All,
Can you please share your thougts on the Technology Sector (TMT) coverage groups at various IBD firms. Which TMT groups are the strongest today and which are the most promising? What are your thoughts on Tech long-term? Given the velocity at which tech companies grow...does the tech industry offer the best potential for IB fees long-term?
Thanks!
| +131 | Is my life over after not getting GS? | 32 | 2h | |
| +109 | BEING WHITEGIRL IS PARADISE | 20 | 53m | |
| +73 | Best IB group on the Street | 35 | 52m | |
| +65 | Thoughts and tips on how to speak like an investment banker. | 25 | 22h | |
| +58 | BIG FOUR ARE PARADISE | 15 | 21h | |
| +49 | Tell me one good reason why Jefferies isn’t going to be a top bank in the next 5 years | 23 | 14h | |
| +38 | UBS Outlook | 28 | 1d | |
| +35 | How to deal with egotistical team? | 6 | 3d | |
| +33 | Highest Paid Bankers in Toronto? | 51 | 19h | |
| +31 | Are you “less ambitious” for having long term goals outside of NYC | 13 | 4h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
bump - update?
I'm not going to try to answer the strength-prestige question - I think these discussions are inane at best. Besides, I might be a bit biased...
The only things I would say are: 1 - Way to bump an ancient thread 2 - Use search - this has been discussed at length 3 - Not all banks have TMT groups - some banks (MS/CS come to mind) separate Tech and Media/Telecom.
As for banks that have done big telecom/tech deals...GS and MS, Merrill-BOA, and then a lot of smaller but extremely successful deals have been done more and more by boutiques such as Qatalyst and Moelis
GS has the best TMT group. Lots of banks though split tech and M&T. What are you more interested in? For tech, top three are GS, MS, CS and then its basically everyone else.
GS, MS and CS are generally the top. Lehman formerly had a good media/comm.
Chase Us, Break In http://chasingconsultantsbreakingbankers.blogspot.com/
TMT is a second-tier group to be in. Most of the TMT offices for the BB banks (GS excluded) are in the west coast (SF,LA,etc). Tech and IB fees that the op mentioned are retarded. Most of the biggest fees have not Tech deals (ok TimeWarner-AOL was large). GS and MS have the top two spots in the league tables consistently in US Tech deals, all the others are spread out.
And TMT fees are hardly paltry. The Freescale & First Data deals each brought in well over $100MM in fees for the advisors/underwriters.
I don't know about you, but as a kid out of college, I'd rather work on 3-4 $500MM-$5BN deals than 1 $30-60BN deal.
As far as banks go, CS has consistently been #1 in # of deals and top 3 in volume ever since Quattrone built the group, and are #1 again this year after being the only bank on Sun-Oracle (nobody advised Oracle or IBM). Oh and that deal brought over $25MM of fees in, what a pittance.
As far as fees go, they are less than more mature industries, but the industry is consolidating fast. There's a reason Cisco was added to the Dow- tech is becoming a larger and larger portion of the economy. The industry is like 25 years old compared to 100+ for many others.
so how is UBS doing in tech?
how about bofa, citigroup and UBS
any decent exp?
UBS has a presence, but they're more in a 2nd tier with JPM and DB. BofA really has no presence at all; most of the Merrill guys have fled the ship and Merrill wasn't even a powerhouse in the industry to begin with. Citi still gets decent financing volume but for advisory they're towards the lower end of the BBs.
GS and MS are probably the best places to work, get involved with the most big deals. CS does a lot of 'upper middle' deals, in the $500MM-$5BN range, though they did get the Sun advisory. So you'd work on slightly less prestigious deals there, but # of deals going on is much higher.
I'm not sure what you are talking about in general. You claim there are alot of IPO's in Tech right now? Not sure what your sources are, but bloomberg and CapIQ do not agree with you. I do agree it is retarded to join a group based on transaction fees, but the bigger the deal the better.
I WOULD rather work on one $40B dollar deal than 4 $500MM dollar deal (still a decent size in this market). If you work on a $5B+ deal, everyone knows about it. You want to get a PE interview? Try putting 'lead analyst on Anheuser/Inbev deal ($60B)... Bottom line is: If you enjoy Tech then go to Tech, just be clear that it's sort of looked down upon. Also, tech gives you an opportunity to go work in LA, which is good if you want fake-tittied whores.
Now to your points. Well, I don't have BB or CapIQ handy, but according to IPOHome, out of 8 IPOs that have priced YTD, 5 of them are tech. Now, most of these are pretty small deals, but if you also consider the pretty strong M&A in tech (intel/wind today, ntap (or emc now?)/ddup couple weeks ago), that adds up IMO.
As far as the big deal vs. the little deals, I can't speak from experience here (starting SA stint in a couple weeks), but I would imagine that aside from recognition factors, the skill set for a $40B deal isn't dissimilar from that of a $1BN, or $500MM, deal. But if I'm wrong here, I do apologize. However, as you mentioned, if you enjoy Tech, the relevant experience, and more importantly, the networks on the buyside that you can establish, would give you a significant leg up into a tech-focused PE/HF role, if you so choose.
Oh, and by the way, tech groups tend to be in SF/bay area, not LA.
Of course, if your entire purpose is just to inflame, don't bother with anything written above...
Gomes knows what's up in the tech sector.
Anyone have first hand knowledge on how Qatalyst is doing? I love Quattrone..
Qatalyst just landed a big fish, getting involved on the NTAP/DDUP deal. $1.8BN deal would put them in good shape given the lean team they have. Frank, like Moelis, will get deals based on his contacts alone.
