As an incoming summer analyst, I'd appreciate some opinions on the differences between Goldman Sachs San Francisco, and Credit Suisse San Francisco. This discussion should only be concerned with the SF offices.
I'm looking for some distinction between the firms based on the following metrics:
- Prestige: I think I'll get an obvious answer here, but I want to remove this bias from the rest of the metrics.
- Compensation: Maybe in terms of Analyst base pay / bonus
- Domain Expertise: i.e. Have the people at the firm worked in industry / taken a technology related degree such as Engineering or Computer Science?
- Culture: Is the office laid-back? Intense? I'm familiar with GS's team-based culture, so I'd appreciate an answer that's catered to the SF offices.
- Deal Flow: Which firm is better for an analyst?
- Exit opportunities / optionality: PE/VC/Industry/Internal
- Any other interesting differences or metrics that could be used to evaluate the SF offices... location?
Also, please indicate what you are basing your opinion on.
Prestige: Credit Suisse, hands down. Comp: Competitive. Domain Expertise: Irrelevent. Completely. Culture: Very similar. Deal Flow: CS. Although GS is better than average. Exits: VC industry is dead. As an analyst expect zero opportunities, but you never know. PE exits exist for both, but somewhat limited overall. Industry? Sure corporate development, strategic planning, etc. Internal? Well you could always be the next Frank Quattrone.
Prestige: Hands down GS overall, I don't know what buyside is talking about - this isn't 1999 Comp: Same for both Domain Expertise: Who cares - totallly irrelevant Culture: Similar - I'd say that GS is a bit more team focused, lots of senior exposure at CS with Boutros etc. Deal Flow: GS is a continuous strong player in Tech, CS is hot now. I'd call it a wash. Exits: GS has better PE recruiting for west coast: Whatever bank you do will be fine for industry exits
I care--so I'll ask again: who has greater domain expertise?
i.e. For me this boils down to:
Which set of people (GS SF versus CS SF) can relate better to their clients in terms of understanding their company's underlying technology?
Which set of people (GS SF versus CS SF) have worked in the tech industry (and thus have contacts)?
Which set of people (GS SF versus CS SF) is more passionate about the underlying industry?
I'm trying to get a sense of the differences between the kinds of people who work for GS SF / CS SF.
Thanks.
?Boutros hasn't worked at CS for awhile
The Goldman name (after 2 years as analyst) will always carry more weight than CS. I don't think that CS will be the top Tech bank like it was back in 1999. The best that it will be is #2 after Goldman.
Goldman is the Gold Standard on Wall Street (check this past quarter's earnings) - the most prestigious investment bank I think hands down.
Heard of two analysts at GS in SF that landed $650K contracts for two years ($325 a year) with PE after 2 year stints at GS.
I agree that it's the gold standard, but then why does "the street" pay a P/E of roughly 22 for the industry and only 10 for GS?
wannabe, i'm no banker but other broker/dealers have similar p/es. look at lehman, bear, Morgan Stanley...
Not exactly sure what industry you're looking at, but GS competition has P/Es very much in line - around 10 - check bsc, leh, ms, mer.
GS SF is only good for TMT. If you get one of the other groups then you are better off at CS. MS M&A Tech is another great option. I personally think i woudl take M&A MS over GS TMT, but I'm a product guy and more interested in experiences than pure brand names. Plus no one ever looked down on a MS banker.
Goldman Tech vs. Credit Suisse IBD (Originally Posted: 12/25/2012)
Full-time offer from Goldman Sachs Tech Div in NYC, and interview with Credit Suisse IBD in Singapore. Both sound very exciting, but I am leaning towards CS. What do the monkeys on this site think? I am particularly interested to hear from people that have moved between divisions or between banks.
Considerations: - Grew up and lived in NYC — it is the financial capital of the world - Visited Singapore — it is growing fast, a new experience, and exciting - IBD is definitely more challenging and exciting than Tech - My background is tech-focused, but I am interested in finance - I know basic Chinese, which would be helpful in Singapore
Thoughts?
I know CS SF is predominantly Corp-Fin Tech, M&A Tech, and Healthcare. (Correct me if I'm wrong--this is what I've gathered from the recruiting process at my school.)
Also, some insight into how GS Tech / TMT is distributed between SF and NY would be helpful. How is GS structured in this sense?
Thanks.
CS IBD. I've also heard that the move from BO-FO at GS is especially hard.
Not sure about how good CS is in Singapore, but I would pick IBD anyway.
