What degree's do employers prefer

[Jack o'Clubs]

One of the reason why the British Empire declined is essentially because of snotty snobs name calling brilliant engineers - working class labourers. Studying the arts, music and latin were considered virtuous at places like Oxford and Cambridge. Engineering was considered a cinderella discipline. In fact the upper classes considered any work that was done using their hands to be a working class activity. So they all stood around with chins up in the air...

...Blah, blah, blah

Reg: They've bled us white, the *******s. They've taken everything we had, and not just from us, from our fathers, and from our fathers' fathers. Loretta: And from our fathers' fathers' fathers. Reg: Yeah. Loretta: And from our fathers' fathers' fathers' fathers. Reg: Yeah. All right, Stan. Don't labour the point. And what have they ever given us in return?! Xerxes: The aqueduct? Reg: What? Xerxes: The aqueduct. Reg: Oh. Yeah, yeah. They did give us that. Uh, that's true. Yeah. Commando 3: And the sanitation. Loretta: Oh, yeah, the sanitation, Reg. Remember what the city used to be like? Reg: Yeah. All right. I'll grant you the aqueduct and the sanitation are two things that the Romans have done. Matthias: And the roads. Reg: Well, yeah. Obviously the roads. I mean, the roads go without saying, don't they? But apart from the sanitation, the aqueduct, and the roads-- Commando: Irrigation. Xerxes: Medicine. Commandos: Huh? Heh? Huh... Commando 2: Education. Commandos: Ohh... Reg: Yeah, yeah. All right. Fair enough. Commando 1: And the wine. Commandos: Oh, yes. Yeah... Francis: Yeah. Yeah, that's something we'd really miss, Reg, if the Romans left. Huh. Commando: Public baths. Loretta: And it's safe to walk in the streets at night now, Reg. Francis: Yeah, they certainly know how to keep order. Let's face it. They're the only ones who could in a place like this. Commandos: Hehh, heh. Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh. Reg: But apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us? Xerxes: Brought peace? Reg: Oh, peace? Shut up!

 

[Crap Buddist]

And the single currency,

What?

Yeah , The Libra ( Pound). Traded across the whole of Europe & North Africa.

 

[Atilla]

Hi Atilla,

Snob comes from Latin: Sine nobilitate=without nobility.

Indeed, a snob is a social disease.

J

That makes perfect sense Jacinto.

In fact I was thinking and due respect to them students from Oxford and Cambridge equally may well be outstanding characters with great minds. I'm not knocking the well educated smart guys out there from all walks of life and backgrounds.

However, a noble person with good character wouldn't claim to be a snob and trade on where one has been but rather who one is. Otherwise he'd be no different to a chav.

Snob is equivalent to a Chav really.

Coming back to trading I was going to say the housing figures from the states is causing me to re-evaluate my EURUSD position. It looks like interest rates may well rise in the US and Europe but in which order? The downward slide may well continue a little longer.

Have a great weekend.

 

[Jack o'Clubs]

I don't know where all this stuff about snobbery has come from. The thread is about which degrees and which universities might be best for a career in trading for an institution.

If at one end of the scale we have a degree in Customer Care from Thames Valley University (yes, there is such a thing), and at the other we have, say, Physics and Philosophy at Oxford, a line has to be drawn by an investment bank wishing to hire graduates. Now this line will be drawn according to supply and demand, and given where those dynamics are at any particular time, it's clearly going to be drawn a lot nearer the Oxford end than the Thames Valley end. Surely the fact that you consider yourself to be bright, got a good degree from a reasonable university, wanted to get a job in the City and had to plump for IT instead, just proves the point? It's not snobbism. Few of the institutions are British anyway - Deutsche Bank, Goldmans, all have the same policy.

The only problem I can see from your having worked at McDonalds is that some particularly large fries fell onto your shoulder, and have stayed there since. Just relax - no one's having a go

 

[Atilla]

I don't know where all this stuff about snobbery has come from. The thread is about which degrees and which universities might be best for a career in trading for an institution.

If at one end of the scale we have a degree in Customer Care from Thames Valley University (yes, there is such a thing), and at the other we have, say, Physics and Philosophy at Oxford, a line has to be drawn by an investment bank wishing to hire graduates. Now this line will be drawn according to supply and demand, and given where those dynamics are at any particular time, it's clearly going to be drawn a lot nearer the Oxford end than the Thames Valley end. Surely the fact that you consider yourself to be bright, got a good degree from a reasonable university, wanted to get a job in the City and had to plump for IT instead, just proves the point? It's not snobbism. Few of the institutions are British anyway - Deutsche Bank, Goldmans, all have the same policy.

