Blacklisted at BB Bank

An MBA candidate at an Ivy League is going to get blacklisted at an BB Bank. I thought he played the interviewing game correctly (from reading M&I, WSO, etc.) and I wanted to get some further opinions.

One of my close relatives is a VP at a BB Bank. His group recruited for a summer associate position (intern) and it seemed like everybody liked candidate "X". The VP called candidate "X" up and said something along the lines of "If offered you the position, will you accept it" and the candidate said something along the lines of "yes - if offered the position, I will accept the position."

To put this in context, this was "off-cycle recruiting" and time was of the essence (i.e. we don't want to give candidate "X" too much time to sit on the offer at the risk of losing the other candidates).

The VP (and the group) thought he closed on the candidate and tells HR to send candidate "X" the offer. A week later candidate "X" rejects the offer for the summer associate position. Now this group is pissed off that they need to recruit for this position again. The director of this group is especially pissed and is currently working with the HR to blacklist candidate "X".

In my opinion - I would of done the same thing as candidate "X". I would not be expected to be blacklisted because I thought that was how the game is played. (i.e. what else would you expect me to say? - I said that every bank that I interviewed with - that they were my first choice and if offered there I would accept the offer). Maybe I'm just an asshole.

Opinions?

 

Yeah, I'd blacklist the guy. X has demonstrated that, when's he's accepted an offer, he hasn't really accepted. Blacklist him as:

  • Why let the BB take that risk a second time?
  • Send a message to everyone else - rescinding has negative consequences, so the risk of someone rescinding on the BB in future is lower.

That's how the broader 'game' is played. It's not personal, it's just common sense.

Stalking the guy and shit-bombing his front door - that would be getting personal.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, post threads about how to do it on WSO.
 

Who says there is a "correct" way to approach the situation that lets the candidate win? Life isn't a computer game where you can complete a mission with perfect score.

X had to choose between to alternatives, each with an associated cost. He chose offer B, he takes the risk that he gets blacklisted and, in this case, he pays it. Whether that is optimal or not is hard to judge until you can get a better assessment of the trajectory of X's career, which neither X nor we can judge at this point. Whether or not it impacts that trajectory largely depends on whether, at some future time, he wants a job a firm A and the blacklisting has a negative impact on that option. If he's get strong business he can bring to firm A, it probably won't.

It seems like some people are struggling to find a way of explaining this situation where the candidate is "in the right" for doing what he did (which is what most people would do) and the director who wants him blacklisted is wrong.

Why are people so caught up in this dilemma?

If people have such an overwhelming desire to justify actions with reference to a morally justifiable outcome, they'll struggle in investment banking and life in general. Not because investment banking or life require immoral action, but because often interests are in conflict and their is no way to resolve that conflict.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, post threads about how to do it on WSO.
 

Look at it from his perspective. This group was obviously his second choice, but since his top choice wasn't locked down, he still needed to keep this option open and tell them he would accept an offer extended to him. He wasn't really in a position to tell the BB the truth of the situation.

Not saying the blacklisting isn't justified, I just don't get how someone is expected to play that situation without settling for something lesser or screwing someone over.

 
Imnotyou21:

I'd question the effectiveness of a "blacklist" and note he likely already accepted another offer since he turned this one down.

This. What does "blacklisted" even mean? After working at 2 BBs, I never came across any mythological list that HR keeps and is referred to for every recruitment. Maybe the relevant parties will remember, but given the turnover that happens (particularly in HR), any blacklisting would really only last for a very short period of time.

 

Call it blacklist or whatever you want but why would that particular firm offer him another position after he gets his MBA? It's difficult enough to get a position at a BB everything else being equal and he has a strike against him at that particular firm. I doubt they can blackball him across the Street but after rescinding an offer that he verbally agreed to, they're not going to do that again.

 
Dingdong08:

Call it blacklist or whatever you want but why would that particular firm offer him another position after he gets his MBA? It's difficult enough to get a position at a BB everything else being equal and he has a strike against him at that particular firm. I doubt they can blackball him across the Street but after rescinding an offer that he verbally agreed to, they're not going to do that again.

