am in a dilemma, should i stay or should i go? money is the big issue… current job: real estate PE pros: - supportive bosses whom i’ve built goodwill with - generally good colleagues and environment - manageable work hours (60-70 hours per week) - still learning alot in the job about the industry, structuring, etc. cons: - fund has been fully invested for the past 2 years, no dry powder left to invest - finding 3rd party funds has not been easy - ridiculously low bonus (1 month - this doesn’t seem like the industry average, correct me if i’m mistaken) for the past 2 years - feel like we are never going to close a deal until funds come in; no actual deal experience; no big bonus to look forward to… - salary is decent but certainly nothing to shout about other considerations: - recently promoted, “betraying” bosses if leaving this year? alternative 1: same job in a different PE firm pros: - essentially same skill set, can hit the ground running - better pay (looking at 20-30% increase from current) - gain actual deal experience if fund has dry powder to invest - bigger bonus from closing deals (though less than at an IB) cons: - build-up goodwill, credibility with bosses and colleagues from scratch - high chance new bosses aren’t as supportive and understanding alternative 2: ER with real estate focus in an IB (ex-colleague trying to pull me in) pros: - better pay (looking at 20-30% increase from current) with sign-on bonus - mega bonus guaranteed (in years, not months) - experience working in an IB, good for resume cons: - career progression… lack continuity…? from PE to ER… what next? - crazy hours (can deal with it if compensation is good enough) - steep learning curve, accounting isn’t my cup of tea - build-up goodwill, credibility with bosses and colleagues from scratch - high chance new bosses aren’t as supportive and understanding
Well you really are a princess if you have these choices 
I think the first thing you want to figure out is what you want to do : ER or PE ? - If it’s ER, then you have your answer, regardless of the continuity factor. You have to do what you feel like doing and not what is right for some HR bureaucrat who will try to trap you with the continuity factor 5 years from now. Screw them. >> Alternative 2 - If it’s PE, then I would inquire as to whether or not the Alternative 1 would involve deal making, i.e. is there any cash left and how is the fund raising going on. If it involves making deals, then I would totally change. If it doesn’t involve deal making more than your current job, then it’s left to factors like money, firm reputation, risk, etc. What have you been doing on your current PE job ? Fund & Investees admin, bank communication and the likes ? I would kill for a PE job, but I understand that this is not an optimal situation or you. Your Deals list is your biggest credential in the whole M&A/PE/CF/IB world.
70 hours! Ouch. I hope you get a decent 6 figure sum or more for that. The norm in my current backwater is 35 hrs. BTW, I would go for alternative 1 if I were you. More money is after all, more money. The experience is no worse than what you currently gaining. Do what you can to keep the goodwill. If you frame it correctly, then you can retain that. Maybe you will be counteroffered, then you are in a dilemma. That’s a nice problem to have to deal with though…
I am currently having an internship in the equity research division of a big bank. In ER, the major drawback that I see is that you keep looking at the same things everyday. You have a set of companies that you cover, and after a while you will get pretty bored at those companies. In PE, you will always get involved in projects / deals. Which means your type of work will be different from the transactions that you are going through at the time. Think about it, being an equity analyst, you are typically on your own. You will be trying to build your own brand (not the bank’s). Also, in ER, the analysts are like at the bottom of everyone (sales people trying to push your research products, corporate finance guys may force you to write good things about a company which is going to conduct a major transaction, etc). So you may have conflicts with these people. If I were you, I would definitely look for Macquarie Capital Funds. Basically the funds invest in real estate and infrastructure assets. You will definitely have a significant advantage with your background. Anyways, good luck!
I am currently having an internship in the equity research division of a big bank. In ER, the major drawback that I see is that you keep looking at the same things everyday. You have a set of companies that you cover, and after a while you will get pretty bored at those companies. In PE, you will always get involved in projects / deals. Which means your type of work will be different from the transactions that you are going through at the time. Think about it, being an equity analyst, you are typically on your own. You will be trying to build your own brand (not the bank’s). Also, in ER, the analysts are like at the bottom of everyone (sales people trying to push your research products, corporate finance guys may force you to write good things about a company which is going to conduct a major transaction, etc). So you may have conflicts with these people. If I were you, I would definitely look for Macquarie Capital Funds. Basically the funds invest in real estate and infrastructure assets. You will definitely have a significant advantage with your background. Anyways, good luck!
cfaprincess Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > - mega bonus guaranteed (in years, not months) No such thing as a “guaranteed mega bonus” for ER analysts. Even the top II-rated analysts are only pulling in mid-to-high 6 figures with much of the compensation in the form of discretionary, not guaranteed, bonuses. so don’t expect to get rich off of a career as a sell-side pencil pusher.
I would go with alternative 1 personally. I would rather be working on analysis that I know is having an impact on investment decisions, whereas in ER you don’t have any say in the decision (unless its buyside).
SMIRK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Even the top II-rated analysts are only > pulling in mid-to-high 6 figures Mid six figures = $500k, High = $900k?
Something like that.
your current bonus does sound low, less than half of a normal target %. Is your target % higher and the fund just isn’t performing so bonuses are low? If you like real estate and you think you can get some good deal experience, then i’d definitely recommend Alt. 1. make sure they actually have $ to spend and are actively looking to move it. I can only speak from experience on the deal side of real estate that i can’t imagine ER being more interesting. being part of the decision making process that will have direct impact on a fund’s performance is where it’s at, imo. and like others said, every deal is unique and it keeps things fresh.