Pick IBD. Back office is a blackhole
The tech guys are incredibly smart people, so don't think it'll be an 'easier' route. I'd go with what you want to do in your life. Personally, IBD is super appealing so I'd pick that.
Two very different offers, go for the one you are most interested in. CS IBD will probably give you more mobility in the long run
Would do CS IBD in Singapore, myself. But admittedly would be apprehensive about being in an entirely new part of the world.
thanks guys
It all depends on what you wanna do. If you wanna do tech go for GS. If you wanna do IBD go with CS. I am unsure whether you actually have an offer from CS but if you do then it should be pretty clear based on career outlook.
Location shouldn't matter.
Pick which area you are interested in more. I like IBD so I would pick IBD. But don't feel pressured based on what strangers are telling you to like. On this site you will get everyone answering IBD because nobody wants to work for tech on this site.
they view Goldman as big hedge fund with other "consulting" services attached.....there was an article about this recently....it's the trading arm that generated big chunnk of profits last year, even though banking had great year as well.
I didnt even know GS had groups other than TMT in bay area.....Most of CS is tech as well (corporate finance, M&A)....they also have few people in healthcare
GS TMT sf vs CS tmt nyc (Originally Posted: 08/15/2013)
..
Probably Moelis LA
bump
I personally know people in GS SF TMT and can tell you that good analysts got offers/interviews with any PE shop they wanted (regardless of geography). If you're good in GS TMT, you'll be golden. Definitely can't say the same for CS. Also, I've never heard of a CS TMT deal.
Wouldn't SF be closer to tech co. for exits? Do you have some kind of aversion to living in/near Silicon Valley?
,,
if you're not going to see the city much in either group i would go with the better prestige - which in this case is the best group on the street. I would only go CS if you hated san fran and loved nyc.
...
Finance exit opps are better but you will be a tech guy. I could be wrong, and hopefully someone else speaks up, but the best tech funds are near Silicon valley, but that doesn't mean there aren't tech funds here you could work for as well. As for which group they would prefer I can't say. But I do know that it's 2013 and no fund is going to focus its search only on the east coast and preclude a GS SF guy. Sounds like you can't go wrong either way.
Out of curiosity how different is the money in each offer? Is this for next summer?
Sorry can't go wrong either way meaning between GS SF and GS NYC or GS SF and CS NYC? I don't have an offer to GS NYC to be clear.
Are these conversations for real? Pick one, are you really going to change your mind based on what a bunch of anonymous people on a forum say?
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/goldman-tmt-sf-vs-nyc
More informed people than me give some advice in the link above.
...
What's wrong with getting input from other people? Who says his decision will be solely based on the opinions here. What are you whining about anyway, if he wants to hear the opinion of anonymous people on a forum then why do you care?
I would do GS TMT over both JPM & CS but that is me cos I have a personal preference for tech. How is your group selection looking like at JPM ?? If its FS/M & A/Lev Fin and you have a preference for NYC than you should probably select based on the people you met at both places. If its another group at JPM I would go GS.
...
Just stay in NYC as you already know the people there, all your options pretty much set you up for solid exit ops
Fair point, I was being a douche.
Unless you hate San Francisco, GS TMT is the better bet.
Yes NYC has better rep however GS has significantly more rep than CS therefore you would go with GS.
Basically, by being at Goldman in SF is significantly more prestigious than CS in NYC. Also GS TMT specifically is known as an elite group, so overall from a career standpoint you should be running towards that GS offer.
(Note you'll be working like a dog for a couple years either way so preference on city should not weigh heavily on your choice, bite the bullet even if you hate SF - opinion)
Don't have any advice to give since I'm an undergrad myself - but wouldn't SF actually be the superior place to be for TMT (at least the tech side of it) over NYC? How does GS TMT in SF compare to the group in NYC?
.
...
PM me man
You guessed wrong.
I agree with Nouveau Richie.
I agree with State of Trance's agreeing with Nouveau Richie.
Still would choose GS TMT.
You have it flipped, tech banking is generally run out of SF offices. Ie: tech banking in SF would be more elite than tech banking in NYC.
Either way JPM is not a bad place to be congrats on all of the offers
I am not one to post frequently but I can't resist. Several of the viewpoints on this thread are off base.
With regard to TMT I-banking, here is the reality:
Finally, in my judgement it is a tremendous mistake to select JPM over GS. There isn't an associate/analyst in JPM TMT that wouldn't depart for GS in a heartbeat. I know this because I work for JPM.
I agree GS all the way especially if you are in a top group like TMT/FIG.
^ yep.
.
Lazard, they own San Fran.
