| Topic Name: |
PE vs IB |
| Message Name: |
PE |
| Date Posted: |
02/10/2006 |
| In Reply To: |
Hi! I'm choosing between a junior analyst position in a top-tier PE house (think KKR, Blackstone) vs an associate position in a top-tier IBD (think MS, GS). Personally see PE as my final goal. Reason that I'm struggling between the two options is that I don't have any previous experience in banking, not in DD, not in execution or anything to do with banking, and therefore IBD appears to give me a better platform to learn about the business before I start doing PE. Would really appreciate if anyone could advise on how I should think about the situation? Many thanks!
|
| Message: |
Keeping in mind your eventual goal, I would say that going straight to a top PE would be a smarter move. It is a lot harder to get a job in KKR at the associate level. They want to promote from within the firm (post MBA) or from other PEs. As a banking second year associate you will be competing with post-MBA PE associates who by that time will have a 2 year advantage. In the pre-MBA case, your MDs actually help you get a job in KKR by recommending you to the head hunter or to the PE directly. Do not count on such a welcoming attitude toward your PE aspirations when you hit your second year as an associate in banking, as they look at you as more of a long term asset.
As for you not being very familiar with the business, I would assume the factor was taken into account when your PE made you the offer. As for your potential banking stint, do not expect to have a tremendously useful experience.
Gluck
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
