Citi IBD vs. Moelis

i would probably recommend Citi because as an analyst, its all about dealflow. saying that, i would say that at Moelis you will probably get a greater exposure to seniors so from a holistic standpoint, you might enjoy it a bit more. btw, is it Citi NYC?

100% Moelis or any top-tier boutique over a BB for that matter, especially in this market.

Looking at the personnel @ Moelis New York, I personally would be inclined to take the offer at Citi. I think the glamour of Moelis comes from the personnel in its LA office.

Moelis NYC isn't as good as Moelis LA from what Ive heard...remember genghiskhan mentioning this in a post some time ago

Moelis LA > Moelis NY > Citi

Isn't Ken Moelis in NY? Too much uncertainty with Citi. Take Moelis unless you really enjoyed your summer internship.

Did Moelis recruit outside its intern class?

Moelis did recruit outside of its intern class. Know this for a fact.

But the restructuring group heads are in NY http://www.iddmagazine.com/news/180689-1.html

I'd rather do Moelis restructuring than BB anything. That said, I'd rather be in LA than NY.

I'm concerned that Moelis is too unknown -- a few people I've spoken with, a VP in Capital Markets and MD in IBD included, really didn't know anything about Moelis when I mentioned I had an offer there. Everyone here seems to know the deal with Moelis, but I've been advised that Citi IBD (and yes, its New York) will carry more weight on my resume than Moelis. Thoughts?

From my understanding, Moelis started out as basically a pure M&A focused shop, but has built up their restructuring practice through the acquisition of a bunch of Jeffries guys. The M&A rainmakers are mostly out in a LA, but the restructuring guys I believe are mostly in NY.

I'd be concerned about taking an offer from Citi...

I am better qualified to comment on Moelis than anyone in this thread.

Citi IBD- Decent culture (based on what my friends have said), and extremely nice for a BB to analysts (I have a friend who didn't get a Visa to work in the US for IBD, but Citi has paid him for four months to keep on interviewing at global offices)

Moelis NY- Dealflow-wise, you'll beat any of the people at Citi. FT analysts regularly chuck 6 or 7 deals at a time. This is mainly due to a jacked-the-fuck-up ratio of senior personnel to junior personnel. Additionally, it is stable job security-wise.

That said, if you have been working for less than 100 hours a week and have only had one to a few weeks where you exceeded 100+, you are in for a rude awakening on the true nature of banking if you start there. The culture is very different from Moelia LA as well, it's a combination of the workaholic DLJ/Moelis culture combined with more uptight and formal NY culture. Slight premium to Street in pay as well.

Name awareness issue is that outside of banking and PE, I doubt anyone's heard of Moelis. Within banking they're pretty decently known. In restructuring, every interviewer I had knew the people who worked at Moelis. But that's also a nature of the fact that restructuring is a much smaller field.

I've sanitized a lot of stuff. PM me if you want more.

That's very nice of Citi to do: pay for four months although I thought you get an automatic transfer if you don't get your Visa.

I agree that Citi IBD might carry more weight on your resume. I would be inclined to go with Citi.

for a few reasons:

1) Citi NY is its flagship office, you always want to be where HQ is if given the option 2) Just because Moelis NY has the "Moelis" brand name does not signify that it is a great shop. 3) The infrastructure for investment banking at Moelis is not as solid as that of Citi. If you attended Wharton and have wanted to become an investment banker since you were in junior high Moelis might be a better choice but for most the learning curve at Citi will be easier (obviously an exaggeration and taken with a grain of salt).

Finally, there has been a fascination / appreciation for Moelis on these boards. I personally think it is a good shop with decent growth prospects.

However, most people confuse the Moelis business structure. Most of the high profile deals that MoCo is involved with do NOT flow down to their analysts. Yahoo, Anheuser-Busch, etc. hired Ken Moelis after the fact for his personal advice, not his firm's resources. Most of the deals at MoCo will likely be mid-sized (perhaps not such a bad thing in this environment) and lead by lieutenants.

Just my two cents...

Actually, the deals do flow down. As an intern, I had an opportunity to pitch with Moelis and one of his lieutenants. Another intern worked on Anheuser. Out of an intern class of about 10, I'd say at least 5 of us had a high-profile deal that you'd read about in the headlines occassionally of WSJ/Bloomberg watever. Yahoo was over by the time we arrived so nothing happened with that.

You're right on the infrastructure. Some of their logins are actually from Mercanti.

Choice between Citi and Moelis is a choice between actually having a life vs. deal flow and job-security at the price of the worst hours on the street. Only group I know who had consistantly as bad hours than Moelis was Goldman TMT.

My (apparently) faulty information was given by a third year analyst friend of mine working there right now.....given your first hand experience I stand corrected. Def. brings another element into your final choice, good luck!

Your information isn't faulty so much as the perspective is different. By definition, most of your stuff can't be high-profile, mainly because there are only so many high-profile deals in existence. Most of the stuff is mid-market, because that's the only stuff that exists right now usually. But as long as you're getting jacked on the hours and having 4+ deals at a time, some of it will be high-profile.

Additionally, I'd like to say that in my opinion, exposure to senior personnel beyond a certain amount is highly overrated. At the end of the day, it's the other analysts and associates (and VP occassionally) who determine what it's really like to work at the bank. Also, most of the interns were wishing that there were much less deals after three weeks in. That's about how long it takes as well for most people to transition from "wow, the deal flow is so awesome!" to "how many more weeks am I here"

Especially with most interns / analysts wishing they had less work a few weeks in....

If I had to describe the latter point, I'd say there's a disconnect between the juniors (analysts + associates) and seniors (VPs, MDS, etc.) and a conflict of interest. Most MDs will not know how much work you actually did unless they are told directly.

In my opinion, where senior management becomes valuable is under two circumstances:

1) During the review / offer process - if you are lucky enough to have a MD vouch for you during the offer process you are leagues above your colleagues. That being said, getting that exposure is a matter of perception and not possible without pleasing the juniors you are working with.

2) If you want to be a b4l (banker for life) - this isn't from first-hand experience but I have heard that promotions end up being highly political and heavily weighted upon those that are senior. Most analysts, however, have aspirations of PE, etc. after two years so this is less relevant (however somewhat of a legitimate point given that there is very very little hiring in PE right now).

bump

this is very old thread, i think we all see now that Moelis was overrated and died in dealflow after the initial hype

they seemed to have placed extremely well this most recent recruiting season (ie this month) although remained quiet throughout the year.

Anyone has recent views on this discussion ? Cheers.

Must have been a wild time recruiting in '08

Its so interesting to read about threads from 08. To those of you who recruited at that time...well, your the real MVPs

Quite funny to read up old threads and have the benefits of hindsight. But things probably are still the same. People still asking the same mindless stuffs that have been asked like 10 years ago and the answers still the same lol.