Morgan Stanley vs. Rothschild - M&A

Apples and Oranges. Both great shops but as an analyst probably MS since their M&A desk is top notch

MS is a far better choice. Would take worst group of MS over best group of Rothschild.

Maybe you have a few argument supporting you thoughts?

Many people haven't even heard of Rothschild.

If you ever want to leave banking, it will be easier with the much more recognizable name (also easier for business school).

Also, since you are asking about M&A, MS is by far the best (even better than GS). Rothschild is nowhere near second (the only area where they are very strong is restructuring).

You might possibly be justified in going with a top boutique over MS (Laz, Ghl, Evercore, BX), but rothschild would be crazy unless you get into their restructuring group and are positive you want a career in restructuring.

Dont agree with everything CashCow said.

But, if its North America, I'd go with MS. If in Europe, I'd take Rothschild.

MS no doubt

Agree with Mezz, it depends which office.
North America => MS
UK => probably MS
Continental Europe => Rotschild

You'd be better positioned as a leader in the New World Order comming from Rothschild.

That is true. I hear that hours at MS M&A are absolutely brutal.

Travis PM me i worked at MS for 3 years.

Here are my thoughts.

1) Morgan Stanley has tremendous brand recognition and you WILL get a good experience. Even if you don't get a good experience, you're a crappy analyst, get shitty work, etc. headhunters will be jocking you non-stop. The worst analyst in my group went to Providence, which is a great shop. There are no asterisks associated with working at MS. Back when I was an analyst people would say I work at UBS (1) or I work at Credit Suisse (2) or Lehman. You work at MS you just fucking say you work at MS and people know what the fuck is up, no asterisks needed.

As for exit opps Morgan Stanley on your resume is going to push you light years ahead of Rothschild in PE/HF recruiting. All the major buyout firms hold special cocktail hours/dinners for GS/MS candidates (and some others), which gives you a HUGE leg up on recruiting. Alot of these firms ask for the white shoe candidates from the headhunters and backfill the spots with other banks later on in the process.

Note:
(1) in the Los Angeles office, which has Ken Moelis and all the DLJ guys.
(2) in FSG in NYC, I worked on that Apollo deal.
(3) in Retail, after they stole the team from Credit Suisse.

2) Someone pointed out that Rothschild is a stronger brand in the UK, I disagree. I think Rothschild's presence in the UK is 100x stronger than it is in the US. MS is a global brand with prestige associated with it wherever you are.

Yeah, i agree with the others here, Rothschild cannot be compared to MS. Not even close.

MS M&A >>> Rothschild in all of Europe, even in Frankfurt. No doubt, unless you'd go to a Banque Privée after your analyst stint.

I would not assume that the lifestyle at Rothschild is much better than at MS. Go for MS, unless came along better with the Rothschild people you talked to. But for all reasons other than culture, MS is the better choice.

i would definitely go with ms m&a - that group is probably one of the best groups on the street.

Morgan Stanley all the way

Rothschild is a very respectable firm these days. Something to be said about that.

Rotschild is definitely a nice firm, but Morgan Stanley M&A is the best on the street.
Just look at the 2009 YTD league tables guys (source: Thomson one banker)

Worldwide completed YTD
1. MS
2. GS
3. Citi
11. Rotschild

Of course, this table differs every year, but a gap of #1 vs. #11 is difficult to ignore.
Good luck with your choice.

Would you rather go to Yale or Middlebury?

Sent you a PM.

This comparison is yet another ridiculous show of prestige-obsession. Newsflash: Rothschild's banking business isn't built around league tables, it's built around 200+ years of stability.

MS is a fantastic firm, but this isn't a "no brainer" and the kid isn't stupid for asking.

lol stability? is that the best u got? so MS is gonna collapse soon huh?

^^ Agree with Fordham on this one haha - you don't pick Rothchild for stability ...

Does this really merit further explanation? No, MS won't collapse soon, although have we already forgotten that it almost did just over a year ago? This is something Rothschild et al have never had to worry about (along with press coverage, political pressure, populism, and oh yeah, its share price).

I certainly would not have wanted to be in the shoes of an MS -- or any other BB -- analyst 14 months ago.

Rothschild and other private firms have built businesses based purely on [centuries of] providing the best advice. MS and Goldman used to be similar -- in fact they made their names as private firms -- and then they threw in securities and started to take on risk.

In the end what matters is where you'll do best, and that's something that a league table won't tell you. Apparently a forum here doesn't provide much help either.

You can't go wrong with many IBD firms in general. But given your choice, go with MS M&A for the most broad range of exit opportunities.

I agree with xps900, it's not only about league tables.
But it's certainly one of the things you have to keep in mind when making your choice. If you will, it's like a GPA on a resume. Not the only thing to look at, but still very relevant.

What about Rothschild in Hong Kong? How are the deal flows there?