| Topic Name: |
IB-S&T Compare Contrast |
| Message Name: |
an answer |
| Date Posted: |
04/21/2000 |
| In Reply To: |
Do you think that an analyst that has come out of the 2 year program from a capital markets group is at a disadvantage when compared to an analyst from an industry group, or M&A because they would not have had the modelling, and valuation experience?
Do you have any info on the SSB Debt Capital Markets group - execution only, the culture, competence? Thanks. |
| Message: |
The answer to your question is that it totally depends on what you want to do later. If you want to eventually be in an industry group or M&A, your prospects may not be as good as if you did M&A/corporate finance as an analyst. If you want to get into portfolio management, or something else that demands a better grasp of market data, capital markets would be better. Even still, mobility within banks is better than most people suggest. If you work at, say, MS, who has great capital markets groups, transferring to an industry group is not hard, since you work with those groups so often. As in anything, being good at what you do will open doors. I think people think that there is only one path to go to if you want to work in IB as a long-term career, but that isn't true.
Capital markets pays really well too, so I wouldn't worry about that. I mean, it's a Wall Street job for God's sake, let's not lose sight of that.
|
|