The only problem I can see from your having worked at McDonalds is that some particularly large fries fell onto your shoulder, and have stayed there since. Just relax - no one's having a go

You sad dumb ass plonker

 

[Jack o'Clubs]

You sad dumb ass plonker

Thanks for the enlightened reply.

Let me ask you a question. Imagine you're head of HR at Merrill Lynch in the Europe HQ, London. You have an annual graduate intake of 50, 15-20 of which are supplied via the US grad scheme and you know will be the best of the best. Your job is to find another 30 individuals across the whole of Europe who need i) to compare to the Yanks, so you don't cause the bank to become more US centric in London than it already is; and ii) to ably fill the vacancies across the bank. You need academic excellence, combined with the aggression and ambition that are needed to thrive in the environment. You have limited resources. How do you fulfil your brief?

 

[Atilla]

Thanks for the enlightened reply.

Let me ask you a question. Imagine you're head of HR at Merrill Lynch in the Europe HQ, London. You have an annual graduate intake of 50, 15-20 of which are supplied via the US grad scheme and you know will be the best of the best.

Your job is to find another 30 individuals across the whole of Europe who need
i) to compare to the Yanks, so you don't cause the bank to become more US centric in London than it already is; and
ii) to ably fill the vacancies across the bank. You need academic excellence, combined with the aggression and ambition that are needed to thrive in the environment.

You have limited resources. How do you fulfil your brief?

Hi Jack o'Clubs,

Now we got rid of the fries I'm happy to give my point of view to an interesting question.

To me the answer is in the question. Diversity... I would definitely be interested in the candidate from a different background to that of Eton, Oxford or Cambridge. In particular a person from a poor background. This point would reflect the drive of the person to achieve objectives under stringent conditions IMO.

I would look at their interests as a way of looking into their psychie. Participants of football, rugby and team games would be preferred to those who play say tennis or chess lets say. Body language, presentation, tone of voice and communication factores would all be equally important considerations. I would prefer somebody who has done the Duke of Edinburgh's award scheme to one who has not. Personality, character and different perspective I would value more than an android who has been through the normal run of privileged up bringing with no personality or any other interests.

Grades would be worth looking at but not a determining factor. Obviously straight 1s be looked into but would not guarantee a position.

From personal experience at companies I have worked for like Marsh&McLennan, Credit Suisse, Lloyd's of London and Cazenove I have come across a number of individuals in my life time from various walks of life. In all honesty I have never considered anyone based on their breed or class but more on how they conduct them selves and interact with other beings.

I have experienced some really rude brokers/traders and some really down to earth fantastic ultra rich people. I’ve heard some of the horrible ones get to smash keyboards and throw monitors off desks (true story ) - talk about throwing ones toys out of the pram ) and hurl rubbish at innocent colleagues. These people need a good smack in the mouth with their P45s but hey they make money to the firm so lets keep them is the HR approach.

The ultra rich people will take time and talk to you give you tips and some are really laid back. The arrogant conceited ones who are highly stressed will ignore you as if you weren't there. Perhaps they have too many things on their minds but you know the journey of life is about the view not about the destination.

The graduates I have met, spent time with and sat next to didn't know what they wanted or what they were doing but simply going through the banks graduate training scheme. I got the impression they were loafers trying to determine which departmental line they like to take their career down rather than being driven to a desired pre-determined goal. I didn’t see anyone who was outstanding. I wouldn’t say this was a bad thing either as life is all about making choices and hopefully doing what is right and good for one self. They were given plenty time and training to learn at great cost. Most people don’t get this chance.

I have also come across some people employed because their rich daddy has an account with the bank or provides business to the bank and so the bank gives a cushy position to their clients son. HR has no role.

These graduates from privileged backgrounds with good academic grades get the best resources and training at these big companies. I would say pick the right character with correct temperament you can mould any young fresh mind to what ever you want with the correct rewards. Privileged background or fancy school names play no part IMO.

On an objective note perhaps based on my roots and upbringing I have prejudice as some one else favouring an Eton background. I’d like to think not perhaps that’s the problem we all favour what we are familiar with and shun what is alian.

In conclusion to your question, I would get two mentors to watch and assist these new graduates. After six months I’d get Alan Sugar (another hero of mine) to enlighten them.

