A kid who I went to school with, who now works FT at Gugg, is insisting that our investment club update one of the slides to list Guggenheim as an EB in our recruiting information guide. We currently have CVP, EVR, PJT, MoCo, LT, and PWP listed as EBs, and I personally do not consider Gugg to be an EB. Curious to hear everyones thoughts on if we should list Gugg as an EB or not?
| +383 | Which Offer to Accept: UBS Analyst Role or Part Time Cashier at the Local Taco Bell | 44 | 1d |
| +292 | Roku-Fox Deal - UBS Misses Out on yet another deals after years chasing this deal | 31 | 1d |
| +287 | TPH V.S. Mizuho [HOU] | 36 | 6h |
| +286 | I Snuck Into UBS Office And Took A Shit On The Floor | 26 | 1d |
| +285 | AI is insane | 43 | 12h |
| +227 | Best Power/Renewables/Energy Teams? | 36 | 17h |
| +204 | Useless associates | 36 | 1d |
| +189 | Differences in Restructuring Teams? | 33 | 1d |
| +182 | Actual EB List | 26 | 1d |
| +181 | Centerview HC group falling off? | 28 | 1d |
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.
Who actually gives a fuck. This debate is futile and pointless. It's a good bank that will get you solid exit opps if you work hard, with a good learning experience. That's all that matters. Certain groups punch above their weight (TMT, HC, Rx).
Do it, you don’t want to hurt your connection or reputation by not including his firm
Deleted
No
Stupid debate to begin with. But why are you listing Liontree on there and then putting your foot down at Guggenheim? Makes no sense…
Smaller headcount = more prestigious
Short answer is no. In practice, you won’t hear anyone above the rank of associate use the term “elite boutique” because this was ultimately a term popularized by this forum / recruiting guides to help differentiate between the top tier independent firms that had fundamentally different business models / scales than the bulge brackets. As a result, there isn’t really a clear cut definition of what makes a bank an “EB” as people have different criteria (league tables, deal size, exits, coverage, scale, revenue, fee/head, etc.)
Back when i was in banking (CVP/PJT) the label I’ve always used was “independent advisory firms to differentiate. In its truest sense, this would not include Guggenheim since they both have a balance sheet and a securities / sales & trading arm.
All this being said, Guggenheim is a great platform that has some great coverage groups, pays well and on the whole exits quite competitively. The whole debate of EB or not is a WSO / prospect / 1st year special. In reality, most headhunters give Guggenheim analysts the same looks as those from most other high performing platforms, and if you get paid well while earning good experience, it’s a bit of a non-issue.
Someone pin this post and direct all further threads to this answer. +1, thank you.
Sure, GUGG, or any strong independent can be called an “EB.” No one outside WSO refers to these things as EBs, besides students. You’ll learn quickly that in FT no one really gives a fuck. You either work in a good group or decent group and will exit well if you perform well.
Anyone have any insights into the MedTech group?
Historically very strong, can make a strong case of being the best group vs. the rest of the street.
Most of their recent growth and hires have been in the MM space
no.
If this is real, very proud day for WSO if schools are now creating slides with “EB rankings”.
Minima nam vel possimus in repudiandae illum impedit. Consequatur et commodi vitae nobis. Aut libero dolorum minus ut quo dicta. Laudantium distinctio fuga minus distinctio earum ad deleniti. Maxime et maiores nam qui. Velit et perspiciatis autem ut facere.
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...