Hey guys, I just wanted to hear some thoughts about working in a big 4’s valuation group within TS in NY as an alternative to ER. This particular group does work with PEs to find the best way to structure deals. Exit opportunities? Interesting thoughts? Thanks in advance -KarateBoy
Wow lots of Big 4 advisory threads going on lately. Maybe these firms are starting to hire again. Kid, do a search but ER at a BB > TS at Big4
must be PwC. I was in the group
Sorry if this thread is a bit repetitive. I did a search first but most of the other posted seem to only hint at this topic rather than address it directly. I knew before I made a thread that ER @ BB > TS Big 4 but I was hoping people can give me more insight on this with regards to it being an alternative if you cannot find a job in this market @ a BB. mzwerner can you give me some insight on what they typically are looking for and what you wanted to get out of it? What are you doing now?
Clearly no contest between TS and BB, and should not even be compared. Notwithstanding TS “doesn’t” do accounting audit activities, people still have a perception that it is still an accounting firm and not exactly an investment bank. There is actually a big difference almost as large as the grand canyon. I’m just saying. I worked with both TS and BB and could tell the difference in an instant if you make me compare the presentation and/or reports of each one.
Do many people go from TS to BB? Or do they primarily go to PE?
Yeah. Big4 are good @ presenting jobs as if they are almost IB jobs. But ín the end Big4 advisory is just a bunch of accountants working with bankers. Big hierarchy, conservative, risk averse read paranoid, boring, bureaucrat and small-timer. At least it s like that @ my big4, and I want to leave.
Hank Scorpio Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do many people go from TS to BB? Or do they > primarily go to PE? Anyone willing to follow up?
From what I have *seen*, people leave TS to go in - to TS @ another big4 or do another advisory gig somewhere - controlling - business development, i.e. holding level M&A department Now from what I know from looking up PE teams on PE firms’ websites, a Big4 TS background is one of the most common background that you’ll find in PE, and is one of the most commonly required background for PE jobs, I just haven’t anyone make that jump myself. But in terms of TS to BB, I have never seen it. And I don’t see a logical evolution between ER and TS. Although I believe no job will give you a better understanding of financial statements than TS, I couldn’t see a TS guy make the jump to ER, but maybe I’m completely wrong.
jackofalltrades Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Clearly no contest between TS and BB, and should > not even be compared. Notwithstanding TS “doesn’t” > do accounting audit activities, people still have > a perception that it is still an accounting firm > and not exactly an investment bank. There is > actually a big difference almost as large as the > grand canyon. I’m just saying. > > I worked with both TS and BB and could tell the > difference in an instant if you make me compare > the presentation and/or reports of each one. Can you tell me more? I’m a MBA student whom has looked at TS considerably.
Depends on what you want to know. Broadly speaking, valuation methodologies/techniques and financial engineering solutions are considerably different between BB and TS. Particularly the insight, capital market knowledge, and presentations can be told apart quite easily. I find TS analysts being too limiting, uncommercial, and superficial. If you are an MBA student, I would suggest you don’t even consider TS as this will narrow down your career scope, whereas in IB, you pretty much enhance your skill set and prestige level a number of notches higher. Let the criticisms [from TS analysts] begin.
jackofalltrades Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Let the criticisms [from TS analysts] begin. here’s one: Most of the i-bankers pitchbooks i’ve seen, where they participate in some roadshow trying to market themselves as the underwriter for some company trying to go public, are outrageously lacking in depth sales presentations. there is limited or zero modeling, it’s all one big macroeconomic and industry overview, polished with mind-blowing amount of semi-relevant market data and nearly zero qunatitative analysis. it’s a sales product, and it’s boring to look at, let alone participate in the making of, and the most advanced valuation concept ever observable is multiple comparison. at the right place, the right TS shop can give one a lot more modeling experience and exposure to a variety of financial products. i think it is a good option for straight out of undergrad to get a broad-based experience. it carries accounting stigma if you stay for too long though
Granted that the pitchbook you were referring to is from a BB, I would have to say that this is a rare case, as you would be bombarded with modeling and financial analyses in a typical book. Nonetheless, TS analysts have a different perspective and would find it challenging to penetrate BB banks. I do not think it works the other way around.
it’s not the “pitchbook” I saw, i am refering to numerours pitchbooks prepared by different banks. its a sales presentation anyway you look at it. half of it highlights the bank’s expertise in the sector - ranking in terms of number of IPOs complete last year, ranking in terms of $ raised, ranking in terms of post-IPO share performance, and other pull-out-of-my-a$$ sales stats. there’s of course macroeconomic “analysis”, i.e. overview of capital markets, M&A and IPO activity, and by “analysis” i mean dumping extraordinary amount of market data to which the bank undoubtedly has unlimited access through various databases, into fancy charts. There is some “valuation” based on applying multiples from recent IPOs to sales forcast for the target provided by management - that’s as deep as the analysis goes and usually the only subjective part, rest of it is just visual presentation of data. i’m not arguing TS->BB is hard to penetrate, or that i-bankers are not “prestigious” in the industry - they certainly are. but in terms of developing financial modeling skills and familiarity with a broad base of financial instruments - please. it’s a prestigious and well-paid sales job!
I’m an auditor @ one of the big 4 in NYC. I have my cpa, and just sat for Level 1. Would I have any shot @ getting into a BB (given that I didn’t go to an Ivy)? I feel like my best chances would be to go into TS even if I get the charter. Thanks, guys.
Listen to Mobious, then read Monkey Business: Swinging through the Wall Street Jungle By; John Rolfe and Pete Troob (IIRC)
Thanks for your thought MS. I do agree with your comments. I just have a feeling that we are arguing on two uncomparable issues. First of all, the pitchbooks you may be referring to are preliminary work just to “sell” their services to a client. I do appreciate that at the end of the day, an investment banker’s job is to sell. Anyway, back to the topic. Once the banker gets engaged for a deal, that is when the modeling and analyses begins. It is always the first “selling” pitchbook that is superficial and non-analytical. I should know, I used to do all sorts of pitches of different kinds. Secondly, I am sure you understand that a pitchbook is meant to “sell” services to a client. As such, it should be visually attractive and boasts the credentials of the BB pitching. Lastly, as mentioned earlier, I completely agree with you that as the IB analyst goes up the corporate ladder, he ends up being the lead “sales man” while the Analysts and Associates, and to some extent, the Vice Presidents do most of the analysis required to make a deal happen. At the end of the day, the I-banker is a paper pusher who knows how to do complex financial modeling.
nuppal Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Listen to Mobious, then read Monkey Business: > Swinging through the Wall Street Jungle > > By; John Rolfe and Pete Troob (IIRC) +1. Fantastic book. Much better than “Damn it feels good to be a Banker.”