I’d be interested to hear your views on how you would fulfill this brief too.

Regards,

 

[jacinto]

a friend of mine at DKB would have a maxim when hiring: No Oxbridge, no tall dudes.
he was clearly not from that background, and he was not tall. :cheesy:

I think you need an open mind to hire, but depending on the level.

Graduates, obvioulsy, you will hire based on the credential you posess. i.e. schooling. Probably not fair, but easy for the narrow-minded junior HR guy doing it.

The interesting part is with MBAs. They always did show a clear preference for army guys. The best part, was that Oxbridge was not an issue. Some came from that background, but not all, and certainly not the majority. And in this case, it wasnt DKB only, also GS, MS and ML.

j

 

[tomhunter]

I've just reread the post taking in other people's comments and seen a host of errors:

- incorrect apostrophe
- courier instead of career
- Buisness instead of Business
- ellegiable instead of eligible
- prestigous instead of prestigious

It might seem we're nit-picking and admittedly some errors might be typos but take heed of Mr Charts' post. If I received an application full of errors it'd go straight in the bin.

Good luck.

Lol taken into consideration, but i wrote that really quickly as my laptop battery was running out. I got 2x A* at GCSE english and if you go to www.pokerbobby.com I wrote the sales copy.

Thank You

 

[PualoP]

For those that work in the city I'm sure you're familialr with the fraise "oxbridge gets you in, but it doesn't get you on". If you're a yank then this is the same MBA syndrome down at the CBOT/NYMEX

There's the old story of the 2nd year associate fixed income trader at Barclays who'd had a run of bad luck running his book and went mental on the trading floor and shouted "for f?*ks sake, I went to Cambridge, why the f*?k can't I make any money?"

His VP shouted out "| don't know but I went to Manchester Metrolpolitan and your fired!!"

 

[PualoP]

Back to the original posters questions, you can't go far wrong with the ISMA course at Reading or what ever it's called nowadays. It, along with City University is one of the few courses that is actually taught by city practitioners so there are is a good network to infiltrate and get your foot in the door. Remember that once your in it's all about the money. No one could give a f*@k what uni you came from as long as you're pulling in the money.

The one thing I often find funny about all these posts is that you think that once you get into an IB it's all plain sailing. You don't understand that the whole 'Elitist ranking' starts again when you get a job in the City. Regardless of what Uni you went too, if you end up working at Duestsche Bank or Dresdnre or one of the other bucket shop IBs', people will look down down on you when you hit the beers down at Schmolensky's and god forbid you take a job at LLoyds Treasury/Investment. Say you both did the same degree at Oxford but one of you ended up at GS and the other at DB, It's the same as a guy at Oxford Uni shunning another guy for going to a former poly.

The even funnier thing is that the Hedge fund guys will just sh@t on any one since all the IB guys, regardless of if you're GS, BNP or (unfortunately DB), are on their knees to these guys.

Welcome to the city. It's all about the £££ and nothing else !! xxx

 

[Atilla]

Back to the original posters questions, you can't go far wrong with the ISMA course at Reading or what ever it's called nowadays. It, along with City University is one of the few courses that is actually taught by city practitioners so there are is a good network to infiltrate and get your foot in the door. Remember that once your in it's all about the money. No one could give a f*@k what uni you came from as long as you're pulling in the money.

The one thing I often find funny about all these posts is that you think that once you get into an IB it's all plain sailing. You don't understand that the whole 'Elitist ranking' starts again when you get a job in the City. Regardless of what Uni you went too, if you end up working at Duestsche Bank or Dresdnre or one of the other bucket shop IBs', people will look down down on you when you hit the beers down at Schmolensky's and god forbid you take a job at LLoyds Treasury/Investment. Say you both did the same degree at Oxford but one of you ended up at GS and the other at DB, It's the same as a guy at Oxford Uni shunning another guy for going to a former poly.

The even funnier thing is that the Hedge fund guys will just sh@t on any one since all the IB guys, regardless of if you're GS, BNP or (unfortunately DB), are on their knees to these guys.

Welcome to the city. It's all about the £££ and nothing else !! xxx

Very true and very well put.

I think the point Jacko is making is the selection process that sets the graduates up as coming from the few named institutions as to opposed to the merits or profile of a candidate.

 

[Jack o'Clubs]

I would definitely be interested in the candidate from a different background to that of Eton, Oxford or Cambridge.

