My son interested in S&T over IB (your advise Please)
Friends...My son is undergrad Junior in a semi-target Business school with Finance Major. He got 2020 SA offers in both IB and S&T from few BB Banks in NYC(same tier)
But he recently accepted S&T offer....He is very clear and felt very happy about his decision. I am also happy for him..
But when i see around , IB seems little more prestigious than S&T. Not sure why my son going that path even though he got IB offer too..He told me S&T role suits for his personality and that role excite him more than IB.
Can anyone give your frank opinion about my son decision? I know he already accepted S&T SA but would like to know your opinions. Is it good decision?
Friends...please note that i am not trying to influence my son decision...I respect his decision..as a conservative parent just wanted to be sure my little one going in right path (I know he is far more smarter than me)
P.S: Sorry for my English...I know it's not good :-)
Lol.
The real concern is the long term viability of S&T
IB isn't very commoditized. If you're a client CEO you'll shell out for big IB advisory fees because the transaction is usually something very important and the banker you hired is one of only a handful of guys that you trust to advise on it. If he wants $50m to guide you through the deal, you're not choosing another bank because they only want $40m. The deal may be the future of your company and career.
Not nearly the same for an S&T client. If you're the PM at a multibillion dollar fund you're mostly just looking for which bank will give you the best commission/spread on a large block. That's a bit oversimplified and there is of course some relationship component, but the S&T MD doesn't have nearly the power over his clients that an IB MD does.
This trickles down to the IB midlevels and juniors also being somewhat less commoditized in terms of their value to the bank, compared to S&T midlevels/juniors. Ultimately I think it leads to a feeling in S&T folks that their future success will be more random and less tied to their smarts/skills, as compared to IB folks. Being very general here, obviously every situation is different.
I can't offer much advice but assuming this isn't a troll congrats for being a good parent ....I wish my parents took more interest in my career like this.
Assuming you're not a troll, there are too many parameters to consider to give you a good answer as to whether this was a good move for your Son - e.g. Reputation of firm, team culture, specific team / sector / product etc.
But I will say this: if your Son received both IB / S&T offers, he's a smart kid - and if you're absolutely unfamiliar with finance, the odds of you giving him good advice are very Low. I'd let him do his thing.
Edit: Agree with other posters, the worst thing you can do is make him second guess himself. You're a caring parent, I get that, but right now - the only thing in order is a celebration of his new role (for both of you)
It's a trade off.
Advantage of IB is that you are guaranteed to build a very clearly defined and marketable skill set: valuation, modeling and deal process. That skill set is valued by PE firms, VC firms, corporate development departments and some hedge funds.
S&T builds a skill set that's less clearly defined and isn't always valued by a lot of employers. That's not to say S&T folks don't often go on to do great things. It's just that the takeaway from S&T is more iffy. The work is sometimes less intellectually demanding and analytical. But don't worry, good news in a minute.
Say your son is working on the rates desk and his job is to monitor daily order flows of sovereign bonds and report on any trends he sees. On the one hand, this could lead to poor skill development because this can potentially be a very easy and repetitive task. On the other hand, S&T offers much better hours than IB so if he wants to use his free time to learn more about why these trades are made (e.g. some clients may have interesting views on what drives rates and credit risk in each country), he could develop that learning experience into being an attractive skillset for a global macro hedge fund.
That's not to imply exits are everything. He also may just want to stay in S&T and build client relationships.
So I would say its really about how proactive and creative he wants to be with his career and how wisely he uses his spare time. If he's good at using his spare time in a disciplined way to build his knowledge, I think he'll come out better as a result of choosing S&T over IB
Part of me wishes my parents had given enough fucks to post on a forum about my decision making - although it probably would have been on some yahoo “is smoking weed bad for you” thread.
Sounds like he’s got a good head on his shoulders. The worst thing you can do is to not back him/her 100% and make them second guess themself.
Give the kid a fat hug and let him/her know how proud you are. They’ll be fine.
Respectfully, don't think that it is fair to gauge his decision on how "prestigious" one is over the other. S&T and IB require different skillsets and personalities.
It is all relative. For example, I find S&T work far more interesting and dynamic. I would even argue that getting a seat as a trader is less likely than landing one as an IB analyst. But that doesn't matter. It is all about fit.
Maybe he's a star and makes $1m bonus before he's 30 (unlikely but technically possible). I would just be happy for him and not second guess his decision. Whatever answers you get from us won't change the fact that he's going into S&T.
Lol @ prestige. If he takes real interest in s&t & is any good at it, he will make a fuck ton of money. If he's an eat what you kill type of guy, then you're good.
Being an S&T guy is very much so baked into someone's personality fwiw. I'm sure anyone on this forum will agree that you can tell someone is in it within 10 min of speaking to them.
OP - congrats on the kid. He/she is smart. He/she will figure it out (or he/she won't since most of us never really figure it out anyway).
Prestige... Finance doesn't, in general, have the sheen (nor the pay) it used to. That is not to say that it is not very well paying, especially considering what we do (across functions) is not the most intellectually challenging. However, it is fast moving, pressure-packed and full of smart/driven/accomplished people. You kid will meet lots of people, be exposed to a lot and probably won't be doing the job forever (changing interests, life getting in the way, bear markets, politics etc).
Different personality types will thrive in IB vs S&T. I now understand that given my personality, that I would have absolutely hated every minute of IB, had I done it (or gotten in). The nature of the work, the people and (what I believe to be meaningless) nonstop minutia that the sell side seems to spend way too much time focusing on (formatting a pitch, 100 page decks that clients don't look at), random little model inputs etc.
I can't say I would have loved S&T but I'd enjoy the whole open desk thing (which is how my previous fund was set up), and constant personal interactions, and markets moving. Would I hate the politics and constant cutthroat nature of it? Probably, but hey, it's financial services and politics/cutthroatness are often the name of the game.
Likewise I have a number of friends who would hate markets moving everyday, sitting on the phone with clients, taking them out and in general doing people stuff and making significant decisions on not a ton of information on a daily basis.
In other words, kiddo will do just fine. Just make your kid buy you dinner when he/she gets that first bonus check :)
Good Luck
The parents said it's a "son". No need for he/she and your political correctness rubbish..... goddamn millennials...
deleted
9/10 troll.. the “parent” talking about “tiers” and “semi-target” is just too much lol
The fact of the matter is most people talking here about "prestige" will never end up in a BB S&T or IB role. Both are very prestigious (from the prestige point) and your son getting into either has him in a good shape. Attempting to compare the two on a prestige level is like arguing whether Stanford, MIT or Harvard is the best school to attend. As you can see, quite silly. Just be happy for him and what he has achieved.