Need help deciding Insight/GA vs GS TMT / MS Menlo
Fortunate to have landed 2 of the offers above, one in growth NYC and one in tech banking SF. Feeling conflicted over which to accept. I know I want to move into early-stage investing long term, and much prefer the work of growth equity over banking. But I also know my growth offer (Insight/GA) is close to 100% sourcing (should preface by saying I’ve had a VC internship before and enjoy sourcing). Does anyone with experience working in tech banking, growth equity, or early stage investing have any advice? Can I forgo the modeling skillset I’d get in IB, especially if I plan on moving into venture where that skillset is less important? I’m also location agnostic and have family in both cities. Thanks
If Insight, no brainer for Insight if you are on one of the six classic fiefdoms and not public or buyouts team (don’t think those hire from undergrad). It is the talent factory for venture and venture growth. This post will immediately get hordes of people poo-poo-ing sourcing but you know what it is and what it gets you for early skillset that you don’t get in a more technical role, which is the trade off you are deciding between. Look at how many and how young Insight folks are when they become successful at other venture and venture growth funds and/or raise their own funds. For GA, think it’s 50/50 because if you progress through associate at GA you’ll get exposure to growth buyout as well. But I don’t know as much about GA other than I see people going there from PE and they do more bank-forward buyouts than pure “Series X” investing. GS MS you could exit to wherever you want save for places that are earlier and don’t love bankers like Andreessen and while you have great technical chops you will need a while to ramp on knowing how to sell / source. If your ultimate goal is venture growth (eg Series B-D) then banking is much more valuable but if Seed-A then Insight all day.
Might be a bit outdated, but last I checked GA analysts don’t touch any growth buyouts- only “pure” growth deals Series B and beyond. Agree with above poster that the associates are usually ex-bankers and do more PE work.
GA takes far fewer analysts than Insight so less data points to work with, but quick Linkedin search and exits from the analyst program include Founders Fund, Tiger, GGV Capital, Lerer Hippeau, Iconiq Growth, Norwest Ventures, and a few people who left to start their own company.
Ah interesting, great add thanks
If you are sure you want to do early-stage investing long term and enjoy sourcing then seems like an easy decision to take GA / Insight.
[edited out some bad information] At least with GS TMT / MS Menlo you know exactly what you're getting yourself into. If you look at this from a 4 year horizon (2 year analyst and 2 year associate), the expected value of doing 2 years banking then 2 years Insight/GA is probably better than 4 years Insight/GA.
Insight’s analyst class is <15, and GA’s analyst program has been historically smaller than Insights
Got it, I stand corrected. I had heard that from someone in the incoming class but maybe misunderstood. Will edit my post =)
If you're confident you'll get enough diligence and business thinking experience in the Insight/GA analyst role, then it's probably a better fit given your longer term aspirations. Between the two, my guess is you're more likely to develop that at GA than Insight. But in either case, make sure you're not significantly giving up the business fundamentals you would have learned in banking just to be on the buy side earlier. At a certain point, VC firms start distinguishing between who's a good sourcer and who's a good investor.
Yoo can you pm me? Would like to ask a few questions on how your interview with insight went!
I would take insight. if its any evidence someone from my uni went from GS TMT sophomore SA --> insight junior summer.
I'd lean towards taking the Insight/GA offer if I were you. People beat on sourcing, but it's a vital skill to have in most VC/GE/PE roles unless you're at a really large fund. Even then, relationship building/management is a lifelong skill. Also, both of those names are strong enough that you could pretty much lateral to whatever you wanted to do. If you want to be an earlier stage investor, investing is ultimately an apprenticeship so the more time you spend doing it and the more time you spend learning from people who are good at doing it, the better off you'll be.
The only argument for banking is that you build a "harder" skillset and you keep your options open. If you already know that you're not going to be that excited about HFs or traditional PE, why spend two years doing a crappy job just to re-recruit for the role you have in hand now? I guess you'd know how to model a little better, but honestly, modeling is a commodity skill, the faster you can get to a ~VP level and delegate that, the more you focus on other aspects of being an investor. Plus if you think your career is mostly going to be in earlier stage stuff anyways, it doesn't matter as much.
Hi! Can you pm me? Would love to ask you some questions about the insight superday :)
Hi! Can you DM me? I have just received an offer from GA/Insight and am going through the same thought process.
Not OP but this post has aged incredibly poorly - would stay as far from Insight as possible given their current fundraising disaster.
Can you DM me?
Ipsa voluptatum veritatis alias voluptatem voluptatem totam. Distinctio itaque quia sed sint numquam vel consectetur. Et explicabo nisi expedita error accusantium earum maxime cumque. Est quisquam ut est inventore aut vel. Rerum voluptas dolorem adipisci ut sint animi neque. In quia voluptas dolores hic et adipisci molestias iusto.
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...