He didn't verbally agree to anything. They tried to hedge their bets and asked him a bs question off the record and got a bs answer.

Schools would not blacklist for this in fact ocr specifically tells firms not to do this for on campus jobs. However for off campus stuff people can do w.e they want.

 

MBA at "Ivy." Since this is not through on campus, I'm not sure if formal rules apply. However, at the school I was at if you verbally committed to accept, even if it was just a hypothetical, you were bound to accept. If the school was informed that you did not, you would be banned from further on campus recruiting. Because of that, I never told a bank that they were my first choice or that I would accept (except in the case of my actual first choice). However, I do know of people that did decide to tell every bank that they were their first choice and would accept in the case of an offer. To my knowledge, the school was never informed and thus they weren't harmed. However, should their internships go south (i.e. get no-offered), these people will have to go bank to those same banks (and in fact, same people) and try to get another offer which I'd imagine could now be complicated.

"They are all former investment bankers that were laid off in the economic collapse that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have no marketable skills, but by God they work hard."
 

that's exactly what i thought too

word for word, M&I tells you to say: "if you gave me an offer right now, I would sign it immediately" furthermore, a verbal agreement is not an official agreement candidate X had every right to not follow through

@"yelloweat", your friend kind of sounds like an asshole

.
 

A verbal agreement is a binding agreement. It might be difficult to enforce but that's a different matter. Don't commit to something if you don't intend to put your money where your mouth is.

Apart from that, it's a matter of nuance. If you say you'd sign an offer if presented to you immediately, you should do so. It doesn't mean that you're still there at a later point in time though.

 

A verbal agreement absolutely counts as a contract in Dutch and German civil law, and I believe in the anglo-saxon tradition. It's a little trickier to prove it than a written agreement however. Secondly, speaking in hypotheticals is not the same as making an offer. If this were a western european bank they would have legal grounds to take action if they had had some (indirect) proof of an oral agreement.

EDIT: It seems as if it is the same in US contract law.

 

How much time was there in between the phone call and the offer? If the offer was not sent almost immediately after, I can imagine the candidate accepting a position elsewhere. After all, a hypothetical offer is not really an offer

 
Visico:

How much time was there in between the phone call and the offer? If the offer was not sent almost immediately after, I can imagine the candidate accepting a position elsewhere. After all, a hypothetical offer is not really an offer

This^

We don't have all of the information, so we can't make an accurate judgement of the situation. But at the end of the day, a faux offer isn't substantiative. The bank can go screw itself with that "offer". You either have one or you don't.

How many times have we heard of people that got strung along to only get their hopes crushed? Every actor is motivated by their own interests. Given the limited context that we are given, it sucks for the bank, but it would do the same if it had to.

 

Hmm - thats very true. The standard answer (for me) to the question was yes.

If the candidate were to reply truthfully - I think there was still a very good chance, albeit slightly less, that the bank would still give him the offer. If the candidate was truthful in his response - it would better position the bank to handle their second choice candidates & better gauge its recruiting efforts.

-
 

Firms have negative consequences in place to prevent from people doing exactly this: verbally committing and then reneging. They're trying to get their ducks in a row to hire you and reneging really moves everything back to square one if they don't have other candidates which may be the case during off-cycle recruiting.

Listen, here's the thing. If you can't spot the sucker in the first half hour at the table, then you are the sucker.
 

To second some of these comments, this question is rare and people who ask it are assholes.

Generally, they phrase it as a "how are you going to go about your decision process when choosing among various offers" or some variation thereof.

This is how I answered it:

You go to your politically correct response of how you are looking for 2 things: a great platform with great people. You then say that Goldman Stanley has a great reputation in XYZ industry, which you are very interested in and you have know that Goldman Stanley will provide you the opportunity to grow professionally and work on the most interesting/complex transactions (name drop a deal they are on if you want). Further, you have really enjoyed meeting the Goldman Stanley team, and specifically John Smith has told you that it is a very collegial/professional/Bottles&Models environment and the impression you have formed during the recruiting process has made you believe that Goldman Stanley represents a great cultural fit for you.

