Which office (NY vs SF) is better with regards for career progression / growth / ops? For anyone who has done a first round with them, was it more behavioral or technical? Since its specific to Greentech, do we need to know anything beyond general basic IBD technicals - like perhaps more related to tech? Thanks.
| +183 | Americas M&A League Table Q2 Updated | 74 | 2h |
| +132 | New Article: Dramatic Slide as UBS #22 (US) & New Leadership Desperately Needed | 27 | 2h |
| +110 | Restructuring: Anti-climactic Experience | 29 | 2h |
| +83 | IB Net Worth / Savings Check | 34 | 18m |
| +74 | A COMPLETE GUIDE TO SUMMER INTERNSHIP RECRUITING | 12 | 1d |
| +51 | Boutique firm wants access to my LinkedIn? | 40 | 1d |
| +39 | Investment Banking is Hard | 17 | 21h |
| +31 | PWP vs BofA | 23 | 6h |
| +27 | Who pays the highest right now? | 14 | 6h |
| +25 | Woman who emptied Knicks trashcan on street then stole it was DEI exec, worked at JPMorgan Chase | 10 | 1h |
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.
Current/former GT banker:
First off, before I say anything about NY vs. SF, you need to make sure that you fully understand what you're getting yourself into. GT has been very understaffed and extremely sweaty, with all second years and most first years leaving, some without exits. If you are not extremely passionate about sustainability and ESG, do not go to GT.
Regarding deals: GT cross-staffs so technically, location is kind of irrelevant. You can do tech/software in the NY office if your heart desires, or you could do renewables in SF. Now, most people align their interests with that respective location, but it technically doesn't matter.
NY: Focuses on asset-transactions and majority of Low-Carbon Infrastructure transactions. If you are interested in Infra or Renewables, NY is the better office. If you can stick out the two-year analyst program (and I warn you, most cannot), then you can get any interview you want in the sustainability investing space. Exits such as GIP, GSAM, Carlyle, Ares, MIRA have all come from the NY office. Now again, these are sustainability focused exits, so if that's what you want then go to NY.
SF: Majority of advanced transportation/software deals are sourced here. The SF is a bit more chill/in line with SF banking culture, but you will still get rocked with terrible hours. The top-bucket analysts for some reason also tend to come from SF, not sure if there is some correlation there with working conditions. Exits have been a lot of sustainability focused investing roles, but also a bit more on "cleantech." (There was a recent exit to Activate Capital, for example)
Interviews: you absolutely should have a why GT answer, and a sector of sustainability that interests you. Be prepared to talk about it extensively. You can't and shouldn't BS your way through this part of the interview, as if you are not truly passionate about the space, they can tell and you'll be dinged. Standard IBD technicals (with some LBO focus) with a major focus on fit. Don't be weird and be able to talk in depth about a sector that interests you.
Slightly unrelated but do you know how the Guggenheim SF office is compared to GreenTech SF? AFAIK it also focuses on Greentech and the MDs are former GreenTech MDs.
Don't know anything about Gugg SF. If cleantech is your top interest, go GT SF.
Realistically, have no accumen with regards to sustainability - although I do know a tech sector (semis). What material would you recommend reading to get up to speed for this? Thanks
Thank you for the detailed response. I'm interested in the sustainability space and was drawn to GT, but have heard that it is indeed super sweaty and tough. Could you please elaborate on the "very understaffed and extremely sweaty" part? How long were your average hours when you were there, is the long hours related with strong deal flow thus mitigating it with good experience or mostly pitches, how is the culture, do you think they'll improve hours by hiring more, etc... any further information would be much appreciated!
For reference, almost the entire first year class (now 2nd years, 2020 grads) quit, with all of the second years leaving as well (I think maybe one stayed). For the 2021 intern class, only 2/5 NY interns stayed. The hours were not only rough, but most of the senior bankers were very toxic, disorganized, or very aggressive for deals. Deal flow was ridiculously good and that combined with aggressive senior bankers can lead to a very tough culture. I know personally interns staying up to 4-5am to work on deals because it was just them, an associate and a VP/MD. Interns had to act like analysts, so you will get a very good experience.
Hours were very bad- month stretches of 90-100+ hours, and with certain stretches of weeks it could be a persistent 110+ hours. I know they are making a good effort to expand their class sizes, but they are also very selective with whom they hire. No guarantee that "bigger" class sizes will amount to anything.
.
Did u get an interview for their FT IB posting?
NGT just lost another very sharp SF analyst to another bank. Just another data point for those who are curious.
Dolorem asperiores odio quis mollitia qui laboriosam itaque. Est sed deserunt soluta nam. Eum suscipit in accusamus dolor ut tempora modi. Dolor qui odit veniam id.
Velit sit dolorum sed ex quia. Facilis voluptate accusantium est velit.
Sed eveniet facere quos est eaque. Deleniti fuga recusandae officia mollitia quo. Quia quaerat incidunt mollitia et culpa ipsum quos. Veritatis earum qui corrupti.
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...