What is it with Americans and GS

Well, I just figure that the only people who would spend time on a banking board are those who are pretty set on banking or have a particularly strong interest in banking, and to those people, you really can't not say GS is pretty much their Everest.

I guess as a comparision, GS is like Manchestor United, sure you can play for another squad, but wouldn't you want to be a Red Devil?

Yeah, obviously it's hard to tell from a board, but it seems like quite a lot of ppl on here seem to think not getting GS but getting Lehman or whatever would be a semi failure. Footballers play one game, banks do lots of things, no comparison really, unless we're talking about the m&a "league" so to speak, in which case it is.

I would rather play for Barcelona. went to the Barca match last week actually.

all people from oxbridge/lse want to go to GS..

The GS people I know are too boring for words...

that's why you are not in GS

Well guess what student22, those ppl I know who I was talking about before, including myself, are oxbridge, so your blanket statements arent very good.

Well, what I want to point out is that everybody who seriously wants to do banking will choose GS if they get the chance...

at GS ibd offers are neveral general, you offered for particular group...

however you are right, if you are very keen on doing M&A execution product ibd then JPM/ms/Citi/ML/UBS might be better options...

GS intern offers are not group specific

"All summer analysts were hired into a general Investment Banking pool. Wherever possible, we tried to match the students' and groups' preferences."

Does GS do a lot of sponsors activity?

Oconnor, please don't think too poorly of us (although quite justified after seeing some previous posts). Those in the industry are not as enthralled by the GS name as this forum suggests. It's a fine firm in many areas with a nice marque, but the mindset of professionals here is closer to your experiences in London.

BTW, there is mild paranoia in NY about losing it's financial center status to London. Do you sense any schadenfreude from your side? People I know there have been very polite to date.

I'm serious about banking student22. I ended up picking the firm I worked for during the summer. However, it wasn't GS. Not everyone wants to work there. Not everyone has the same preferences as you.

I want to work for a large European bank because I want to work in Europe after a few years in NYC. GS does offer the same opportunities in places like Europe like my bank can.

Also, a lot of ppl pick banks based on there groups. I know I did. GS is very bad for my type of group.

Nothing is black and white when it comes to picking a bank or other decisions you may face in life. I thought the first thing they taught you in Uni was not to generalize groups of ppl...maybe you should get your college apps out of the way before you declare yourself a BSD.

Well the general feeling here is that NY has already lost out to London as the international financial centre and despite the recent moves in the states to address this, it's one of those stable door - bolting horses cases. Who's to know though, London has a lot of major issues, ie price of living.

The best investment bank in America is Goldman

Everyone in this forum wants to be in investment banking, so it is a dumb question to ask why they would want to work for the best.

Furthermore, investment banking is one of the very few industries that people want to get in ONLY for the short term. Therefore, exit opps are a HUGE determinant. The best exit opps are at GS, again b/c it is the best and therefore it has the perception of the best exposure (we could beat this to a pulp).

As a side note: If this forum was full of bankers currently in the industry (there are some, but not the vast majority) then you would get varying perspectives based on the weighted pros and cons of each firm.

actually GS IBD has been the least favorable choice in Hong Kong banking scene (even worse than Lehman HK). Unlike other banks base their operations in HK, GS sends all of the new mandarin speaker analysts and summers directly to Beijing, which is comparable to equities in Dallas in an Asian banking aspect. Not mentioning the lack of opportunities and absurdly high tax in PRC, the dearth of social life (its office is 30 minutes driving away from the city's entertainment center) and poisoning air polution would "add extra values" to the GS IBD experience.

Student22, I hope you get an offer from GS, I noticed you seem a bit worried about that.

You would not be placed in HK if you cannot speak Mandarin. GS Financing people also stay in HK. It is just for Mandarin speakers. Some GS Beijing people fight to stay in HK for half a year but they are officially "leased" as temps (rather than employees) from BJ office. Nevertheless GS is a top firm in Asia but it's just not good for personal development.