Or at least that is how I answered it. Never did I get a follow up pushing back harder. If a VP/MD, etc. does push back, fuck them. Can't win them all. That being said, when I went through recruiting not saying everyone was my first choice did not hurt me at all.

"They are all former investment bankers that were laid off in the economic collapse that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have no marketable skills, but by God they work hard."
 

In my school, all banks asked where else you interviewed at and where do we stand. No one would tell WF that they are #1 while they had interview with GS/MS/JPM coming up. But they would word it more along the line of you are on of my top choices. In the same time, WF guys know where they stand. It gets little messy when someone tells CS or Barclays they are top choice (then go for a 'better' bank) and then the first bank gets pissed and give them an earful. In that case, you better go get your FT offer from the summer internship. Another thing to consider is that in MBA recruiting, all the bankers are former classmates, so they talk with each other before extending offers. We were specifically warned not to tell multiple banks they are number one.

EOD, getting blacklisted by one bank doesn't hurt when you can get a return offer from where you accepted the offer (if not, you are screwed anyway). Off cycle recruiting kind of messes things up, but similar rules apply. It's also not cool to deceive multiple banks when the offer could be going to another of your classmates who needs it more than you sitting on 4 offers. No one likes that guy,

 

"It's also not cool to deceive multiple banks when the offer could be going to another of your classmates who needs it more than you sitting on 4 offers. No one likes that guy,"

I think it's awesome you made this point. Something that we often fail to consider.

Work hard, work clean, & most of all do not give up.
 

I think both parties are in the wrong. I don't think the bank should have asked him if he would accept if they provided an offer, but I don't think he would have said yes. If I were in the candidate's position I would say something like "I'm really excited about this position and am looking forward to receiving an offer in writing. Once I receive and review I will contact you as soon as possible." If you're not going to commit, don't commit. And don't commit to something if you don't have it in writing.

 

This is pretty comical... He obviously took the offer for a "better" role so a blacklist amounts to shit.

Lastly, when asked about competitors during process, be honest. The Street is a very small world and you'll run across those people during your career at some point BC banks are 1 big cess pool from other banks.

 

I would absolutely react the same way that candidate "X" did. The bank was more or less at fault for their shifty wording and pressing the candidate for a decision without giving him the complete information for doing so(i.e. whether or not a real offer is coming). Now I agree that being blacklisted is appropriate, however as the candidate I would not see that as enough of a consequence to avoid taking the risk - not even close.

As an MBA student, you have to watch out for yourself first, and until I have something IN WRITING I would not feel bad reneging the offer. Under other circumstances I would feel stronger allegiance towards a verbal commitment, but with how the firm acted in this scenario I would reneg without even thinking about it.

 
jss09:

I would absolutely react the same way that candidate "X" did. The bank was more or less at fault for their shifty wording and pressing the candidate for a decision without giving him the complete information for doing so(i.e. whether or not a real offer is coming). Now I agree that being blacklisted is appropriate, however as the candidate I would not see that as enough of a consequence to avoid taking the risk - not even close.

As an MBA student, you have to watch out for yourself first, and until I have something IN WRITING I would not feel bad reneging the offer. Under other circumstances I would feel stronger allegiance towards a verbal commitment, but with how the firm acted in this scenario I would reneg without even thinking about it.

Yeah, please let these young guys on here know what's up. Candidate X did nothing wrong. Banks do this all the time to try to rope you in, and MBAs to do it all the time. Some MBAs do get roped in, some don't. If your friend's BB was so hot, and the candidate wasn't in demand, your friend wouldn't have had to do this. Sounds like he knew the candidate would be a tough sell.

MBA did the smart thing--sounds like a very sharp candidate who is obviously in high demand elsewhere (and may not have really wanted to do banking anyway--since waited until off cycle). The Bank won't blacklist him, maybe that group might, but the overall bank wont. Banking is so fluid anyway, most of the bankers there will be gone in a few anyway, and most likely if the candidate went to another BB, his/her next exit will most likely be outside of banking. Your VP friend better be careful not to be too 'upset' about it, who knows, that candidate may be of help to your VP friend someday.