You have much longer term prospects and upside in case #1 – any time you have the chance to be on the principal investing side, it’s often much desirable than being on the client-facing side unless you can really hit it out of the ballpark. Also, remember that the skills you’re developing as an equity research associate are more tactical in nature, whereas the skills you need to succeed as a senior analyst are more sales-like in nature as well as relationship-driven. Would you be comfortable making that transition in the long-term? It’s not for everyone. To me, it sounds like you are probably being underpaid in role #1 because you haven’t made a case to your employer to be paid more. Chances are you are pretty good at what you do – possibly very good – but there’s something inherent in you, either personally or culturally, that prevents you from seeking a raise. Why not test the market and see what else is out there? You don’t sound like you’re in love with the equity research opportunity anyway, so why do that for a 20% raise knowing that it will be hard to make the reverse transition if you decide to change your mind? To me, the solution to your dilemma is simple, and you’ll probably come to the same conclusion if you look objectively at what you wrote. You want to potentially build a career doing something like #1 but you also want to get paid more. But if the money doesn’t find you, you need to go and find the money…either internally or at a competing firm. Best of luck!
numi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You have much longer term prospects and upside in > case #1 – any time you have the chance to be on > the principal investing side, it’s often much > desirable than being on the client-facing side > unless you can really hit it out of the ballpark. > Also, remember that the skills you’re developing > as an equity research associate are more tactical > in nature, whereas the skills you need to succeed > as a senior analyst are more sales-like in nature > as well as relationship-driven. Would you be > comfortable making that transition in the > long-term? It’s not for everyone. > > To me, it sounds like you are probably being > underpaid in role #1 because you haven’t made a > case to your employer to be paid more. Chances are > you are pretty good at what you do – possibly > very good – but there’s something inherent in > you, either personally or culturally, that > prevents you from seeking a raise. > > Why not test the market and see what else is out > there? You don’t sound like you’re in love with > the equity research opportunity anyway, so why do > that for a 20% raise knowing that it will be hard > to make the reverse transition if you decide to > change your mind? > > To me, the solution to your dilemma is simple, and > you’ll probably come to the same conclusion if you > look objectively at what you wrote. You want to > potentially build a career doing something like #1 > but you also want to get paid more. But if the > money doesn’t find you, you need to go and find > the money…either internally or at a competing > firm. > > Best of luck! Well Said Numi…have to agree with Numi here…
Thanks for the affirmation, N.VanCandidate. I appreciate it. Also, for the original poster – there was an article that was published by Harvard Business School in 2003 about behavioral differences in negotiation due to gender. This article specifically discusses “negotiating challenges for women leaders.” http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/3711.html Several weeks ago, I had to help an former girlfriend (now a friend) go through the salary negotiation process where initially, despite being ranked as top analyst in her investment banking class, she received what she felt was a disappointing bonus and no bump in her base salary. I’m not sure how much this article rings true for you, but my former girlfriend told me she was playing into social/professional norms about women that she didn’t even consciously realize till she read this article. She recently spoke with her M.D. again, by changing her negotiation tone and realizing that she could add value elsewhere if she wasn’t paid. I had forwarded to her some notices I’d received about investment banking recruitment from other firms, so we both knew that investment banks have started hiring again. In the end, she decided to stay with her current firm and was able to secure a 10% increase in base for this year. Perhaps you’ll find interesting gems of wisdom in this article that will change your view on negotiation too. There’s some good material in it for males as well – there’s commentary about seizing leadership situations at work that anyone can benefit from, regardless of their gender.
numi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To me, it sounds like you are probably being > underpaid in role #1 because you haven’t made a > case to your employer to be paid more. Chances are > you are pretty good at what you do – possibly > very good – but there’s something inherent in > you, either personally or culturally, that > prevents you from seeking a raise. This could be a factor, though keep in mind she also said the fund is out of dry powder, has had trouble raising new capital, and therefore is not able to do much on the deal side. If the fund/firm is not on good economic footing, they may not be paying anyone well. And even if she could negotiate a raise there might not be opportunities to continue to develop skills. If gender issues re negotiating and self-promotion might be an issue, however, here are a couple other great resources in addition to the article Numi mentioned: Women Don’t Ask (Babcok & Laschever) Nice Girls Don’t Get the Corner Office (Frankel) (and other titles by same author) If current bosses are genuinely supportive they will understand your wanting to improve your earning power and advance your career. Don’t be afraid of changing firms, as long as you’ve done good due diligence on the new one. If you enjoy the deal side don’t give it up, unless you really think you would like ER more.
I’m on the deal team. Other option is to stay on until year-end and hope for fresh funds to come in and close a deal, in which case I could up my value and bargaining power in my next job interview. Downside is opportunity cost in terms of higher earnings elsewhere and greater chance of closing deals in another firm with dry powder. Your thoughts? @viceroy: Last time I checked I wasn’t a princess but I sure wouldn’t mind marrying a prince! ;p @muddahudda: If you were me, would you stay on if my current company counter-offered knowing that you probably won’t be closing any deal soon? @futureIbanker: Thanks for the tip on Macquarie funds. Would you happen to have experience interviewing with them or know anything about their culture you could share? YWould you mind PM me if so? @numi: The point on gender differences in negotiation is an interesting one and thank you for the reading links, though I don’t think it applies to me Long story, but I’d say (local Asian company) culture is the main problem here… @JDCFA: You’re right. The firm has been paying everyone very little bonus (some have no bonus even) for the past 2 years because of its poor economic footing. I am very thankful for a good base salary and a decent raise too after being promoted to junior VP. I just think that the bonus and thus overall comp could be better, esp. knowing friends in banks are receiving bonuses in terms of years… granted they are on the ECM side of things… Btw, Babcock was my professor in college and “Women Don’t Ask” is a good book!