| Topic Name: |
this site sucks |
| Message Name: |
site still sucks |
| Date Posted: |
01/31/2000 |
| In Reply To: |
Well, this site started off for MBA students and it has grown its content faster than its viewers...
I am in the buyside at one of the 10 largest asset managers in the world. I'll answer two of your questions:
# 4 - every firm I spoke with will hire a strong candidate. If you are not a strong candidate work on fixing that first. Of the top 10 AM firms, every one hires both undergraduate and MBA students, as well as experienced hires every single year.
Compensation - this is a pay-for-performance business. Compensation at my firm varies 9-1 between the top and bottom associates in years 2-6. Top PMs can make $20m. Hedge fund managers a lot more.
# 5 - depending on your skill level - why not just submit your resume to the hiring or recruiting manager at the different firms. Most of the firms I looked at had a resume contact person listed on their website. |
| Message: |
ah, mba's....so naive, yet so sure of themselves.
#4 and what makes a strong candidate?
It could be anything - it varies immensely from firm to firm and from position to position. Unless you know what position they're looking for, you cannot know whether you're a strong candidate or not.
MBA students apparently have some difficulty with this concept (probably because they're all the same and are gunning for the same jobs - which are jobs designed for MBA's without knowledge or experience). Those of us who are unfortunately forced to function in the real world (where there aren't hordes of employers chasing us around) are well aware of this.
Let me put it in a simple way for the students here to understand - I'm a technology equity analyst. It's a hot field, but I work at an obscure firm. I don't have an MBA at the moment. I'm a strong candidate for some positions and firms but many firms will not consider me - they may have all the tech analysts they need (they're not cheap), or dislike people without MBAs or not like that I worked at an obscure firm or dislike that I have experience (many firms hire only inexperienced people). Other firms dislike MBAs and maybe need some tech analysts or don't mind my current firm's obscurity.
There's also an assumption that firms will make a space for you if you're good. Not true. Most firms operate on a strict budget and new openings are approved well in advance by senior management. In many cases, it doesn't matter whether you're good or bad, if they haven't cleared a requisition at the beginning of the fiscal year, it's not going to happen.
Compensation - I didn't ask for some theoretical numbers. I said we need to discuss the actual levels for real specific jobs - ie. "Fleecem, MentalCase & Arrogant Funds is looking for an analyst covering butter, gravy and biscuits and they think they can get somebody for $2.00/yr." That's what I'm talking about.
#5 - I don't like to waste my time so the community college dropouts in HR can look at my resume and decide whether they should pass it along or circular file it. They don't know what an analyst is, much less be able to determine my worth (or anybody else's). People in this business don't hire through HR, they do it themselves (or they're fools). The essence of this board is networking - or it should be - and the point of networking is to give people real contacts to avoid the black hole of HR. That's how it's done in the real world.
Of course, if we want to play only in the magical sandbox of graduate schools, then we can do so. But experienced people like myself aren't going to want to come here to listen to students make lists on "the top ten firms for cat litter" or some such.
Besides, don't some of us maybe someday either want to or have to work at firms that don't have monstrous websites or "recruiting coordinators"? Or maybe aren't always hiring?
|
|