Trust me the MBA will live. Most MBAs don't really want to do IB anyway--this isn't undergrad (or 2007).

 

I also dont understand why people think being blacklisted is so bad anyway, he has another job lined up and will be completely fine going forward minus that one firm. What are the chances that a post-MBA associate even stays in banking for his next job? Even then, what are the chances he wants to work for that particular BB??(considering he passed on them the first time)

I hate when people throw around the term "finance is a small world" to justify it, does anybody seriously think that they are important enough to be remembered years from now for this? I mean your an associate level banker, not a high profile politician or celebrity. Some people on here are so entitled to think that in 2017 theres going to be a still bitter MD sitting at his desk blasting out emails trashing some guy who kind-of, sorta renegged an offer that you could argue wasnt even given to him in the first place. Unbelievable.

 
MonsterMadison:

in the future, instead of saying 'yes' or 'no' to those questions, just say 'i'm extremely interested but I don't have enough information to answer that question.'

I would argue that when a firm poses a question like they did in the OP the only way to answer it is "Yes" or "No."

If the person asking the question is the type of person to press a candidate in that fashion, the ONLY answer they are looking for is "Yes".

 
jss09:
MonsterMadison:

in the future, instead of saying 'yes' or 'no' to those questions, just say 'i'm extremely interested but I don't have enough information to answer that question.'

I would argue that when a firm poses a question like they did in the OP the only way to answer it is "Yes" or "No."

If the person asking the question is the type of person to press a candidate in that fashion, the ONLY answer they are looking for is "Yes".

Nobody is actually going to push for a Yes or No. It's not like if you answer ambiguously, expressing your interest but unwilling to verbally commit, that they're going to be like "No, I need a Yes/No answer right now". Then I'd just say "If you were so pressed for time then work on getting me the offer letter faster" (obviously in a respectful/positive way).

 

This argument has gotten a little silly and over thought. First, it's the OP's family member who's the VP and not even the MBA. The MBA took another position that he obviously feels is better so he's probably toasting himself and isn't giving it a thought. Is it a shit thing to accept a position and renege, sure, but it's highly unlikely it will have any impact on his career because if he and the VP/MD stay in banking long enough that they cross paths again, they'll either forget or MBA will be a rock star and VP/MD won't care. While VP may be pissed off now, it will quickly fall away and he probably won't care or even remember the MBA. Should the BB blacklist him for now? Why not? Why would they hire a guy who reneged in their mind, regardless of reality?

 
Dingdong08:

While VP may be pissed off now, it will quickly fall away and he probably won't care or even remember the MBA. Should the BB blacklist him for now? Why not? Why would they hire a guy who reneged in their mind, regardless of reality?

Actually they do remember. Know of someone who picked one bank (A) over another (B) few years back. Last year as Bank A was having trouble, the associate reached out the banker who recruited him to Bank B to see if he could lateral. Got shut out pretty quickly for turning down Bank B in the past. Obviously he can go recruit at Bank C, D, E, whatever, but generally you have best connection with couple of banks.
 

My advice would be to give a non-answer and blame it on the school. Something along the lines of "since I've committed to interview with firms XY&Z on-campus, it would reflect poorly on the school if I cancelled my existing interviews and/or went into an interview with an accepted offer". It doesn't directly answer the question, but it makes your position clear while placing the blame on the school rather than you. If they try to dig any deeper, they're fucking ridiculous.

 

This is the classic case of the guy being labeled the asshole really not being the asshole and the victim really being the asshole.

If the guy says its not his first choice he won't get the offer. So what is he supposed to do? The banks are all insecure about being rejected that they play these games. They hate having low offer convert rates.

Also, contrary to what other posters have written about this being rare, at my school basically every bank asked these questions at the MBA level. Furthermore, banks would have dinners between 1st and final round and scheduled them on the same day and time so candidates essentially had to choose even before they knew they had offers.

