I definitely have. Going the RIA route is the exit strategy/semi-retirement plan for many in my field. Since I call on some mega-RIAs I’ve had informal discussions about it. Right now it’s not for me, but definitely an option down the road. The key is to find the right fit. I’d like to find a $1-3 billion RIA with a small staff that’s content with their AUM. Those are the guys that are just waiting to get bought by the aggregators of the world. Work there for a while and build up some equity. Sell to a $30 billion RIA and then go pro playing in Goldeneye tournaments (no Oddjob allowed, obviously). That’s the plan.
Just don’t share your occasional misuse of the kitchen sink 
that sounds interesting, maybe like a PE for a really specialized industry.
this actually gave me a really interesting thought! I used to work in a different industry that I liked. maybe I can pitch my expertise to a pe that specializes in those kind of businesses
But I would still get at least an hour for lunch, right???
What I’ve noticed is that I’ll never be the best person in Excel or programming in Python. But as I add different skills together, i can become increasingly valuable.
For example for me, the pool of people who are good at Python and very knowledgeable about community banking is quite small. If I add those two factors together, now I’m rarer. This is why programming is such low hanging fruit. If you learn it and already have some industry expertise, you’ve immediately narrowed down the people you are up against. But there are plenty of skill sets that seem to be very valuable together. If you have deep industry experience, put yourself in a situation to benefit from it!
1+1 = 3, synergies amirite6
This. But the cautionary tale is that the rarer the combined skill set, the narrower the opportunity pool is for jobs to pop up looking exactly like you need them to. Of course, when they do arise, that rare combination is golden.
Who cares about the $1-3b RIA? I’m talking about working out of your home office or sharing office space with a small CPA firm. Get your Series 7 & 66 (if you don’t already have them) and health insurance license and find a B-D.
According to BAM, If you have a 4-5 man CPA firm that has $1m in billings, then there’s probably $50-75m in assets to be gathered. So get the $50m in assets and charge a 1% fee. You’d be in the 85% payout category. That’s $425k in revenue. Granted, you’d have to pay some overhead, like your rent and Morningstar Advisor Workstation subscription, but you’d still be taking home north of $300k every year. And the work isn’t all that hard–especially if the CPA firm is feeding you clients and you’re paying them referral fees office rent every month.
Nothing is as much fun, and as much of a sure thing as M&A. You work like a dog, but you learn an excellent combo of analytical skills and sales skills…that can make you a better banker, CFO, or you can take your skills to a PE shop or HF. Don’t try to avoid selling or client interaction in general, it is a key skill to have. More than anything, M&A is fairly recession proof, and very hard to disintermediate with tech, unlike long-only portfolio managers and some hedge funds. If only i had this insight when i was still in M&A.
Was with you until the recession proof thing. Otherwise agree. I remember my IB friends telling stories in 2009 of the MD walking out of his office, announcing loudly that the entire office had been shut down and then just walking out.
I thought M&A was a really cyclical business…
Yes very cyclical, but how it impacts your career really depends on how deep the cycle and whether you’re at a top-bracket firm. If you think of it like a CLO, the M&A product area is the big money maker in IB so the subordinated (most cyclical, lower margin) product areas like FICC, DCM absorb the first cuts. Also you guys are right, firms that are bull-market only players, and some advisory specialists, they probably suffer in the downturn. I am exaggerating a bit for effect, but cyclicality in M&A is not always a negative, it is really facts and circumstances dependent. Sometimes M&A benefits from cyclicality because you cover the sellers as well… The rise of cashed-up financial sponsors and mega family offices are more when cycle turns. And most sectors (except FIG) are getting so global that there’s almost always someone looking to buy growth, market access, or get a bargain…
it makes sense that people sell thier company at the top of the markets. cash out when the going is good asn teh valuations are high!