Which of these 2 offers would you go with?
1) Barclays IBD SA NYC--Nat Resources Group
2) Small-Cap Venture Capital Fund in Southeast
My future plans and goals: I want to go into business development and venture capital long-term. Staying in the southeast would be nice for me as well, given that I am from there.
It's funny because VC jobs are harder to get than banking, but the transition from banking to VC is a lot easier than VC to banking. Because of that, I would do banking. Especially because the pay and structure of Barclays ibd nyc sa is clear-cut.
You haven't mentioned enough about the VC fund to make a meaningful comparison. That being said, the Barclays Nat Res group is the ex-Lehman group and were tops in the category. No bias of course, but I would go with the Lehman guys.
Ha, really solid advice here...
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-02-11/barclays-says-2013-investment-bank-profit-falls-on-fixed-income
Take the VC job if you know that's what you want to do long term. If you're not sure and want to keep options open, take Barclays.
Does the VC job offer FT?
Yes, a senior guy there that I have meaningful connections to said this VC fund will hire me full-time when I graduate college if I do a good job. Also, I go to a target school along the lines of the level just below the level Wharton, Harvard, Princeton (think Columbia, Dartmouth, UChicago, Duke, Cornell, etc). It seems like many of the seniors at my school don't have a hard time either lateraling among bulge brackets that recruit at our school or can get hired full-time fairly easily with buy-side experience. What do you all think?
If what you're saying is true (easy to do IB after junior buy side job), then you have some margin of safety. VC is in the SE is what you want to do... and you have been afforded with an opportunity to do so. If you find out VC is not for you, then you can pursue IB FT (sorry for all the abbreviations).
Barclays is likely the better opportunity here. You will learn more, and make better connections, by starting in a strong group like Nat Res, which has a proven track record of excellent placement.
I see no reason why you could not later pursue VC in the south east (especially coming from Barclays Nat Res) if that is what you truly want to do. Maybe not with the same firm, but a similar opportunity should be available. Furthermore, there is always the possibility that you will change your mind and decide that VC is not what you want to do -- perhaps you'll realize that you are more interested in working with later-stage companies after working at Barclays.
Can you really be guaranteed NRG at Barcap? But IMO why do banking just to hopefully get back to VC if you have what sounds like a good FT opportunity in VC in the region you want to end up in?
bump any other thoughts?
Vel rem accusamus quae aspernatur. Doloremque quibusdam doloribus deserunt a dolor asperiores. Non ut sit est quasi consequatur reprehenderit eveniet. Labore quas neque velit voluptas rerum.
Enim debitis consequatur nihil reprehenderit. Et voluptatibus in enim qui odit ea maxime. Fuga consectetur dolorum qui velit ducimus repellendus dolores voluptate. Aliquid ipsam autem et atque corrupti blanditiis voluptatem. Exercitationem placeat corporis in praesentium odio id quia magnam.
Nam animi et omnis autem. Nobis rem qui sequi debitis dolores error dignissimos. Aut quia in non eum dolorem quae fugit. Dolore consequatur ut vel. Voluptatem adipisci facere soluta ad. Quam excepturi voluptatem est soluta ab. Rerum dolorem ut at odio.
Magnam enim saepe excepturi. Voluptate fuga est qui ipsa laborum. Labore eum eos enim saepe porro officia. Voluptatum ex minima quae architecto ad culpa non.
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...