Long story short, banks use unethical hiring practice for their own good and force candidates to behave in this manner.

 

Whether OCR rules were in effect doesn't matter. Legality of verbal contracts doesn't matter. Even if this constituted one (it doesn't), the stakes are so small that no one would enforce it. Telling a firm they're your "first choice" is barely even a gray area. I'd avoid that phrasing, but everyone employs a bit of puffery in interviews.

Both the question posed by the VP and the candidate reneging were unethical. Either the VP was offering a job or he wasn't. The candidate should have responded "I'd love to work at Goldman Stanley and if you're offering me a job, I'm confident I can get back to you within 24 hours." Not sure how any other schools work, but career services gave us specific coaching around exploding offers and pressure tactics.

Ethical questions aside, the whole situation follows a pretty clear pattern of cause and effect. VP wanted to lock up a candidate. Candidate wanted to stay on the bank's nice list. Candidate accepted a better offer. Bank got pissed. Candidate can't work for bank in the future.

And the Earth keeps spinning...

 

Boo-hoo. The firm he thought was shitty enough to reject won't hire him anymore. Surprised this question has gotten so much attention. The guy in question doesn't give a shit. Both parties did exactly what you'd expect given the original circumstances.

The interviewee said, 'fuck yeah you're my top choice!'. The firm got pissed when they had to spend more time recruiting (they weren't pissed they lost this particular guy, in case you didn't know) and said, 'Never hire that dickwad'.

 

In my opinion, when you interview you have to sell yourself in the best way possible while not outright lying. In this case, the dude lied to this BB and probably deserves to be blacklisted by them. The entire Street blacklisting him seems a little extreme, however.

On a related note, I accepted an offer with a boutique that was rescinded in March when the firm encountered financial issues. This experience has made me extremely skeptical of the entire hiring process and I totally get where this guy is coming from in hedging his bets. I realize there is a difference between a BB and a boutique but at the end of the day the bank is going to look out for itself and fuck over a potential hire without a second thought, so best to look out for yourself as well, even if it means fucking someone else over in the process.

 

do what you said. yes, we can argue on the reality of the verbal offer and etc., but VP sent the offer, i.e. kept his word, and the guy didn't keep his. got blacklisted – who cares if the guy got another offer? I would blacklist the guy too, but it doesn't matter as @DickFuld already said.

 

W/e this is just like game theory, always act in your own interest. Both sides were playing the game and one actor didn't cooperate so he made off well (probably got his top choice offer) and the BB lost out (had to recruit again). I honestly would have done the same thing, BBs could hire/fire anyone in an instant if they felt like it, so if they feel like playing the hypothetical game with me then I would give them hypothetical answers.

 

I wouldn't be too worried about this blacklist for the reasons said above, also companies are more disorganized than you may think, the list is probably only for the 1 HR person on her desktop and probably will disappear with turnover. I wouldn't be surprised if next recruiting season he got an interview for same company one floor up.

 

It's for a Summer Associate position (quite low on the totem pole in the grand scheme of things). Why make such a fuss over such a small matter?

I used to do Asia-Pacific PE (kind of like FoF). Now I do something else but happy to try and answer questions on that stuff.
 

This is ridiculous. How can you extend someone a hypothetical offer with no specifics and assume that they will evaluate it in a vacuum? How is this a surprise? You can't reasonably expect the candidate to do that. . If he had signed the actual offer letter and completed all the onboarding, and THEN reneged, different story. But it shouldn't be a surprise that a hypothetical offer would receive a hypothetical yes.

Metal. Music. Life. www.headofmetal.com
 

Anyone watch Silicon Valley Sunday? When they said jokingly that they'd have to jerk the whole audience off to win TechCrunch. And then the nerds went into a complex discussion of a formula to calculate the time necessary to jerk everyone off.

Witness the same thing happening here.

Someone asks you if you will accept a job if offered and you say yes to my face. You leave, get the offer and say no. I am now pissed.

