Advice: Two drastically different offers
Appreciate any advice regarding two offers. I'll try to provide as much detail as possible.
Offer 1: 100-110 K all in, investment analyst role, low cost of living city, large institution, mix of debt and equity placement across property types, bigger deals, anticipate this will be more structured (good and bad), probably more siloed, certainly more corporate, less hours,
Offer 2: Low 70s K all in, acq./dev. analyst role, high cost of living city, GP specializing in a single property type, more varied exposure to the entire deal process (acq./dev., asset management exposure, dispositions), will understand the property type quite well after 5ish years here, significant comp upside through equity if opportunity meets hard work (3-5 years out), more hours, less structured (again, good and bad), more entrepreneurial
A bit of context:
-Finishing a graduate program
-Fairly large student loan burden
-Like many here, would like to "do my own deals" at some point, but I'm also at a point in life where I value stability and higher guaranteed income
-I am not a big city person and much prefer the quality of life offered by tier 2/3 cities
-The property type that offer 2 specialized in is definitely interesting to me, but I'd also like some broad exposure to all property types
-Find the equity side more interesting, but I've been around long enough to know that any job can become repetitive after enough time
Looking out into the future, offer 2 puts me in a better position to achieve significant upside through equity participation. That said, offer 1 has materially higher comp for the next 3-5 years, which is quite important to me for a variety of reasons, and provides much more security and likely more consistent/guaranteed comp increases. Unlike others coming out of undergrad, my tolerance for career ambiguity and risk and resetting at a later date is lower. Clearly, onus is on me to figure out what I want, so maybe the question is: does taking offer 1 preclude future opportunities to take something akin to offer 2 in the medium-term? And yes, I understand the redundancy of taking a position for the exit opp when you already have an offer for the exit opp. Also, I don't have any real estate experience so my reference points are limited.
Thanks.
Based on everything you said. 1 is the way to go. Keep in mind this is just based on the criteria you said you care about
Go with where you want to live. To succeed, you need to be happy outside of work as well as inside work. If you don’t like big cities; don’t force it. You can learn to do your own deals at more institutional shops and less institutional. As great as the equity component sounds, don’t get fixated on it. At a young age, cash comp is better. You can’t eat equity. If you wanted to move in 5 years, the majority of equity you were awarded probably won’t have vested.
My gut was telling me the same thing. The locational factor is pretty big, and that would make me a more productive employee. The equity sounds awesome, but I get less excited when people actually explain to me the mechanics of how it is paid out.
So, a points....
- Your first job out of grad school isn't like be the one to provide you the best "equity participation" opportunities, it could be, but really, you need more experience for those opportunities to be legit. I wouldn't be thinking offer 2 is "once in a lifetime", it isn't, and if it is.... then it is prob too good to be true.
- I had to read a few times to verify that the higher paid gig is in the lower cost city... if you really prefer 2nd/3rd tier cities, then I feel the choice kinda looks obvious....
- Since both are buyside roles, I don't really get any big advantage of "exit ops" from one over the other. You can move around from either I'd guess (that said, easer to go from major city to secondary city than vice versa, but that isn't universal, and job 1 sounds like a bigger "name" so may offset that)
So bottom line, I'd make the decision based on the theory of "minimizing regret", meaning which decision are likely to regret the most if you don't take. Mentally, flip a coin and assign one heads and one tails..... then take notice of how you feel when you see the result. If happy/relieved how the coin landed, take that gig, if disappointed, take the other....
This is all a gut call, you career will be making forward progress either way!
Good stuff. Yeah I was getting hung up on how this is a "once in a lifetime" opportunity, so your perspective is helpful. And 30-40K higher in a lower COL city? Just a GP thing? That goes a long way.
Good points regarding exit opps. I didn't think of it the same as you did. Frankly I could see myself staying with offer 1 for a while.
And then grateful to have the offers and to be making forward career progress as you said. Taking offer 1 would probably minimize regret. I don't think these offers come around super frequently in tier 2/3 cities. GP roles in HCOL cities are in my opinion more common.
Not the OP, but question halfway related to this....
say you have an offer in development. GP which focuses on one asset class and you’re not sure if that’s your long term asset to specialize in. Do you join, learn, then start looking again at a later date, or keep pushing to get into a different GP?
classic bird in the hand question but my point is does being at a GP in another asset class hurt you more than help?
No, it really is hard to say you are "precluded", this "peigonholing" concept is so badly over used on this site..... (I've ranted on other posts, I'll keep this quick).
A lot of people who go work for a firm that works cross asset/product types will get assigned to only one asset/product type, it's the norm. Whether something mainstream like office or multifamily or more niche like senior housing, you will have to be in the industry awhile (long past analyst zone) to really thing about this.
That said, most career "peigonholing" that actually occurs is by the person choosing to do it..... As they can make more, get better jobs playing on their experience. Jumping to jump gets really costly the longer you stay in the business. Even at analyst/associate level (where jumps occur and not hard to do), it is not clear to me that doing so is actually accelerating a career vs. just resetting it.
Cum aliquam nisi magni omnis. Totam aut ipsam reiciendis sit voluptas similique. Est quidem reiciendis quibusdam doloribus hic ratione quia.
Hic officia excepturi necessitatibus iusto. Delectus dignissimos dolorem impedit aut. In quia alias dolor et dolores deserunt molestiae. Iusto placeat qui impedit est debitis pariatur voluptatum et. Voluptas cum sunt iure totam. Ea quos ea voluptatibus omnis. Aliquid consequatur at adipisci sed provident facere.
Voluptatem qui minus dolores accusamus perferendis vel est. Quidem autem animi ut et incidunt dolores. Cupiditate officia esse veniam et numquam. Alias asperiores ut voluptas numquam cupiditate at corporis consequatur. Soluta exercitationem impedit laboriosam provident tenetur eum explicabo.
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...