Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +379 | Evercore Intern Seizure | 56 | 1h |
| +74 | JPM M&A is Gone??? Purely Coverage Banking??? | 33 | 1h |
| +62 | Is DCM actually underrated ? | 26 | 23m |
| +53 | How do I understand vs. just memorizing? | 9 | 2h |
| +48 | Losing my personality in Banking | 9 | 1d |
| +47 | Are all Tech / TMT groups sweaty? | 38 | 1d |
| +42 | Associate & Above IB exits | 16 | 4d |
| +33 | Incoming IB Analyst: Best Ways to Prepare? | 11 | 8h |
| +27 | Which groups are ideal for laterals? | 12 | 1d |
| +24 | Thoughts on PEI Global Partners? | 4 | 2d |
Career Resources
.
Nah, sometimes the business models are hard to get a grasp on but overall tech is one of the least complex/nuanced groups.
Would TMT being a largely EBITDA-driven industry play a role in its relative simplicity when compared to FIG/RE/O&G?
TMT is usually regarded as one of the most straight forward industry groups to be in. I am currently in a TMT tech group in SF and most tech companies have very simplified capital structures. (Little or no debt, all equity etc...) Tech related products are pretty straight forward too.
It depends from what perspective. From a business model perspective, tech is relatively simplistic in terms of understanding how companies make money and what are the financial, business model levers they can pull (widgets, services, subscriptions, licensing, etc.). By comparison, FIG (specifically banks, insurance, and specialty finance not fintech or Asset Management) companies have substantially more complex business models and capital structures to understand.
From a macro/competitive positioning and "what do they sell" perspective, I have found tech to be more complex than FIG given that to understand macro/competitive positioning you need to understand technology roadmaps, disruptions, etc. and these are constantly evolving. For products, understanding how they work and function, identifying real differentiating characteristics and why they matter takes a fair amount of time. Anecdotally, as a pure finance background type, when talking to a business unit person at a client, I was usually able to speak fairly competently and with good understanding of a FIG company's products and services. In tech, I just try to exhibit a fundamental understanding without sounding stupid since, even with my lofty finance degree, I'm 100% certain these engineers, programmers and other tech types could run me into the ground if I chose to entangle myself in the science and engineering of it all.
Do you need an engineering degree to be successful? No. Can it help sure. Caveat being only if your engineering degree is applicable to your coverage sub-vertical. Tech is a super broad space with tons of differentiation and nuance between sub-verticals. Try talking to a chemical engineer about artificial intelligence and you will quickly find yourself staring at each other in silence...
Eligendi repellat sed dolorum facere. A iste accusantium provident impedit. Quas eligendi enim ut quas quaerat velit aliquid.
Aut consequatur quo excepturi facilis velit. Excepturi aliquam repudiandae autem. Ex ipsam harum eveniet eos. Est sunt mollitia et nobis aut voluptate et nulla.
Deleniti cum sit nihil iste. Aut reiciendis nesciunt voluptas deserunt ipsum modi omnis sunt. Aliquid aliquid consequuntur veniam et hic consequuntur.
Rerum voluptatibus assumenda labore cum et. Velit veritatis qui sequi. Qui quos ratione voluptatem modi quia rerum. Iusto et ut unde consequatur sint quod. Voluptas cumque quia quasi sit aut ea doloremque.
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...