This is the position I was approached for: https://jpmchase.taleo.net/careersection/2/jobdetail.ftl?lang=en&job=1118738&src=JB-13027 This is position I am actually interested in: https://jpmchase.taleo.net/careersection/2/jobdetail.ftl?lang=en&job=1090192&src=JB-13027 Obviously, they are completely unrelated and I believe the second one is front office while the first is middle or back, even though their both in risk, correct? I mean, the first one just sound like compliance. As an aside, I currently work in ER, but at a very small shop and much lower salary than either of these positions offer. Also, I can’t say I’m thrilled with research (I find it kind of boring and feel like the profession has mostly turned into rehashing management’s opinions and using some fancy jargon that says alot without really saying much at all), so staying here and then moving to a better shop isn’t all that appealing to me. I’m not even sure I woud move to the first position, because it would probably be moving backwards. The only reason I’m considering it is because the salary is about 30% higher than what I currently make, but I’m trying to think long-term here. What do you guys think, would the second position be a possible move? The posting doesn’t list any specific requirements, so I am assuming its entry level. Also I’m a level 3 candidtae don’t know if that’s helpful or not?
Imo first one is back office and if you are in ER I wouldn’t t switch to that, even for pay raise. Second one seems like some MO and looks pretty interesting.
bkballa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Also, I > can’t say I’m thrilled with research (I find it > kind of boring and feel like the profession has > mostly turned into rehashing management’s opinions > and using some fancy jargon that says alot without > really saying much at all), If this is what you are doing with your ER job, congrats on joining the hoard of useless ER analysts on wall street. If you are doing your job right, it should never become “re-hashing management”. I can’t say I’m surprised though, since you are at a very small shop. This industry is not the same anymore. SS research once was a $13-15B industry, now its 8-9B. But the number of ER analysts has shot up dramatically, now there’s something like 9000 in ER. Totally oversupplied
I apologize if I offended anyone working in research. I’m not saying that all ER is rehashing publicly available info and is useless by any means, ofcourse there are superior analysts that add value and provide a valuable service in price discovery and generate alpha. But are you trying to tell me that this is the majority? maybe its 20% at best. I mean, how do you explain when a firm has a $50 price target on a stock, which drops to $12 the next week (a.k.a DNDN). Oops, I mean c’,mon these guys dont know sh*t about this company, even if they spent 100 hrs speaking with management, reading industry info, modeling, etc. Only management knows what’s truly going on. As for myself, working at a small shop, we have very few of the resources of a BB, making it extremely difficult to put out quality research. It also depends alot on who your analyst is and what kind of guidance/training you receive in the beginning. At my shop these weren’t very good at all, again, because of too much to cover and too few resources. I believe I could do a much better job if I spent 15 years working in the industry, then went into research with a rolodex of contacts and a wealth of inside knowledge. This is what many analaysts do and they probably have a significant edge over someone who goes directly into research. Anyway, lets not make this a thread about the merits of research.
bkballa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I apologize if I offended anyone working in > research. I’m not saying that all ER is rehashing > publicly available info and is useless by any > means, ofcourse there are superior analysts that > add value and provide a valuable service in price > discovery and generate alpha. But are you trying > to tell me that this is the majority? maybe its > 20% at best. I mean, how do you explain when a > firm has a $50 price target on a stock, which > drops to $12 the next week (a.k.a DNDN). Oops, I > mean c’,mon these guys dont know sh*t about this > company, even if they spent 100 hrs speaking with > management, reading industry info, modeling, etc. > Only management knows what’s truly going on. As > for myself, working at a small shop, we have very > few of the resources of a BB, making it extremely > difficult to put out quality research. It also > depends alot on who your analyst is and what kind > of guidance/training you receive in the beginning. > At my shop these weren’t very good at all, again, > because of too much to cover and too few > resources. I believe I could do a much better job > if I spent 15 years working in the industry, then > went into research with a rolodex of contacts and > a wealth of inside knowledge. This is what many > analaysts do and they probably have a significant > edge over someone who goes directly into research. > Anyway, lets not make this a thread about the > merits of research. its difficult to put out quality research if you suck. nothing to do with sell/buy side. its up to the individual. You just happen to join a bad group. As to your question why x y z has a huge target on a stock, if you’re in research, you should know why.
It is difficult to do many things if you suck, sir. It’s a matter of sucking, its like playing in the same league as Kobe Bryant. It doesn’t matter how good you are if you’re only 5’ 5". Similarly you’re not going to have the same level of expertise as the guy who spent 10 years working as an exective at some biotech firm, no matter how “good” of analyst you think you are.
first one is definitely back office but these regulatory groups continue to hire in the investment banks