You either lied, played me or misrepresented yourself. All three piss me off. So I am going to tell HR that you are a fucking flake and a douche and to not waste your time with this clown in the future. Depending on how much you pissed me off and how much I went out on the ledge for you will impact how much I let all my buddies at different banks know that you were and are a douche.

That's life. Fucking someone over is a gamble. If you think the gamble is worth it, roll the dice. But like all gambles, sometimes you get fucked. Just keep that in mind.

 

It is important to discuss because people should not have to be put in a position of having to decide on a hypothetical offer. Again, you either have an offer or you don't. There is no middle ground. If given a flaky offer, expect a flaky response.

Do banks expect people they recruit to be retarded? People get screwed over all the time in these types of situations. An intelligent person would not have responded differently than candidate X.

 
TNA:

Someone asks you if you will accept a job if offered and you say yes to my face. You leave, get the offer and say no. I am now pissed.

What if as they walked out the door a better offer came in? A verbal offer is not an offer.

When I first moved to NYC (without a job straight out of college) I had the group head at a BB make me a verbal offer (not an "if" offer as in this post) and ask if I could start the next week. I said yes. He said that I'd get a written offer from HR that day. The next day I still hadn't received it so I called him. He said that HR said no because they had some internal transfer candidate that they wanted him to take (summer of 2002 when there was a lot of "downsizing" going on). He still wanted me, but said his hands were tied.

Everything worked out fine for me eventually, but BBs pull complete BS moves all of the time. They don't have a lot of moral high ground when it comes to recruiting promises. Rescinded offers, anyone?

 
TechBanking:

Someone asks you if you will accept a job if offered and you say yes to my face. You leave, get the offer and say no. I am now pissed.

What if as they walked out the door a better offer came in? A verbal offer is not an offer.

When I first moved to NYC (without a job straight out of college) I had the group head at a BB make me a verbal offer (not an "if" offer as in this post) and ask if I could start the next week. I said yes. He said that I'd get a written offer from HR that day. The next day I still hadn't received it so I called him. He said that HR said no because they had some internal transfer candidate that they wanted him to take (summer of 2002 when there was a lot of "downsizing" going on). He still wanted me, but said his hands were tied.

Everything worked out fine for me eventually, but BBs pull complete BS moves all of the time. They don't have a lot of moral high ground when it comes to recruiting promises. Rescinded offers, anyone?

I agree with you, but everything is fucked up like that. You have to give two weeks or you are the dick, yet you get canned or your offer rescinded left and right. Like I said, I would have done the same thing, but I also would come on WSO and post about being blacklisted at a bank.

It's like dumping a GF for a hotter chick and then worrying about what the ex is telling her family. You accept the bad vibes the second you trade up.

 

How do you know their hiring pipeline? Oh yeah, you don't. You give your word you stand by it. You reneg and you will be considered a cocksucker by the guy who made the offer. Who cares if you have a better offer, but play the move out a couple steps.

So it is cool and kosher for the applicant to play the game, leverage offers, hedge bets, but when the guy hiring you gets fucked over he should just suck his thumb in the corner? No, he is going to fuck you like you fucked him.

Life 101.

 

Life 101: Don't make bullshit hypothetical lukewarm offers to desirable candidates because they will likely get better offers and you will be stuck with your dick in your hand scrambling to find another candidate.

Plus who gives a shit if the kid was blackballed he traded up and won't be looking back. Blackballing him is the equivalent of saying "you can't fire me I quit"

 
ke18sb:

Life 101: Don't make bullshit hypothetical lukewarm offers to desirable candidates because they will likely get better offers and you will be stuck with your dick in your hand scrambling to find another candidate.

Plus who gives a shit if the kid was blackballed he traded up and won't be looking back. Blackballing him is the equivalent of saying "you can't fire me I quit"

Who the fuck responds like this?

Guy made an offer, kid said yes and reneged. His is blacklisted or at least looks like shit at that old bank. Who cares since he has a better job. You tell someone you are going to do something and then don't do it you should expect someone to get pissed.

 

OT question: Is it okay to renege on an offer from a nonIB offer to go to a FO IB role? Is the IB going to find out if the reneged company was just general 'financial services'?