I think there's a misunderstanding here. I agree on Eton. Money and background get you into Eton. Ability gets you into Oxford or Cambridge. My wife went to a social priority comprehensive several decades ago and got into Oxford.

I’d be interested to hear your views on how you would fulfill this brief too.

You get something like 300 applications for each graduate vacancy. Given the scenario I set up earlier the bank might be looking at a 'quota' of about 15 grads from British universities. For that, the couple of people looking after grad recruitment are going to have 4,500 applications on their desk from the UK alone. You have to have a systematic and realistic way of filtering them, since you need to reduce that 4,500 down to about 100 pretty quickly before you can think about interviewing.

So first, I'd set mandatory criteria. For me, this would be a 2:1 or better from one of the top twelve universities as per the Times University League Tables. I'd then assess on a points score. Bonus points for i) a state/comprehensive secondary background; ii) 'hard' subjects; iii) a 'hinterland', ie serious achievement in sport, arts or similar, etc. This would then give me a relatively objective ranking from which I could take the top 100 through to the next stage. I agree in principal with all the egalitarian stuff you've written, but in practice you need a quick way of getting through the mountain of cv's and application forms on your desk. You can't assess every one out of 4,500 to make subjective judgements about how they've triumphed over adversity. If your two HR people each got through a 100 forms a day, that would be more than a month of just looking at cv's!

Alternatively you could always adopt the strategy of the old joke: divide the pile of applications neatly into two. Put one pile in the bin. After all, you wouldn't want to hire anyone who was unucky :cheesy: .

Also bear in mind this is just for grad recruitment. Grads are 'cannon fodder' to a large extent and I'm pleased that my route into an IB was from a very different direction. The early years are miserable IMO, you're treated like crap. That's also my point - there are lots of ways into the City for people with the determination to do it, it's not all over if you don't get in as a grad. In my (front office but not trading) role, there were only a handful of the team that had worked in an IB from their graduate days - most had come in with other experience. Granted this is less likely among traders.

 

[Atilla]

I think there's a misunderstanding here. I agree on Eton. Money and background get you into Eton. Ability gets you into Oxford or Cambridge. My wife went to a social priority comprehensive several decades ago and got into Oxford.


You get something like 300 applications for each graduate vacancy. Given the scenario I set up earlier the bank might be looking at a 'quota' of about 15 grads from British universities. For that, the couple of people looking after grad recruitment are going to have 4,500 applications on their desk from the UK alone. You have to have a systematic and realistic way of filtering them, since you need to reduce that 4,500 down to about 100 pretty quickly before you can think about interviewing.

So first, I'd set mandatory criteria. For me, this would be a 2:1 or better from one of the top twelve universities as per the Times University League Tables. I'd then assess on a points score. Bonus points for i) a state/comprehensive secondary background; ii) 'hard' subjects; iii) a 'hinterland', ie serious achievement in sport, arts or similar, etc. This would then give me a relatively objective ranking from which I could take the top 100 through to the next stage. I agree in principal with all the egalitarian stuff you've written, but in practice you need a quick way of getting through the mountain of cv's and application forms on your desk. You can't assess every one out of 4,500 to make subjective judgements about how they've triumphed over adversity. If your two HR people each got through a 100 forms a day, that would be more than a month of just looking at cv's!

Also bear in mind this is just for grad recruitment. Grads are 'cannon fodder' to a large extent and I'm pleased that my route into an IB was from a very different direction. The early years are miserable IMO, you're treated like crap. That's also my point - there are lots of ways into the City for people with the determination to do it, it's not all over if you don't get in as a grad.

Jack o'Clubs, I agree with most of what you say but differ on the criteria - 2:1 from the top twelve universities as determined by Times League tables. There are I think 40 plus universities in the UK not to mention the excellent vocation based Polytechnics/Universities. This is bad practice IMO. In fact this whole idea about Governments league tables is all a big fiasco creating exclusivity which really isn't there. People who think like this or favour this selection process in whitling down the CVs are being devisive and non-productive. The shchool and your environment is a great facilitator to achievement but the process rests with parents. This is why Asians are over achievers as there parental bond seems to be so much stronger than the Western peoples.

