RANT: Why do firms ask "Why us", when there is rarely any difference between these companies.

There's literally no difference, you can usually get away with overemphasizing "the people I spoke to, man! Just really high quality people, etc." but you really have to use descriptive and creative adjectives, typically because there's always that one loser you have to convince who thinks "HUR DUR MAN, THIS IS HOW I KNOW THIS GUY PUT IN THE EFFORT TO NETWORK AND REALIZE WE'RE SPECIAL AND UNIQUE AND BLAH BLAH BLAH" yeah, you just gotta say the people and really show how muh nice and muh differentiated, etc.

All BBs are the same. EBs u can talk about something interesting and unique about the bank

To test that you have the emotional intelligence to come up with an answer. Also echoing the above poster - to prove you're interested and have done the work to learn something unique about the company.

I had the same thought process as you when I applied, but it’s so easy on the other side to ask this question and read who is really interested

rarely any difference? lmao would you rather work at DB or GS myguy 

It's a stupid fucking question, but it's not hard to create an answer for right? Like how "Why IB" is an objectively stupid fucking question but everyone goes through the motions because it's a question meant to ding people who didn't memorize the answer, and won't help anybody.

I mean in the grand scheme of things, wouldn't you just have two versions of the same answer that you would use universally (one for large banks, one for boutiques / independents)?

The single dumbest question that is asked in interviews and is regularly used to dq people.  People that ask this are idiots

I was interviewing at a lower tier MM bank and they asked this question.... I mean you know I'm just not very interested in working for JPM and Goldman.  Already turned down their offers. That's why I'm here - you seem just like such a swell group of guys. 

I used to think there were no differences between banks and then I worked at a bank and now I disagree. I actually think they vary a ton and it’s whether you are perceptive and smart enough to understand that. Will all of them end up being a gold star on your resume that treats you poorly and pays you well? Probably. However, they actually can vary a lot in terms of strategy and culture. Just a few examples:

• Culture: some banks and groups specifically do have very different culture. A MM like Baird or William Blair in the Midwest is going to act and have people very different than Goldman Sachs in NY. Centerview or Qatalyst is going to operate very differently than Morgan Stanley. Even more specifically, some groups have types of people they prefer. As an example, I know a friend who worked for one office and in the interview they bragged about how everyone leaves in 2 years to go to a megafund, then during recruiting, they unstaffed the analyst from the deals they were on. This is really different from the bank I worked at where they wanted people to stay and during recruiting didn’t alter staffing at all. Some banks are known to have a “party culture” where they frequently have drinks together, others are more tame. Culture is different not just between banks, but within banks and it actually is a very important criteria to evaluate when choosing employment for both employee and employer.
• Strategy: A BB, a MM, and an EB all have different pros and cons in terms of the work experience you would get. Depending on your future goals, one might be better for you than the others. The size of deals, the type (IPO’s, sell-side, buy-side, carve-outs, etc.) who their buyers commonly are (PE firms, strategics) all these could be different based on how a firm is positioned. To someone else’s point, asking the question why x bank helps people understand if you are perceptive enough to do some level of business analysis to determine why that bank is competitively different through taking the effort to talk to people and understand it’s strengths. 
• Groups: Even some BB’s are better than others when it comes to specific sectors and sub-sectors. If you are interested in healthcare, or tech, they aren’t all the same in terms of experience and the number and type of transactions you would see. They also aren’t the same in terms of how they are perceived in the market. For example, but on the EB side: Centerview healthcare and Moelis tech are not at all the same based on the way the hiring market perceives the experience.

These are some differences, but really the point of this question is to see if you 1) put the effort into trying to get to know the bank or if you are half ass applying to places and don’t really care 2) Can analyze a business and critically think (banks are businesses too) 3) Have long term goal alignment that will result in you accepting the offer/ choosing their bank and having a good experience. You saying the firms are the same is as ignorant as someone saying that working as a programmer for Apple, Facebook, and Google is all the same. On some level, you aren’t wrong, they are all big tech and all investment banks are in the same industry and business, but it’s ignoring that within an industry there are differences.  

Your job as a banker is basically to come up with creative ways why whatever company your selling/taking public/issuing debt for is worth more/should trade better than the 10 other identical companies on the market that do the exact same thing.

Seems reasonable to ask you to do the same in an interview for the company you're applying for, no? Or were you planning for your next bake-off to just leave off the positioning section because it's a "stupid fucking question" and you weren't given enough info in the RFP?

If you hate the question this much, banking (or PE for that matter) might not exactly be the best long term career fit. 

To see how well you can bullshit. If you can bullshit HR, then you also will be able to do it with a client.