Here to learn and hopefully pass on some knowledge as well. SB if I helped.
 

seems like the recruiter got his panties in a bunch for being rejected. if the shoe was on the other foot, the bank wouldn't think twice about fucking candidate X over over. I graduated in '08 just when the financial crisis shit storm was kicking off and tons of banks and other firms rescinded their offers to me and a lot of my friends and they didn't get blackballed at the school. Everyone must look out for #1 or you get fucked with no lube. candidate X did right by himself and the recruiter should respect that. It's not like it will be hard for him to find another candidate. people would kill their grandma for a BB role.

"I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player. Or nothing. " -GG
 

It appears to me that there is some confusion on this issue. Let's make it black and white.

If it went like, 'are you giving me an offer verbally? No ifs, spell it out. And at what terms?' There is no room for error after that.

If it was spelt out in no uncertain terms, then he screwed up and deserves it, else he doesn't.

Lesson? Do not fail to communicate thoroughly and establish follow through deadlines.

 

Yeah, he'd be blacklisted. While the blacklisting itself wouldn't have any practical impact on him (doubt X would actually apply for another job at the BB, and he probably took a job elsewhere), the messaging is more important, especially as word of it gets/got out to others. Honesty and reputation are key here and X lost theirs.

The flip side of it is I know a BB that got banned from on campus activities for flagrant violations of school hiring policy. Why should a student get any better treatment?

 

So this has happened to me. I went on a temporary project to help in another office. This office offered me a job albeit at my same salary. My current boss offered a promotion into a coworker's, who had resigned, higher paid job. So I opted for the higher paid job and came back to my office. I did the work but never got the promotion. This offer was not in writing and when I raised the issue they mentioned lack of funding and all manner of bs until I left. He made a bs offer and the candidate went for income security for his self and family. I'll never let people play these games with my money again, lesson learned

 

1) you can't accept an offer until it is in writing, just like you can't get a $lowjob over the phone 2) we go through associates like pussy so no one really cares enough to blacklist anybody 3) any competitor would probably like them more and also thinks their dick is big enough to keep them around

Bottom line, getting multiple offers that you turn down means you have a great pussy and if you have a great pussy every big swinging dick is going to want to ##ck you!

 

A hypothetical question is not an offer. If they were really prepared to offer him the position, they should have ended the call with "The offer is on its way." I've negotiated for a job before. That is how it's done. Do you want the job? Yes. Ok, let's hash it out and I'll send you a written offer, today. The question they asked him is very common and should not be taken as an offer until they say, "I'm offering you the position." Why should a candidate be expected to sit on a hypothetical offer while actual written offers are coming in? I wouldn't. Why couldn't they have just said, "Ok, I'm going to tell HR to write up the offer and send it to you." It would sure save a lot of heartache. Though I guess without more information, we don't know what really happened. I would also say that even if the offer is minutely different than what was verbally agreed upon, vice drastically, the candidate shouldn't accept it unless it's in his favor (ie extra vacation days). Example, if you verbally agreed on 5 sick days, and the written offer comes in with 4, call back and say, "Hey, we agreed on 5 days."

 

It has everything to do with the recruiting game.

The guy did what was best for him based on a faux offer. I agree with @"Simple As..." on that X should have been prepared to deal with the consequences. But at the end of the day it was grimy for the VP to ask X to accept an offer that he may have had no power extending by himself. What if X went along with the VP and declined a real offer somewhere else, and then found out that another person got his job because someone higher than the VP found a better fitting candidate? He would have been screwed out of both jobs. In turn, the director is a petty asshole for going out of his way to try to blacklist an intern.

 

Um, no. There's nothing grimy about asking a hypothetical question and one that is quite common for that matter. If you lie to someone's face there will be consequences. Period. Its not the end of the world, and no one is losing sleep over it. But in my experience, the people that have behaved like that are remembered and do not get another chance at that firm.

