| Topic Name: |
Which Has More Prestige? |
| Message Name: |
It's all about options. |
| Date Posted: |
05/24/2000 |
| In Reply To: |
Your advice would work if I could actually do what you said I should do. Problem is, I don't think that it is possible. You missed the problem.
If I do an S&T summer associate program, then it seems very unlikely that I will then even be ABLE to land a full time IB offer. If I don't like the trading floor after the summer and want to go to IB, I'm screwed.
I didn't think that the converse was true. I was of the opinion that it was possible to get a full time offer for S&T EVEN IF you spend your summer in the IBD.
If what you say is true "If you like S&T, then you won't like IBD, AND If you like IBD then you won't like S&T", then wouldn't it be better to do the summer associate position in IBD so as to leave both options as possibilities for full time employment?
Do I misunderstand the recruiting process, or does this make sense?
|
| Message: |
Yes, you understand the recruiting process. If you go into banking and don't like it you'll have a better shot of getting an S&T job than vice versa. That's because of the lifestyle difference. No one wants to hire a full-time banking associate that's never worked banking hours. That's not an issue on the S&T side. If you don't like your investment banking summer you'll also still have a good shot with consulting firms and corporations (the corporate side of corporate finance). But again, the equation doesn't work the other way.
I find it ironic that S&T people can't seem to value "real options". Investment banking includes a wealth of real options. S&T doesn't.
I also find it hard to believe that S&T people can't spot a trend...
|
|
