Mod Note (Andy): #TBT Throwback Thursday - this was originally posted on 2/16/11.
I have been meaning to post something regarding this topic for some time, even though it has been covered to the point of exhaustion. My final breaking point was about 2 weeks ago, when I had the unfortunate experience of riding the train from Stamford to NYC (a commute I am too used to dating to my IB and hedge fund days and have sworn off for life). Regardless, as my crackberry session commenced upon being seated in the sweatbox, an important phone call came through from a portfolio company who I happen to sit on the board of. During the call, I noticed the young Indian kid next to me spring up at the chance to listen to the call – which he surprisingly let me finish.
I also give the kid credit for attempting to turn this into a networking opportunity (which I would gladly accept) had he not wanted to make me throw myself under the moving train – a feat unaccomplished until meeting this lad. The following chain of events is why he and so many young monkeys on this forum (who go to Ivey, have internships, solid grades, whatever else) are not getting jobs:
• He assumed because he went to Yale, he deserved an IB career (he basically said this)
• He was wearing a suit that had pants with zippers for pockets (obviously this fucker hasn’t read the 20,000 posts on “how to dress for an interview” – I would auto ding this kid even if he was Summa @ HBS for such a fashion faux pas.
• He focused on nothing but EXIT OPPS (which began to make my blood boil). Upon our discussion where he has interviewed and where he was going to be interviewing (which I could have been a HUGE asset on both prep and recommendations) his only questions related to where it would get him after. WSO – top exits opps will be available to a sample size of any year’s analyst class (and as the wonderful recent PE thread has addressed, it ain’t all that great kiddies).
• He was as stale as a 4 year old Triscuit in the August sun in Tuscon, AZ. Bring something to the table, I don’t care if all you can do is crank a DCF – any moron can do this.
• He could not speak to his strengths
• He could not tell his story
• He knew nothing about the bank he was going to
• He knew nothing about the market
• He did nothing but ANNOY me – asking dumb questions, ranting about DCF calculations when he was actually fucking wrong, and did not take the time to pick my brain, someone who has gone the path he is attempting and succeeded (and he knew MY story quickly because I know how to tell it).
Monkeys, bottom line – if you have the tangibles required for banking / finance in general and are still not receiving offers (whether FT or SA) you are lacking the intangibles. I know many people on this forum say all they want is an excel machine, but there is much more to banking – and finance for that matter. Take a step back, and really examine your process thus far if you are without an offer.
This is my rant for the week. Thoughts / Comments?
JD
I go to a target for most banks and I have a killer GPA. I basically deserve an IB career. So what if I wear my diamond studded platinum rolex to an interview?
Do I even bother to keep up with the market? Of course not. I'm in college and I shouldn't be bothered with silly things like reading the Wallstreet Journal. Why does my story suck? Because its boring as shit. I'm from CT, went to a prep school and then an ivy. Why finance? Well I didn't want to be a surgeon or a lawyer, so I guess Wallstreet is the only option left.
Isn't the whole point of banking to get barely enough experience to make you qualified for top HF/PE firms?
Definitely sad to see people like that somehow still manage to get offers while others (myself included, from non-targets) have to put ourselves out there and sell the shit out of that story like you wouldn't believe. On top of that, you have to deal with questions like "Why should I hire you from so and so non-target when I can get [insert douche bag kid here] from so and so ivy. Thanks for this post, going forward, will have a much better answer to that question... it reads: NO.SENSE.OF.ENTITLEMENT.WILLING.TO.WORK.MY.ASS.OFF.WILLING.TO.LEARN.
First of all, I agree with the intent of this thread. Entitled kids - whether from targets are not - don't belong in the industry. But what's with all the hate on targets? I see so many people on this thread saying "yeah I want it so much more than kids from targets, I'm willing to/I do work harder than them, target kids have it so much easier..."
That's absolute BS. First of all, most target kids who get jobs in banking aren't entitled. Most have worked their ass off since they don't have connections, and they know interview prep backwards and forwards. Yes, 10 or 20 percent will have prior connections, and they'll be able to slide by. But by and large, target kids tend to be much more polished and intelligent than their counterparts from non-targets. And that's the other thing that bothers me - that so many people on this thread forget that these kids are generally smarter than their counterpart from a non target. It's not a hard and fast rule, obviously, but generally speaking, an average kid from a target is much smarter than an average kid from a non-target. And the top quarter of kids at targets are smarter than 90% of kids at non targets. There's a reason that they're overrepresented on the street, and it has nothing to do with nepotism. It's because kids from targets are more qualified/competent/polished than non-targets.
And the argument that target kids don't want it as much as non-targets also doesn't hold water. I go to a target school, and tons and tons of kids have been busting their butt trying to line up boutique internships, get relevant experience, get their grades up, etc. And trust me, OCR is no cakewalk. People on this thread think that target kids have it easy in terms of recruiting - and that's absolute crap. Yes, OCR means a firm like GS/MS will likely take five or six kids from my school. But those five or six kids are insanely qualified. And remember, anywhere from three to six hundred kids will drop resumes for those spots. And you're not competing against six hundred average kids - you're competing against six hundred kids from say Harvard, who are much more qualified on average than the typical non target kid. At the end of the day, is it preferable to be at Harvard versus a non target? Yeah. But does that make the competition at Harvard any less brutal? No way. People need to recognize that fact.
Look, do I think that banks should only recruit from HWP? Absolutely not. Do I think that a state school kid with good grades, good technical skills, and a great personality should get a job over a Wharton kid with so-so grades and an entitled personality? Absolutely. But this thread seems to be painting every single target kid as entitled and undeserving of the jobs that they end up getting, and that's just categorically untrue. By and large, target kids should take up the majority of jobs because they are more qualified/smarter than non-targets.
This is an excellent post.
Couple thoughts:
1.) The entitlement isn't an unreasonable surprise from certain target schools, but the lack of sophistication and planning is. Your typical top-tier Ivy League student gets more networking prep, interview prep, and help than anyone on earth. If you manage to graduate from Yale without knowing how to carry on a friendly conversation with someone in industry, you may not deserve to get a job.
2.) Most college students outside target schools don't get a lot of sophistication when it comes to getting hired into banking. I told my career counselor that I had to fly out for an interview with an investment bank and she spent 15 minutes looking for an old interview questions book, handed it to me, and said, "That's all I've got; you're on your own." WSO didn't even exist back then. It was me, this book, and a plane ticket. Somehow, a couple of very wise interviewers managed to see through the light gray suit, sing-songy Midwestern accent, and relative lack of confidence in the face of some smart competition, and decided to hire me. And it turned out to be a great decision for the firm two years later when they needed someone smart that could take on a VP's responsibilities.
3.) I think banks need to do a better job of figuring out which 21-year-olds are going to cut it and which ones aren't. Having a quick story to tell, knowing more about the firm than what the website tells you, being supremely confident, and dressing like most people dress tells a lot about sophistication, but it doesn't really cover competence on the job and value to the firm. I think a lot of that comes down to intellect, work ethic, and most importantly a good attitude.
So should I throw out all my zipper pocket suits?