I noticed a bunch of people on the other thread do not like there job. I thought it would be interesting to take a pole of why you stay. I myself am a bit unhappy and I think I stay out of fear of the unknown, next job could be worse. So what is it? Why do you stay? 1)Money 2)Fear of the unknown 3)In this market I would be crazy not to stay 4)Other
- Money 4. Other Say I quit tomorrow, how would I spend my time better? I would probably work out longer and cruise the job boards longer, but nothing grossly different. Also, gaps in one’s resume are not attractive. I’ve noticed one should have a job before they quit their job.
I like the job that I have now, but here are the reasons why I wanted to leave my last job in no particular order: (1) Money (not as good as it could be) (2) Lack of internal mobility (3) Wanted to try something new because I felt like I had learned as much as I cared to know (4) Did not see a long-term career in equity research for myself (5) Was not being challenged by my work (6) Bureaucracy (7) Manager with below-average skills (in my personal opinion) Here are the reasons why I stayed at my last job for as long as I did: (1) Needed to get my current job lined up first (2) Money (still needed to pay the bills somehow) (3) Work became relatively easy, aside from the long hours (I already had the functional knowledge to get the basic tasks done, and I was at a point where I knew what I had to do in order to just get by)
no particular order: 1. Husbands out of state job offer forced me to leave my last job after only being there 9 months, and I’ve only been at current co a year, so I risk being branded as a job-hopper/ unloyal. 2. My current position supports my current objectives: reasonable hours= plenty of time to study. Decent pay in low cost of living area= saving a ton of $$ for future. Unusual role at smallish company = quicker progression and hopefully adds value to my MBA apps (I hope). 3. I pan on going for MBA in 1.5 yrs, so don’t think it makes sense. 4. Although I may not particularly enjoy my *job*, I really like the ppl I work with.
Sounds like a pretty good situation akanska!
hey numi, i remember u said something to the extent that the landscape of ER is changing. did that have an effect on “why leave ER for PE?” What does PE offer that ER doesnt?
pacmandefense, as for the comment about the “landscape of ER changing,” i’m sure this is something that has a different meaning to different people…but in my case, i was referring specifically to the payout distribution model for sell-side research. every firm seems to have a slightly different way of computing how research analysts are compensated; a lot of it is trade-driven, meaning they’re based on commissions, which in turn tend to be some function of client votes. however, every firm seems to have a slightly different formula as to how they compensate research staff, and these differences arise because research is not a department that directly generates revenues. consequently, the lack of transparency is what makes the payout structure for research departments pretty tenuous in my view, and this actually was a pretty significant driver for my decision to leave research. maybe it didn’t matter all that much to me as an associate, but i think for people aspiring to be senior analysts, they have a right to be concerned about compensation structure. after all, if you have no idea how much revenue you’re bringing in to the firm, how do you know what you’re really worth? what would prevent a bank from telling you that you’re worth incrementally less year after year? (as it turns out, if you look at how research compensation is today compared to the days prior to Sarbanes Oxley and the Global Settlement, you’ll see that these concerns are very well justified!) anyway, that’s my take on it. since i no longer work in research, i’d be curious to hear what others here have to say about it. i don’t think things have changed all that much in the last half year but would be curious to learn what the “state of research” is these days. as for what PE offers that ER doesn’t as well as my rationale for the switch, i have written extensively about this in previous threads - refer to the following http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?1,657261 http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?1,795258
^ One thing the I notice people mention alot less is that, yes, the Sell Side research field is tough money right now, but what do you expect? All these firms who are axing their MDs and promoting no names to lead analyst *cough*MS*cough* can’t really expect to be paid as well, right? I don’t think it is how your comp is structured, I think it is just more economically alligned to have better in house research, rather than relying on the ss. And that is why we have seen the big migration in research.
Numi, I’m curious as to what you think will happen in ER if we enter a serious, extended downturn as I believe we will. I get the feeling at my bank that job cuts across the industry will continue, the banks will shrink, and outsized bonuses that have been the norm for the past few years are going away. However, it seems that the demand for ER would be fairly consistent regardless of economic conditions. Do you see the industry shrinking (at a more rapid pace than it already is) if we enter a serious downturn?