As far as doing the InBev deal, that's awesome if you get it, but there's like 40 analysts in our general industries group. Odds are you will not be the one working on that monster deal. Besides, in this day and age, there will be no mega-LBOs for the next several years, so deal experience in the $500-$2BN range will give you a good idea of what you'll see on the buy-side.
And in terms of name recognition, that's a really poor explanation for wanting to do a big deal. Maybe because monster deals can get more complex it's better, but I've seen plenty of deals under $5BN be far more complex than $50BN deals. And while the average person might have no clue what Wind River is or Data Domain, I guarantee you a PE shop will and consider that a quality deal.
As far as 'being looked down upon', that's nonsense. Goldman TMT is regularly seen as one of, if not the top group to go into (outside maybe SSG). PE shops like Silverlake, TPG, Blackstone, KKR, Providence Equity, etc. all make big investments in tech / media companies. So please, stop with the 'TMT is a 2nd-class group because it's on the west coast' nonsense.
I will completely ignore dacarez's comments, for he is totally clueless.
Onto Gomez's comments...
Sure, there are MANY more deals in the $500MM-$2B space than deals north of $10B. Some of those are pretty recognizable deals as well. The deal size does not indicate complexity. A $150MM chemicals,mining, or FIG deal is much more complex than a $1B consumer products deal. However...and this is true in any group at any IB...THE BIGGER THE DEAL, THE BETTER. Period. It is literally that simple.
If you have aspirations of going to a top PE Firm (Warburg, KKR, Carlyle, TPG, CVC), than try to get in a group at a bank that has large deals (if you have an option). Tech groups are located in SF/LA/SB area because thats where most of the tech companies reside...but as most people know PE firms, like the Wall St. experience. That is all.
Again, if you like Tech go to the Tech group. If you want better odds of getting into the top-tier PE firms, go to the groups that have the largest deals.
Back to work..
Not to mention shops like Bain, THLee, Providence Equity, etc. that are all some of the 20 biggest buyout shops in the world that operate in New England, where they will fly candidates in from anywhere- Chicago, SF, LA, you name it.
Sure, NYC is still the PE shop motherload, but SF and Boston have huge PE/VC presences, and if you go into tech you will have access to those jobs.
Funny that you bring up FIG, given that if there's any group that has a 'stigma' of being tougher to transition out of, it's that. Maybe not right now with all the deal activity thanks to a meltdown, but in general the unique valuation method and generally consolidated industry structure has led most people to believe (fairly or unfairly) that it's not the easiest transition to PE/HF/VC.
If you want to get into a top PE shop, the best way to do it is not even be in an industry group to begin with- go into LevFin/Sponsors/M&A/High Yield. Otherwise, for almost all the industry groups you have a decent shot at a very good shop, with plenty of sector-focused buyout shops if you want to stay in that industry.
Not to mention shops like Bain, THLee, Providence Equity, etc. that are all some of the 20 biggest buyout shops in the world that operate in New England, where they will fly candidates in from anywhere- Chicago, SF, LA, you name it.
Sure, NYC is still the PE shop motherload, but SF and Boston have huge PE/VC presences, and if you go into tech you will have access to those jobs.
Funny that you bring up FIG, given that if there's any group that has a 'stigma' of being tougher to transition out of, it's that. Maybe not right now with all the deal activity thanks to a meltdown, but in general the unique valuation method and generally consolidated industry structure has led most people to believe (fairly or unfairly) that it's not the easiest transition to PE/HF/VC.
If you want to get into a top PE shop, the best way to do it is not even be in an industry group to begin with- go into LevFin/Sponsors/M&A/High Yield. Otherwise, for almost all the industry groups you have a decent shot at a very good shop, with plenty of sector-focused buyout shops if you want to stay in that industry.
There have been a lot of new tech groups opening up on the west coast. Evercore opened up in SF a few years ago. Greenhill just set up shop in SF, Perella Weinberg in SF, and now Centerview in LA. How do you think these firms will fare given the dominance of bulge brackets that seem to do well in tech like GS, MS, CS, and niche players like Qatalyst and Union Square that only focus on tech?
There have only been 5 Tech IPO's in 2009, ML was sole lead underwriter for two of them, co-underwriter for 2 of the others (Rosetta Stone as Morgan Stanley, co-written by some smaller banks I believe, correct me if I'm wrong).
This was more than GS/MS/CS. However, underwriting isn't all that counts obviously - GS/MS/CS dominated M&A just from what I've followed on Bloom, though BOA-ML is still 3rd for completed M&A activity in Q1 2009.
So I'd say MS/GS are the best, then CS, then BOA-ML beneath that and of course other BB's aren't a bad choice (DB...). I'd take elite boutiques over all of these aside from GS, BS, if I could possibly rank them.
MS* not BS hahaha
Possimus est tempora sed rerum. Dolores aspernatur libero quo doloremque ipsam. Rem eaque qui vitae laudantium id illum.
Et quod maiores eos praesentium sed. Qui enim facilis ut et.
Dignissimos porro eius ratione. Assumenda aliquid animi occaecati hic et enim. Soluta eligendi quas repellat et.
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...
Odit voluptas fugit quae eveniet veniam eius. Ex quia vel nam odit. Hic suscipit eveniet facilis perferendis inventore. Nihil odit molestias voluptas rerum dignissimos. Enim quos similique qui minima. Aut neque laboriosam libero qui maxime minima voluptas.