In my experience a lot of time and effort goes into searching for the right candidate. Sorting the CVs is shared out and further jointly discussed by a number of people not one. The departmental heads also get to see the CVs. Usually pyschometric and banks own tests are also conducted on profiling candidtates. The multiple interview selection process is only the last phase where there may be 100 to 50 what ever the HR can manage. However, having come into contact with many HR departments having sat and had lunch with them as you do, the topic of selecting personnel based on school or background has never come up in all honesty. It's usually what they were like and whether they are speaking the truth and if they would fit in and perform.

Returning to the original question, you make no mention of subjects studied. I would like to see someone who says they want to go into IB to display interest and at least show they have thought about their career and picked the relevant courses like economics for starters and then maths, economitrics and accounting rather than show me 2:1 on the history of art from one of the 12 top universities.

I don't think and I sincerely hope they don't restrict their intakes to some top listed universities. When I get back to work next week I'll enquire of our HR department (not in the city but a FTSE100 co.,) what they are and let you know.

 

[hasse]

Jack o'Clubs, I agree with most of what you say but differ on the criteria - 2:1 from the top twelve universities as determined by Times League tables. There are I think 40 plus universities in the UK not to mention the excellent vocation based Polytechnics/Universities. This is bad practice IMO. In fact this whole idea about Governments league tables is all a big fiasco creating exclusivity which really isn't there. People who think like this or favour this selection process in whitling down the CVs are being devisive and non-productive. The shchool and your environment is a great facilitator to achievement but the process rests with parents. This is why Asians are over achievers as there parental bond seems to be so much stronger than the Western peoples.

In my experience a lot of time and effort goes into searching for the right candidate. Sorting the CVs is shared out and further jointly discussed by a number of people not one. The departmental heads also get to see the CVs. Usually pyschometric and banks own tests are also conducted on profiling candidtates. The multiple interview selection process is only the last phase where there may be 100 to 50 what ever the HR can manage. However, having come into contact with many HR departments having sat and had lunch with them as you do, the topic of selecting personnel based on school or background has never come up in all honesty. It's usually what they were like and whether they are speaking the truth and if they would fit in and perform.

Returning to the original question, you make no mention of subjects studied. I would like to see someone who says they want to go into IB to display interest and at least show they have thought about their career and picked the relevant courses like economics for starters and then maths, economitrics and accounting rather than show me 2:1 on the history of art from one of the 12 top universities.

I don't think and I sincerely hope they don't restrict their intakes to some top listed universities. When I get back to work next week I'll enquire of our HR department (not in the city but a FTSE100 co.,) what they are and let you know.

I think the above advice is sound. There are many ways in to the city.

I too believe that if you have studied a quantitative/economic/business related subject then you are signalling an interest in the industry, in addition you should have a better understanding and a more developed and relevant skill-set. It slightly annoys me when art history students, (for example), get jobs in IB's... If you don't go to a top 12 university, not to worry, try and get a 2:1 or ideally a first class degree, you can then do a masters at a top uni/business school and then you'll be well on your way. There is always a way around these little problems.

V.IMP: It is about you as an individual, selection doesn't rest solely on academics.

 

[Jack o'Clubs]

Jack o'Clubs, I agree with most of what you say but differ on the criteria - 2:1 from the top twelve universities as determined by Times League tables. There are I think 40 plus universities in the UK...

There are actually more than 100. I am not 'snobbish' but I am elitist (and so are the banks we are talking about), if you mean you agree with a process that can identify an 'elite' - whether that's sportsmen, musicians, or bankers.

I completely agree with your arguments from an 'in an ideal world' perspective. However, you can't ignore the practicalities of 10,000 applications hitting an IB chasing 30 places. There is no way that department heads get involved at that stage!

Here are a couple of recent press articles to back up what I'm saying:

First: http://www.thes.co.uk/current_edition/story.aspx?story_id=2034611

Moral? All firsts, from all universities are not equal. The idea of Bangor arbitrarily increasing their allotment of firsts to keep pace with Aberystwyth is outrageous!

Second: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/12/neducate12.xml

Several points here, 1) with the increase of student numbers employers are being swamped and having to find ways of keeping on top of applications "the growth in graduate jobs has not kept pace with the enormous rise in the number of people going to university in the last decade".
2) Leading employers (not just IBs) focus their search on the top 10-20 universities. Maybe they shouldn't. Maybe they're missing out on a big pool of talent. But this is what they do, and until it changes advice should be to apply to a top-20 university.
3) The current degree classification system is not 'fit for purpose', which kinds of links in with the Bangor issue - who monitors the quality of the class of degree given?