Bottom line: lying in a professional environment is unacceptable, no question about it. There's nothing petty about blacklisting him. People are trying to run a business, there's no room for immature bullshit. They made a decision based on information that candidate gave them, that ended up being a lie.

 

VP was asking a hypothetical. If I ask Larry Page if Google stock is going to be over $1000/share in a five years and he says yes and it turns out to be under $1000 five years later, you don't get mad and claim Page lied to you.

What you're alleging here, basically, is that VP demanded an option from candidate- the right but not the obligation to hire him. The problem is that there was no consideration paid for it. Furthermore, anyone in an interview who answers that question "No, I wouldn't take the offer if it were made" reveals himself to be an idiot.

My view is that if you are being asked this question, the correct answer is Yes(*) (with an implicit asterisk). The answer "Yes" is given the fact that you spent an entire day to come in and do an on-site interview- you clearly want the job and will probably accept if offered. The asterisk is, given your current opportunities. If you tell Goldman you'll take the offer if they give it, and they take four weeks after the interview to get back to you, and in the meantime you manage to land an interview with KKR and they make an offer, you haven't lied to anyone. You haven't even broken any commitments.

I mean how are you supposed to answer this question? Do you need to spell out the asterisk?

"If you made an exploding offer tomorrow (I don't have any interviews tomorrow and don't anticipate any offers tomorrow), I'd take it." "You are currently my best opportunity. Assuming you are still the best opportunity when the offer arrives, I'll take it." "Yes, Morgan Stanley, I'll take your offer if you make it. Unless I get an offer from Greenhill or Lazard, or Goldman."

I would find myself more in agreement with Marcus if the MBA candidate were made an exploding 24-hour offer a day after the interview.

 

Adipisci similique commodi est nobis est voluptatibus voluptates. Hic iste veniam inventore voluptatem vel modi. Iusto rerum perferendis blanditiis voluptatum.

[quote=patternfinder]Of course, I would just buy in scales. [/quote] See my WSO Blog | my AMA
 

Aut dolor fuga ducimus voluptatem et voluptatem rerum ipsa. Aut ullam ut autem laudantium. Quo magnam animi enim sit nam possimus. Distinctio velit deserunt nesciunt voluptatem. Consequatur temporibus enim nobis id voluptas repellat. Voluptates repudiandae voluptatem quae eaque voluptatem.

Sed sequi possimus ducimus pariatur similique repudiandae. Enim eos ut facilis beatae vel nesciunt doloribus.

A voluptatem ut ducimus molestiae enim iste. Aut asperiores in quisquam ut debitis. Ut est ut amet distinctio aut deserunt. Earum ab veritatis fuga dolores.

 

Quam dolorum dolores eum nostrum. Quia nesciunt alias sapiente et animi omnis. Voluptate iusto dolorum ut veritatis aut sequi iure omnis. Consequatur quo minima sint sit aut sint. Itaque quia et placeat fuga debitis vitae sunt. Dignissimos ut et assumenda maxime nisi asperiores laborum.

Dolores autem id et rerum. Voluptatibus debitis dolorum consequatur nihil earum facilis. Et delectus totam qui aut reiciendis placeat at.

Dolore provident ut blanditiis quae assumenda quis error in. Qui ex quas nulla molestiae ut est error. Dolorum magni nobis consequatur cum ea quis qui sunt.

 

Et ut optio a repellat. Est in voluptas dolore excepturi ipsa.

Et eveniet expedita repudiandae est pariatur eum asperiores vel. In nam earum sunt nam mollitia. Voluptatum architecto ut nemo est reprehenderit sit labore. Temporibus esse placeat ut eveniet aut.

Optio eius sit aut eaque autem quae. Exercitationem et quia velit dolorum maiores autem.

Voluptates nam alias nostrum odit maiores. Exercitationem est quidem perferendis consequatur ut eius. Fugiat vero aut non molestias magnam nemo. Quam recusandae omnis vel aut tempore magni. Harum amet odio eos eos. Odio qui sequi consequatur. Explicabo atque numquam sit vitae doloremque inventore. Mollitia aperiam mollitia eaque unde in.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”