Lazard definitely owns San Fran with their tech group competing for group of the year with Thomas Weisel Partners and Wachovia.
LOL!
is that realistic?
I know the GS TMT analysts two are going to SLP and unless they got some kick ass offer I didn't get a 650k contract is not in the cards.
GS Tech Principal Investing is probably the most desirable group an analyst could hope for in SF. Although the GS culture likes to take its pound of flesh and then some...
Thanks--is the culture really the same? I get the sense that CS SF is pretty laid-back. Is that a west-coast thing, or a CS thing?
CS LA and many groups at CS NY are intense as any bank out there
don't fuck around in SF
since you are quite knowledgable about tech banking in SF, what is the next best bank after the big 3 in terms of deal flow, culture, and people? I have friend trying to decide between Lehman, JPM, and UBS. Thanks.
If i had to choose from the three I'd go: UBS, Lehman, JPM
both firms care/are passionate about clients and have experience in industry.....understanind of company's technology? I doubt any banker cares much about that. You seem quite anal dude.
Dude, relax - no need to use that tone with a kid thats two years into banking when you are still just looking at summer options. To answer your question, think about the recruiting process, eng guys might be favoured a bit but generally they are looking for the smartest candidates. They both have a similar level of expertise which maxes out at guys having engineering undergrads (CS Tech loves Stanford Engineers). They don't tend to have too many execs jump over from Silicon Valley.
GS has Real Estate but they are new and kinda blow right now. Your old name suggested you were an eng guy, and by your new name I'm assuming you got an offer and are on some type of power high. So from a fit perspective either office will work for you. CS Tech I'd say is a bit more laid back, however, both are filled with all types of people. The guys I've met from CS Tech range from massive partiers to pimpled face guys who look like they just finished with puberty and would easily be considered dorks. Same type of range at GS. Really to be honest - both groups are really similar, GS just has better exits, CS has more senior bankers (ie Boutros).
Quae commodi architecto reiciendis et quia voluptatibus. Ea veritatis aliquam sit perferendis voluptas ullam.
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...
Omnis aut voluptatem qui eveniet autem. Temporibus ut officia rerum reiciendis quia veniam. Officiis veritatis distinctio rerum aspernatur numquam sequi ut animi.
In sit autem eius perspiciatis nulla facilis. Quo iure dolor labore id error ut dolor. Quibusdam assumenda aut at pariatur illo consequatur. Laboriosam vel est porro quibusdam velit eos quo. Sed commodi dolor porro deserunt sit repellat.
Deleniti facere aliquam minus alias nulla fugit qui ea. Rerum quasi vel dolor eos velit et. Ut voluptas voluptatem sed dolor porro. Dolorem occaecati qui perferendis assumenda dolorem iure. Est modi et culpa facilis amet. Ut qui voluptas eius laborum vero et est ut.
Et eligendi sapiente cumque delectus deleniti soluta hic quibusdam. Excepturi sint quia quasi autem. Vel eum est iure ullam rem reiciendis soluta. Saepe atque ex autem nihil itaque cupiditate. Suscipit quas quasi id quam dolor voluptates expedita. Et magnam provident quo eum aut.
Doloribus ut autem eligendi sit eaque nisi. Deserunt esse est quia voluptatem consequatur. Corporis nisi non nesciunt corporis quia aliquam debitis odio. Culpa maxime et voluptas alias qui. Possimus eum et veniam id autem eos eos. Ullam similique et voluptatem aut eum consectetur. Perferendis odit corrupti voluptatem atque nihil.
Commodi quia modi excepturi porro sunt. Unde eius ex qui dolorem. Vel esse delectus et voluptatem eveniet et. Non soluta voluptas vel deserunt. At quia eum amet voluptates similique sunt consectetur. Iusto id molestiae incidunt facilis blanditiis nulla velit. Non hic quia sit nisi.
Aut in quae qui unde. Culpa odit debitis dolore sunt qui quia. Ut ut aut fugit quaerat quae. Ducimus velit odit sit eos rerum recusandae debitis. Quia libero dolores sed qui impedit ex. Excepturi sed voluptas animi alias occaecati odit a. Perferendis voluptatibus necessitatibus repellat qui voluptatem molestiae.
Omnis eius sint eos quae est ut aliquam. Ipsa voluptas ut debitis sunt. Molestiae eos quasi aut blanditiis. Illum neque beatae omnis itaque voluptatem modi ea aperiam. Maxime quae dolores at et consequatur odit reprehenderit. Tempora facilis voluptatem eum porro est quisquam a.