Golden Gate Capital VS EB IB analyst programs?
EB is PJT/EVR/MO LA. Could pursue BB too but I'm leaning against it right now.
GGC is a solid UMM PE name that I would love to work at. The people are great. Culture (not hours) seems great. I like the location. I want to be an investor long term and I think an analyst program is a great way to accomplish this. There is a strong internal promote-culture including direct-promote to VP. Otherwise, Harvard/Stanford for MBA is pretty standard. I've seen people lateral to other PE firms or exit to hedge funds as well.
My only real issue basically boils down to... "It's not Blackstone." However, I recognize that this is an extremely pathetic reason that has been corrupted into me by this forum. 5 out of 6 people at the EB IB I go to aren't going to land MF PE and I likely won't either. The WLB at MF PE is not there either and I'm not sure its even worth sacrificing the marginally greater compensation for the extra hours. Also, I'm just not sure how well IB programs develop you nowadays compared to PE programs (as opposed to a decade ago). Every person I've networked with, talked to, who went straight to the buyside at UMM/MF's always talked about how it was a dive off of the deep end but they felt like they were learning the entire time whereas their banking friends didn't feel the same way near the ends of their stint. This is echoed by the sentiment on this forum that PE analysts end up being some of the most polished.
I want to to take the GGC offer. The EB is probably my 2nd top choice in terms of culture/prestige but I don't know if I really want to go through with it. Am I an idiot for turning the EB down or should I just go with GGC.
.
Go with Golden Gate
GGC
In any normal situation I would say absolutely go for GGC, however, given recent news on the firm I would advise an EB IB route. Have heard there's been a lot of turnover at the associate through principal level. Industrials team spun out three years ago, Consumer team spun out last year and have heard FIG is currently going through some changes as well. Have heard from another source who has a friend there that they're struggling to raise money as their last fund was downsized from $4.5bn to $3bn.
Have nothing personal against the firm, but just figured you'd appreciate someone being completely transparent with you. Banking culture will most definitely suck relative to GGC, but think your long term experience at an EB IB and going to another shop down the line will be better than starting your career and staying at GGC.
.
You don't think like an investor as a 1st year PE analyst. You just do all the shitty work that the 1st year PE associate doesn't want to do.
Headhunters would be wary of why you are looking to leave for an associate program elsewhere, so disagree with your second comment.
Thanks for the advice. Makes sense. I don't necessarily think teams spinning out is a bad sign (atleast with Percheron from what I know) but the fund downsizing definitely is if true.
How true is the statement that "Harvard/Stanford is pretty standard from GGC?" Is it on the level of Berkshire, or more that like 50% of associates get into one of Harvard/Stanford and the rest go to Wharton?
As analyst you're only going to be doing grunt work here, in IB you'll have more options and better training.
Does GGC do fulltime recruiting or do all of their analysts come from the internship program? Seems to be pretty big on Notre Dame.
I cold-emailed them. Not at ND. I think all come from their internship program.
It is very possible to overthink these sorts of choices. I think this is a case of "your first job out of college doesn't actually matter," especially when you're choosing between two prestigious places that will both set you up nicely for your next few opportunities.
And this might be sort of a bad take, but if you ever find that the GGC program isn't helping you achieve your goals, you'll always have the option of lateraling, either to another fund or even into banking/consulting/other non-finance roles.
It looks like you knew that going with GGC was the right decision and you're just getting cold feet now when you have to make a decision. 9/10 times you should go with a UMM analyst program over banking if you want to be in PE in the long run.
You should definitely take the GGC offer if you think that you want to be an investor in the long run. I've been across the table from them on a few deals and they're definitely a well-respected investor. Given that their analyst program has been around awhile, I'm sure it's built out.
Any "training" you get from banking is frankly overstated - I say this as someone that did 2 years at a BB group comparable to EVR/PJT (GS FIG/MS MC). I can guarantee you down the line, if you want to switch funds, you will be able to do so. People on this forum understate the difficulty of buyside recruiting, but as someone who has been through it, I can assure you that the majority aren't going MF even from the group that I was at. I'm sure it has gotten even more competitive recently because a lot of funds are hiring analysts.
.
Omnis et amet tempore est sapiente et. Ullam aliquid quo repudiandae molestias aut autem. Natus quod dolor tempore labore maiores. Est accusantium amet molestiae repellendus eos. Veritatis cum iusto molestiae id officia sunt.
Quo voluptas et et inventore. Inventore eos unde nobis eveniet impedit molestiae iure.
Pariatur explicabo mollitia consequuntur et qui aliquid. Assumenda cupiditate sed facere quod. Rem fuga velit et et quaerat.
Voluptatem dolorem temporibus non pariatur sapiente sed praesentium tempore. Alias veritatis et perferendis accusantium quos. Eius consectetur est qui sint ullam delectus molestias. Nisi id voluptas ipsum qui.
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...