In London GS is highly regarded but barely more so, if at all, than MS and the rest. Oconnor is right, there is less of an obsession with the GS name. This may be related to the fact that analysts are direct promotes to associate.

Aspiring bankers are keen to join barcap, Lazard, and rothschilds as well, aside from the "BBs" often mentioned here.

This is probably best for another string, but I get the same sense here. Reputation has a way of realizing itself, so many have been very quiet about the drastic movement in the center of gravity until very recently. Once such vast amounts of money starts to move, it's difficult to stop the momentum, I suspect. The committee on capital market regulation probably hit the issues, but finance is just another issue (albeit important) in a country mired in many.

Maybe this is why so many in the US dealer community are trying to establish their reputations elsewhere. The innundation of publicity may be heard, but certain articles make US 'BBs' seem like loud, pretentious kids. Balance sheets and (long-term) direct funding relationships seem to be very important for transactions in Europe, and few US banks (let alone dealers) can play completely in these leagues from what I've heard.

It's probably healthy to note that GS wasn't much of a name a few decades ago according to old-timers. As some (seemingly well informed contributors) in even this forum suggest, some BBs may not exist as independent entities by the end of this decade. In any event, change is not uncommon in finance, either for firms or for countries.

Hurray for the 'equities in Dallas' reference!

Great post and great replies! This is definitely much more refreshing than the typical posts on this board.

American elitism or just Americans' psychological method of escaping from reality?

If this board is anything remotely representative of the "real world" investment banking community or even American mentality in general, I think we can make the following observations: (1) If you're not from a target school / Ivy League, your life is shit (2) If you don't work for GS/MS, you're shit (3) If you do anything less than investment banking, such as accounting, operations, consulting or any job that pays less than what they pay you in banking, you're shit. In other words, any world outside of banking is shit, and therefore anyone trapped in this outside world is shit by definition. (4) If you're not American, you're shit (5) If you don't wear brand XYZ at work, you're shit.

...and I can go on and on.

Perhaps its this form of American ignorance or outright stupidity against reality and what's going on the rest of the world, you're seeing this "brain drain" effect going on in America right now.

Time Magazine: "Are We Losing Our Edge?" http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1156575,00.html

Technologically and scientifically, America no longer leads the world --- perhaps its because all the great minds took the advice of their buddies in college and went to the much more "prestigious" route of investment banking in GS than shit careers like anything non-investment banking.

As discussed previously, America has started or is already losing its prominence as the world's financial center to London. Yes, you can crap all over this NYC "prestige" thing on me again and again, but perhaps it is exactly this ignorant "prestige" mentality of Wall Street Americans that led to this decline.

I'm not trying to argue that GS is a bad firm or anything. Everybody acknowledges that GS is a major financial powerhouse in the current capital markets. However, I do agree with what was discussed by the previous posters of this thread regarding American ignorance towards GS.

To the above poster: you quote Time, a more-often-than-not liberal mouthpiece, so you have already discredited your rant. Note that liberals, particularly white, American liberals, bear some massive cross that they carry on their shoulders everywhere they go, blaming themselves and everyone like them (solely in the form of "white" and "American") about the various demons of society, past and present.

Further, you state: "Perhaps its this form of American ignorance or outright stupidity against reality and what's going on the rest of the world, you're seeing this "brain drain" effect going on in America right now". I'd be careful about what you say, considering your name blatantly states that you're from Canada. I will gladly wager that I am less ignorant than you about "what's going on in the rest of the world". And as someone from Canada, you'd better pray the U.S. continues its dominance because it will be even farther away from home for you (and more difficult, at that) to get some meaningful future employment from a strong economy if the U.S. falls.

