-schools draw the line in the sand, and what do they consider in evaluating IB applicants? Is it just transaction experience? I want to go to a top (M7, preferably H/S/W) school and for a number of personal reasons will likely be applying after 3 years with only IB experience. 3) Given my b-school aspirations, do you think that returning to my bank and then moving to a top bank (this one if possible) after a year or so is the best way to go? Shows career progression (I assume) and can get to the bank I want to work at without giving up a guaranteed offer.
Finally, I'd appreciate your thoughts on another question I have posted elsewhere, which will also tie into my final decision. I am potentially interested in banking long-term and I incidentally just read your how I got into IB post, in which you mention you want to learn as much as possible so side-stepped BBs in favour of MMs. Although you're in PE now, having worked in banking, do you think working at and establishing myself at a lower BB or a top BB would provide the greatest learning opportunities and earnings potential over the long-term?
Thanks!
Application-advice,
I don't really have much experience, but I was in a situation similar to yours, and I thought chiming in might be helpful to you -- if not in making your decision now, then maybe in making a decision in the future.
I had a sure thing with a non-GS/JPM/MS BB, and I also got an SA offer for a GS/JPM/MS. However, I made my decision based on people. The same thing happened with my school choice -- I got into an Ivy, but ended up going to a great non-Ivy school because I liked the people more. It seems to me that most people on this forum would label both decisions as bad moves.
Again, I don't have enough career experience to state this as a fact, but my opinion is that if you work hard you can make anything happen, and make those differences in "prestige" marginal.
Something to keep in mind too, is that prestige changes quickly. I'm class of 2009 (which wasn't long ago)...during my recruiting cycle, JPM was not on the same tier as MS/GS, at all. The year before, banks that don't even exist anymore were considered top tier (ML, BR, Lehman). The top banks today very well might not be the top banks 2 years from now. Citi could get it's shit together, or MS gets a big fine from the government, and everything could change.
1st, it's a BB and despite what many college kids on here think, there aren't "tiers". BB is 1 big melting pot, GSers transfer to CS, DBers at MS, etc etc.
2nd, you already decided so why does it matter? If you're seeking validation then you have more problems than you think.
Lastly, you chose Option 2 and no 1 gives a shit.
I actually picked option 1 before I posted this question...
I'm still not understanding properly. Is your theory that you could be more influential at a lower BB than you could at a top BB and therefore stand to have a more lucrative career or better learning opportunities? Put a different way, are you asking which pays better: 1) maintaining a top BBs reputation or 2) improving a lower BBs reputation?
Essentially, yeah. I've heard that a top performer at a lower tier bank will have better exit ops (in my case, likely b-school only but potentially HF/MF) than a bad/average performer at a top bank (is this true in your opinion?). Extrapolating that, I'm just wondering whether standing out and being a superstar at a lower tier bank will earn more than an average performer at a top bank?
In my opinion that's logical, but I've heard otherwise and I'm curios as to what you/others think.
Yes, I agree. The top performers at a lower tier bank will have better opportunities than average performers at the top tier banks. This is because the top performers at the lower tier bank are typically smarter / harder working / whatever than the average performers at other banks.
Where your logic falls apart is you're assuming that the average performer at a top tier bank would be a top performer at a lower tier bank. This absolutely isn't the case. If it were, then the other assumption you've made would fall apart and everyone would just hire all the GS analysts first, then the MS analysts, then the JPM analysts, etc. down the line. But they don't.
Talent pools are mixed. Someone who was a top performer at Credit Suisse (sorry all for picking on CS) would likely be a top performer at any other bank. Same is true with the average performers and definitely true for the underperformers. This is why your question makes no sense. You're assuming that if you got an offer from Goldman you're positioned to be a top analyst at a lower tier bank.
Id autem numquam nulla architecto et. Nisi ut quo fugit eos maiores distinctio. Voluptatem mollitia dolore ut vel neque.
Rerum iste recusandae eum ab quam consequatur. Quasi qui est sit et dolor molestiae ipsum officia.
Quod iure laudantium explicabo delectus. Recusandae quisquam perferendis et culpa. Dolore est qui sed debitis. Impedit dolor voluptatum non consequatur.
Earum provident tempore voluptatem quam adipisci. Consequuntur ut voluptates debitis sint quod corrupti laudantium. Consequatur beatae quia quae nulla.
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...