Don't take it personally, it's not meant that way. And obviously there are very successful people working in the City who have come through other routes, but the bottom line is that while your egalitarian ideas are all very well, they're simply not practical for a big firm to implement. After all the guy asking advice was asking what his best option might be in the real world, where these issues definitely apply. Arguing on a public forum may help let off steam, but it doesn't change the fact that things work differently, and any sensible advice to a person with all their options open should take this into account.

 

[Atilla]

There are actually more than 100. I am not 'snobbish' but I am elitist (and so are the banks we are talking about), if you mean you agree with a process that can identify an 'elite' - whether that's sportsmen, musicians, or bankers.

I completely agree with your arguments from an 'in an ideal world' perspective. However, you can't ignore the practicalities of 10,000 applications hitting an IB chasing 30 places. There is no way that department heads get involved at that stage!

Here are a couple of recent press articles to back up what I'm saying:

First: http://www.thes.co.uk/current_edition/story.aspx?story_id=2034611

Moral? All firsts, from all universities are not equal. The idea of Bangor arbitrarily increasing their allotment of firsts to keep pace with Aberystwyth is outrageous!

Second: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/12/neducate12.xml

Several points here, 1) with the increase of student numbers employers are being swamped and having to find ways of keeping on top of applications "the growth in graduate jobs has not kept pace with the enormous rise in the number of people going to university in the last decade".
2) Leading employers (not just IBs) focus their search on the top 10-20 universities. Maybe they shouldn't. Maybe they're missing out on a big pool of talent. But this is what they do, and until it changes advice should be to apply to a top-20 university.
3) The current degree classification system is not 'fit for purpose', which kinds of links in with the Bangor issue - who monitors the quality of the class of degree given?

Don't take it personally, it's not meant that way. And obviously there are very successful people working in the City who have come through other routes, but the bottom line is that while your egalitarian ideas are all very well, they're simply not practical for a big firm to implement. After all the guy asking advice was asking what his best option might be in the real world, where these issues definitely apply. Arguing on a public forum may help let off steam, but it doesn't change the fact that things work differently, and any sensible advice to a person with all their options open should take this into account.

I did check with our HR and the reply for selection was that given the area companies operates in some universities are preferred over others. Whilst the normal social corporate responsibility was quoted and is adhered to as much as possible, the candidates from selected universities considered to be leaders in specific subjects areas are given preference.

The justification was that the selected top universities have a stringent selection process to select the top pupils. Hence, the best of the best get chosen eventually by the best companies so to speak...

That's life for you...

 

[combotrader]

Back to the original posters questions, you can't go far wrong with the ISMA course at Reading or what ever it's called nowadays. It, along with City University is one of the few courses that is actually taught by city practitioners so there are is a good network to infiltrate and get your foot in the door.

Pualo, I take it by city unin you mean cass business school as it is now called ? Am I right ?

As far as rank and social standing is concerned, the city I presume is the same as a society : The ones who love their jobs and do well and most importantly ARE CONTENT don`t give a damn about the rest....but its true what you say.

If you ( or anyone else ) knows anything else about cass would be glad to hear from them. I am planning to do a MSc in Investment Management there. As this is a thread about careers and qualifications, would be grateful for any advice.

Cheers
CT.

 

[TWI]

The even funnier thing is that the Hedge fund guys will just sh@t on any one since all the IB guys, regardless of if you're GS, BNP or (unfortunately DB), are on their knees to these guys.

I sh*t on everyone who wants to work at IB. W*nkers. Been there,done that, on to better things.
I graduated many years ago and have 17 years in markets. It does not matter once you get onto the ladder where you godd*mn went to do some stupid degree, it is all about how much you make. A lot of the people who are mediocre will stay in the IB and go into "management" where they can lay off all the position risk on their minions. What a load of t*ss. HF's offer reward based on performance directly, if you are any good that is where you will find yourself.

 

[Directional]

I sh*t on everyone who wants to work at IB. W*nkers. Been there,done that, on to better things.
I graduated with Maths(I)/Physics(IIi) degree from Reading many years ago and have 17 years in markets. It does not matter once you get onto the ladder where you godd*mn went to do some stupid degree, it is all about how much you make. A lot of the people who are mediocre will stay in the IB and go into "management" where they can lay off all the position risk on their minions. What a load of t*ss. HF's offer reward based on performance directly, if you are any good that is where you will find yourself.

true words spoken by a true hedgie!