To the original poster, and I don't mean offense, but a mentality such as yours is a fine example as to why Europe (in general) and Britain (in this specific example) will never catch up to America, regardless of what these supposed experts at McKinsey spout. Your post indicates that there is a general lack of drive and desire to be "the best" or "at the best." Glorification of mediocrity (a disturbing phenomenon occuring on this side of the pond as well) combined with fewer opportunities (sorry, America still is the friendliest place towards entrepreneurship) will enable Europe to continue slipping further into the chains of "second-rate."

I agree, the utterly obsessive behavior and rants by some people here do sound moronic and could warrant some of your words. I would further caution against you making statements as indications of American "ignorance."

Lastly, I would note that the vast majority of the people posting here are college kids (why do you think the serious questions have only a handful of posts while ones about fashion and seeking opinions have dozens?) who may not even be at an investment bank in a year's time. Also, the anonymity afforded to everyone on this message board enables people to make retarded statements with very little repurcussions, and so you should naturally expect to get many opinions at various extremes.

Hope this brings some clarity to the discussion.

I dont mean to COMPLETELY change the subject - but I must retort.

Wall Street is still (and will continue to be in the foreseeable future) the undisputed heavy weight financial center.

The trend lately is for a lot of shady companies to register in London so they don't have to comply with the expensive requirements of Sarbanes.

These companies fill one of two roles: 1) They think that the whopping $1-3M per year is greater than the potential to draw the bottomless American pockets (not a very lucrative investment in my opinion).
2) They have something to hide (again not a good investment).

Just because these companies are registering in London does not mean capital will follow. I think we can expect the lax securities regulations in London to cause a plethora of corporate malfeasance (think 2001/2002 in the US) that will end the "move to London" debate.

Think of the US capital markets as the US Marines. The Marines are notorious for having the most stringent and grueling basic training (like the US securities regulations have most stringent reporting requirements). Despite this, the Marines have no problem whatsoever fulfilling its recruitment requirements. In fact, they recruit substantially more than the presumptively 'weaker' air-force/navy/army. Why? B/c people want the best of the best. This is why investors money will always be in American exchanges and also the answer to why Americans prefer GS.

Its biological human nature rooted in sexual procreation. Men desire the hottest chicks b/c we have a biological craving to spread our seed with a mate that will yield attractive offspring to. We want to work for the best companies and drive the best cars (best suits etc) as a mating ritual, like the peacock waving his feathers, we too like to wave our Business cards and brand names.

I stumbled around a bit but I think I made some good points. Now back to this model...(kinda hard to stay focused at 11:45)

Agreed with the above. Good point about the companies registering in London - sketchy firms from Russia, China, India, Uganda etc., looking to feed off "Western Guilt" into buying their shitty IPOs. I'm not sure how much I would trust buying into microcap from Russia...

Last summer, I worked in a firm that dealt with a lot of smaller companies in the tech and healthcare space. It seems most of these companies wanted to list on the Nasdaq, but when they found out about the requirements, and how much it would cost them in a year, they opted to go public on the AIM (one of the London markets). However, the CEO of said company was still set on listing on the Nasdaq in 1-2 years. Any of the mid-market (large for our space) companies we dealt with never even considered listing in London.

From what I saw over the summer, I can see Bananalyst's point. I would be interested in seeing how many of the companies that initially list on London exchanges (AIM, etc) eventually choose to move to the American exchanges or co-list with a US exchange as the primary one, after a couple of years when they are more financially stable.

By the way, I never realized how easy data-gathering is for US companies because of all the SEC reporting requirements. Having to get data for some of the smaller companies listed in London sucked.

I quoted Time Magazine because that was a recent article that I'd read. Regardless of the reference source, I'm sure you can find a lot more information on this brain drain problem in other sources you find "more credible".

And, also, who said that being Canadian means I have to work in Canada?

people who really want to win and who are really competitive usually want to be GS and care for prestige..

Coming from someone who's worked in Australia and HK, I agree with OConnor that neither GS nor any other bank is really singled out and hyped up so much. Nothing like the way in which GS is hyped up on this forum.