I hate the job that I have now, so highlighted the reasons why I wanted to leave (similar to numi): (1) Money (not as good as it could be) (2) Lack of internal mobility (3) Wanted to try something new because I felt like I had learned as much as I cared to know (4) Did not see a long-term career in MO for myself (5) Was not being challenged by my work Here are the reasons why I have stayed at my job to date: (1) Contemplating the right options to chose (2) Money (still needed to pay the bills somehow) (3) Work became relatively easy, plenty of time for me to self develop, prepare for interviews and assessing my career options I am in serious thoughts to do a course in MFE to move into the FO now
Following are the reasons I no longer like my current job. 1. The work no longer seems to be challenging, as mentioned by Numi, I also feel that I have learned as much as I could have had from my current job. 2. Don’t see a long term career in outsourcing industry. 3. Pay package is less. 4. Doesn’t require al my financial skills and knowledge gained from L2 preparation. Following are the reasons why I am still working with the same employer. 1. Money to pay my bills 2. I might get a promotion this month, however, that is not cetain 3. Waiting for L2 results. I might ger better opportunities if I pass 4. Lack of opportunities matching my aspirations 5. As Numi and theKing have mentioned, work is a bit easy, so get time to go through FT (in detail) and read posts on AF :-).
gauravku Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 4. Doesn’t require al my financial skills and > knowledge gained from L2 preparation. > Very few of us use CFA knowledge directly in our job - for heaven’s sake, it is just a series of exams, not an occupational magic wand. What earning CFA charter does is to give you a broad overview of financial concepts. As usual, the practice is substantially different. As to MGG’s question: I quit my job 3 year ago because my boss was abusive. Unfortunately, before I took the job, I did not know that the firm had an employee turnover of more than 35%. In any case, one day the pain of staying became more than the pain of leaving.
My job duties at this point suck the big one. I stay for the following: 1) Money - Trying to start an internet online community which may provide some a nice revenue stream in the future. However, I need funding to do this. I use some of job’s salary to do that. 2) Job is cozy - leave at 3:30, no weekends, shorts and sandals are acceptable, the people are very friendly, and I get unlimited vacation time. 3) Education - They will pay the whole cost of MBA and I don’t need a minimum grade. On top of that, they don’t have any rules about the years you must stay at the firm after you get the MBA. 4) Potential - Stock Options and bonuses. We’re growing big time and the bonuses get split amongst the employees. I also get stock options in case of a liquidating event. So wouldn’t make sense for me to walk away eventhough I hate my duties at present.
buddha Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ > One thing the I notice people mention alot less is > that, yes, the Sell Side research field is tough > money right now, but what do you expect? > > All these firms who are axing their MDs and > promoting no names to lead analyst > *cough*MS*cough* can’t really expect to be paid as > well, right? there were a number of other banks besides MS that have done the same thing. it made a lot of sense for MS as it was a way for them to purge the huge salaries that were being paid out to managing directors, but for the junior guys, it also gave them an opportunity to move up and take their own coverage. layoffs are never pleasant, but they created a lot of opportunity for junior personnel to become coverage analysts and in that regard, i really don’t think too many of the junior folks would disparage MS’s move in this direction. again, everything is economically driven and if you can get a younger senior analyst to work harder for less pay, why not? luke77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Numi, I’m curious as to what you think will happen > in ER if we enter a serious, extended downturn as > I believe we will. I get the feeling at my bank > that job cuts across the industry will continue, > the banks will shrink, and outsized bonuses that > have been the norm for the past few years are > going away. However, it seems that the demand for > ER would be fairly consistent regardless of > economic conditions. Do you see the industry > shrinking (at a more rapid pace than it already > is) if we enter a serious downturn? it’s tough to say. i don’t think sell-side research will disappear completely anytime in the foreseeable future – they’re an essential part of the vetting process when it comes to potential banking transactions, and i’d argue that another one of their most important purposes is to provide buy-siders with access to senior management. as it is, i think ER at your bank is getting to be pretty leanly staffed, but there’ll continue to be a push at your bank as well as others to trim out the sectors that don’t generate a whole lot of trade volumes. let’s put it this way – equity research is going to be one of those areas on the sell-side where the future really isn’t all that certain, but i wouldn’t say that the futures of other things like institutional sales or equity trading are any more certain as trading automation becomes more common and buy-siders continue spending time building up their in-house networking and expertise. so personally, i find any aspirations of building a career on the sell-side as a coverage analyst, while still potentially lucrative, will still have to face the whims and volatility of the industry as a whole. that being said, i still contend that the skills that you develop as a junior equity research professional are very useful and versatile, so while i would advise someone to think long and hard before making a mental commitment to becoming a senior analyst on the sell-side, i still think the associate role is a very good financial training ground. what is your take on this? what have others at your bank been saying?
