No Bonuses (Lower Bucket) at Goldman
Goldman just denied bonuses for the lower bucket IB performers (100 total). Tough times for some, especially since bonuses are the bloodline and a huge motivator for many financial service workers.
Since the qty is so small is this even worth discussing?
Do you think it's likely we will see some job cuts or moves in the future?
Source: Goldman Bonus Cuts
Some people just don't get it. A good attitude can only take you so far, but I have seen first year analysts at the end of their first year still struggle to get sources and uses right in their models. That is literally the first step.
This also applies across the board - there are soft skills as you move up the ranks that sometimes you just don't pick up. At the VP level you need to start accumulating a client base and thinking about banking ideas for clients...adding value for the senior guys so that they can trust you. Sometimes that transition from analyst and associate, where you are more task oriented, just doesn't click.
Getting a 0 bonus is not unusual - I am surprised that it was ONLY 100. It is usually a sign to start looking for a new job ASAP before we let you go. I would bet that anybody leaving GS wouldn't really have much trouble moving to a MM position, perhaps even one step closer to a promotion in title.
Y
I call BS. There's still a chance you downloaded the model from Macabacus.
Nope. Besides which it's not like you can simply download a model from somewhere else, plug in companies in a completely different industry(and hence different line items and cost/revenue drivers) with different capital structures, and make it work.
I did like the flow of their model, so I borrowed elements of it( including a lot of the style...I simply like the look and find using multiple tabs easier to compartmentalize this type of analysis) and learned from that one but rebuilt it from scratch using my favorite elements of my favorite other models. For example, the Macabacus model does not automatically reconcile calendar differences. Mine does. The Macabacus model does not allow for custom purchase price scenarios. Mine does.
Nevermind that I've done sources and uses myself on several other occasions as needed for projects here (including a deal in progress), it just didn't look as pretty as when I had a good template for style. Mine is however considerably simplified because some of the more complex option considerations simply weren't present in the companies I used.
However...even if I had just copied that one verbatim, it would I had figured out how to reverse engineer a template. That is still better than someone who has been working in banking for a freaking YEAR(and will have access to plenty of existing models to use as templates) and can't figure out(or can't be bothered) how to do sources and uses of funds for a merger even with all the resources he has access to. That's something you SHOULD be able to do before you even set foot in the damn building and if you couldn't bother to prepare yourself that much before you started the job I have absolutely no sympathy for someone who can't do that in a year and gets no bonus.
Did you at least tell them your model automatically reconciles calendar differences? That could've been the reason. Can't think of any others why you didn't break in.
Settle down non-target
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I thought the guaranteed portion of a person's pay was called 'base salary'
Come on. You know that while that might be the mechanic, that's not actually how it works in banking. The base/bonus structure in banking is to align banker comp not only with performance but with overall firm revenues. That said, I also read the article as this being mostly limited to more senior people, and don't necessarily object to this practice, as long as people were generally aware this was a possibility. Don't know if GS has done this in the past or not.