Maybe it's just an American thing. Or maybe it's just a university thing; people who have not had a day's experience in the industry. In any case, those people who couldn't shut up about GS probably plan to stay in US and have never considered there's a world outside. That's all good.

But I think there's also a lot of people on this forum, like me, who are not in the slightest interested in going to NYC or anywhere in US. Many parts of Asia and EU will be bigger and stronger than ever, and even if America continues to be the best, I'm content with what can be achieved in Asia. Anyway, I wanted to say that working at GS means the same as working in UBS, JPM, MS etc for me.

i spoke to people from MS, JPM, ML, UBS etc (varying from analysts to vp's ) and I noticed they were very enthousiastic when i told them about GS , how do you explain this?

explain what

Explanation is you're in America. See previous post. Alternative explanation is you're imagining things (which is more likely).

i spoke to people at other banks in US, London, Hong KOng... most of them were impressed by the name of GS...

what did they think of lehman or ms?

i think they think all top 10 banks are equally good but GS is the best

student22 why are you such a GS troll? All your posts seem to involve you getting off on the amazing GS name.

I personally think the GS obsession is more evident on the boards than in the real world. I mean I worked in PE in a smaller firm last summer, and they made it seem as though any job w/ a BB in IBD is impressive. Also I mean among college kids, getting an IBD internship at any banks is hard to do and definitely to be considered an accomplish whether it's GS or not.

What do you mean, everyone you spoke to was impressed by GS' name? No one working 100 hours a week is gonna give a shit the minute difference between GS and any other BB. Granted they're #1 in the industry, but that does not put them head and shoulders above the rest of the banks. Stop creaming yourself over the name -- I know a kid just like you and it annoys the hell out of me. If you can get into GS, congrats, but chances are you won't. Getting into any BB is an impressive feat given the demand for these jobs.

Oconnor, you helped prove my point with your answer. Without going into specifics about groups or any other details, GS is, arguably, the top back out there on an overall basis (not the best in everything, however). Now, you joined your bank because "they are the best in the business that you want to be in." Personally, I think that gives you the ideal set up - you're doing what you want to do at the best place for it. All things considered, you're doing better than most out there.

Most people here just know they want to do banking but don't know which specific aspect and so they drool over Goldman, simply because it is the top banking house out there, overall.

BBs in general are difficult to get into and those who do should be proud of their achievement.

student22,

You're comments on GS are outright childish. Let me recap what you said:

"all people from oxbridge/lse want to go to GS.."

"Well, what I want to point out is that everybody who seriously wants to do banking will choose GS if they get the chance..."

" i spoke to people at other banks in US, London, Hong KOng...most of them were impressed by the name of GS..."

"think they think all top 10 banks are equally good but gs is the best"

It sounds to me that you haven't even worked in the industry for a single day. Your nickname "student22" isn't adding any conviction to your arguments and yet you're just throwing this GS is God crap around.

If you've worked in the industry, you'll know outright that what you tell amongst your working friends is a lot different than what you tell prospective job seekers (also known as students). Do you really think the working people would go through the details and hassle of explaining to you the strengths and weaknesses of each bank and of GS? They'll just tell you some generally accepted answer, and in your case, GS, and want you to bugger off. The fact that you believe 120% into what other people tell you and not do more thinking or research on your part suggests shallowness.

Look -- nobody is disputing that GS is a very good firm. But if every single investment banking professional agrees that GS is the best firm in the whole wide universe, why would anybody be working for any non-GS firm at all? Think of it this way --- why is Stan O'Neal of Merill Lynch, Phillip Purcell of Morgan Stanley, etc, are still working for their respective firms and not banging their heads at headhunters' offices for a transfer to GS?

Just observing by the responses from this thread, I'm very amazed by the good level of critical thinking and logic from the European posters and posters of other geographic areas.