Why not aim to start as an Associate?
From what I pick up, associates make a lot more money for doing the exact same grunt work that analysts do. I am wondering, then, why so many people strive to enter as analysts instead of assocaites. Why don't more people consider doing some corp finance work, going to a good b-school, and then start as an associate? This way, you will be able to hold on to your sanity for a few more years after college before jumping into banking. And when it is time to switch, you will be making more money Shouldn't this be a goal for more people?
Once you're an Associate, you're expected to be committed to banking. Analysts aren't expected to stay. Therefore, if you want to use banking as a stepping stone, then the analyst role probably works best.
A lot of people do this. Once you are an associate you are expected to stay in banking as opposed to an analyst who will either go to B-school or PC/HF/VC.
The reason for going into investment banking or consulting as an analyst is the exposure to a wide variety of companies and situations. In addition, interaction with clients is invaluable.
In corp finance, you are working with one company and no client interaction.
There's a significant difference.
Tempore voluptatem architecto ea quas. Aut dolorem tenetur quasi voluptatem totam ex repellat.
Perferendis deleniti doloribus et deleniti recusandae et ea. Maiores deleniti voluptas vitae voluptatibus. Ipsum quibusdam facilis hic. Voluptates est neque nesciunt fugiat dolores.
Soluta modi id qui rerum id corrupti. Expedita ut nostrum cumque provident nobis. Non incidunt reprehenderit recusandae exercitationem cumque.
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...