My first gig post undergrad I stayed only six months. The job completely sucked. I was foolishly drawn to the sexiness of working for a major movie studio (in a hybrid finance and market research role) figuring I could get all the perks and parlay the experience into a media coverage role at Stifel, Jefferies, Weisal, some other middle market bank or jump straight to the buyside. Nnnnnnnnhhhhhh!! Perks and parties were great, but the place was full of villianous ego maniacs who demanded your dignity in order to advance, more importantly, the work was a joke. Round 2, I’m at another smaller VFX/Video game studio/developer in a pure forward looking financial analyst role. Upside; 100x better people, more interesting and relevant work, cool industry. Downside; same pay, longer hours, and I’m still left feeling unsatisfied. So, why do I stay. Money- Gotta keep the chips coming in Perception - To mitigate being labeled a job hopper, I told myself I was going to give this place a year, then I’m gone, regardless of whatever raise and promotion package they throw at me. I figure, at the junior level, one year or two max are standard time frames to stay at a company before making a move without getting the hopper label.
I don’t condone job-hopping for the sake of job-hopping, but I think it’s very common in our generation. The alternative for many job-hoppers is to stay in unfulfilling roles. I have changed jobs numerous times (like 10 times), and if I hadn’t I’d be tearing my teeth out because I’d be so bored and not making nearly the money I do now. As I mature I think I’m getting ever-closer to breaking out on my own. We do better when we are free to do what we want. Society benefits as a whole as well. I can’t wait for the day when I don’t have to sit in front of a computer if I don’t have to. Some other clueless college grad can do that 
“what is your take on this? what have others at your bank been saying?” Nearly everyone I’ve talked to about ER (all in either trading or corp finance) have been pretty negative on the industry - basically that not much value is added by ER, and it will continue to shrink as markets become more efficient, integrated, etc. The ER guys I know are obviously much more positive regarding their “value”…and opinions among them vary about the future of ER. Personally, I kind of agree that the very nature of the system is eroding the value of ER, but I don’t think this means that it will go away anytime soon. I also think that “Financial advisors” provide little value, but that industry is growing by leaps and bounds.
People tend to only move jobs for money alone if pay offered elsewhere is at least 15% higher.
I wouldnt move for 15% more, unless the other parts I know for 100% they would hold true (that is the other parts I like). I think for me it would take 50% minimum if I didnt know what else would hold true.
luke77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > “what is your take on this? what have others at > your bank been saying?” > > Nearly everyone I’ve talked to about ER (all in > either trading or corp finance) have been pretty > negative on the industry - basically that not much > value is added by ER, and it will continue to > shrink as markets become more efficient, > integrated, etc. The ER guys I know are obviously > much more positive regarding their “value”…and > opinions among them vary about the future of ER. > Personally, I kind of agree that the very nature > of the system is eroding the value of ER, but I > don’t think this means that it will go away > anytime soon. I also think that “Financial > advisors” provide little value, but that industry > is growing by leaps and bounds. agreed – i think the value of research is being eroded as well as far as the analytical stuff goes, but i think it’s slowly but surely being more defined by the relationship front, i.e. buy-siders often say that one of the most important services that senior analysts provide is access to senior management. plus, institutional change is slow in finance and even if research is losing some luster for economic reasons, it’s not exactly a “dying industry” either. i think what we’ll continue to see is a continued evolution in its function and purpose, but research analysts will always be around in some fashion or another as buy-siders will always need access to company management as well as validation for their investment ideas