I have the feeling engineers make a lot more
I've been thinking about this for some time. I mean most of the high-pay positions in banks are occupied by engineers, mathematicians, physicists etc. but I'm talking about the engineering sector. Here are my arguments:
1) There are a lot of engineering companies, some are huge (e.g. microsoft, google, apple, intel, Mercedes, BMW, IBM etc.) and have higher earnings than top banks.
2) Engineering companies are not affected by crisis as much.
3) Some have higher efficiencies in terms of num. of employees/profits
So than I'm thinking being a top manager in Google or Microsoft or Apple or Mercedes etc. probably pays as well if not better than being a manager in a bank. Furthermore, most of this companies allow various progression paths so that you can be very highly paid without having to manage (much).
Then I look at the number of scientists who have gotten immensely rich by making a product : the facebook guy :), Bill Gates, a ton of people associated with Google, Apple. There are a lot more that nobody has heard but they own a couple of billion :O (e.g. Mark Shuttleworth). I heard of that guy who wrote a stupid game for mobiles (which takes a week in total and probably few days if you push it) and makes a killing from this simple stupid thing.
Then I look at the startups in technology (all the time) and surely the founders are earning at least 6 figures out of these things and if it goes well (and chances in this day of age are it will because the industry is booming) then you earn a lot.
And sure in banking you can earn a lot too but remember- you hear stories of people earning millions but these people are not that many and I have the feeling the number of rich engineers surpasses the number of rich bankers. Bear in mind that a lot of the quant, high freq. trading firms were founded by mathematicians (say from MIT or Standford etc).
Unfortunately, starting in engineering is harder (I feel) and sometimes the starting salary can be a bit lower (although they are very close). I found it so much easier to get a job in banking. I also feel that engineering companies develop your personal skills better. You learn more maths, how to apply it and how to design and design is probably the most important skill a person can have.
What are your thoughts?
then why do engineers give up their jobs to go into banking?
You're looking at the top engineers vs average banker. if you want to compare, you need to look at top engineers vs. top bankers, and I think top bankers out earn top engineers by far.
do what you are most interested in, not what makes the most money. If you are very interested in something, you will continue to work on it and you will continue to get better at it. Once you become so good that you have few peers in terms of skill, you will have created your own goldmine.
How were you able to put 6-7 paragraphs together for such a retarded argument is beyond me. You must be one of them hot shot engineers that you keep hearing about. Please shut the fuck up before you give me a headache.
This.
Definitely not true. The earnings for an engineer cap out in the 100-200 thousand dollar range. The average earnings for an employee at a bank in NY is around 350,000. Most top traders and bankers will bring home a million or two a year. Remember, these positions are few and far between. Engineers are a dime a dozen at a tech firm. Maybe if you are 10X or something but even then you only get paid 2 or 3 times the amount of a typical engineer.
the engineers who kill it are entrepreneurs who take massive equity stakes
an engineer collecting a paycheck probably has an easier life, and pay/effort ratio, but making more in absolute terms? no.
Top scientists? You mean like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Carlos Slim, Bernard Arnault, Larry Ellison, James Simons etc? With the exception of Simons these are all engineers, all in the top 5 richest people (Buffet is on #3, these are around him).
Anyway I also think that doing what you like is best tactics. Problem is how do you know what you like :).
From what I see the CEOs of big engineering companies do not much worse (actually from what I see sometimes a lot better) than CEOs of banks. I also think it's probably a lot more enjoyable to be a CEO of say Porsche than of DB.
The smartest friends of mine either go work for Google/Facebook/Twitter as group leaders or work in (algo) trading/ as quants.
I think, (the responses I've seen to some brainteasers recently certainly reinforces this), you don't need a lot of intelligence to be a banker - The work itself is mundane and repetitive, but requires a high stress threshold?
My friends in F1 or national defenc/se also get paid well and have really great exit options.
I think banking just has this prestige that many can't let go of (investment banker sounds sexier than turbine engineer at Rolls Royce).
the difference? anybody can sit at a desk for 12 hours a day and do 'banking' and 'finance', but it takes a wee bit more up top to be an engineer (financial, software, electircal, etc.)
"So than I'm thinking being a top manager in Google or Microsoft or Apple or Mercedes etc. probably pays as well if not better than being a manager in a bank."
No, they don't. Top SVPs at Google/Microsoft etc make about $500k including options + bonus. Base is around $250-300.. And keep in mind VP is a senior position in tech. The only way you might make real bank is to start a company, have been given tons of stock before a boom, or rise to C level.
I always did think this pay level was strange when you consider the earnings of the companies though.. Any ideas why?
Ullam quo esse consequatur. Esse nihil aut molestias molestiae. Dicta eaque et atque qui illo ducimus voluptatibus. Nihil repellendus accusantium rerum vel rerum in vel.
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...