Now I have two interviews: Senior associate with a small Chinese venture capital company ($100m) strategically backed by 2 top 20 US VCs; Senior analyst with a startup mutual fund ($1bn) joint venture with a top 5 European fund house. VC and fund house are quite different. I don’t’ know which one I shall choose… VC is more challenging (funny?) and risky…but career at fund house would be more sustainable… I have 4 years experiences (2yr in VC and 2yr as equity analyst). Need your advice. Thanks!
if mutual fund company is ING dont go there
“strategically backed” means the first time they F-up their funding gets pulled. Good luck
I would worry about this when I get both offers.
Also $100M? They will be taking small swings I assume not taking lead.
golfer, it’s not ING. Mr.Good.Guy, the VC is very small (compared to the world tops) but it’s top 10 in China and successfully closed a couple of deals in the past two years. Now it’s working on around 12-15 deals. One of the VC’s US partners is a recognized leader in early stages.
cfafrank , I haven’t gotten the offers yet. However, I want to make decisions and prepare for future applications.
Hey Golfer, Is ING really that bad? Just asking because I’m exploring some opportunities in Europe and since they’re a big player I may look into the company some. Thanks.
I like the VC job. I personally think that’s much more interesting, but I guess it depends on what you want to do…
hi liy09, my thoughts fwiw (assuming you get 2 offers): 1. get to know who your immediate boss is in both cases. He/she will be the key to what you work on and what opportunities you are given. 2. if you’re young, smart, mobile with no fixed responsibilities (family, mortgage to support) then you have no down-side - go with the one with the most up-side in terms of money and most of all what you can learn. 3. eg the mutual fund probably has more constraints, rules, stages you need to go through to get some seniority and authority. VC generally much more open to new ideas and will probably allow you to do much more (and potentially make more mistakes) earlier on. VC probably more upside for you financially, and it’s smaller so you’ll have a broader role and learn more areas of the business, and easier to be noticed. that’s what I did when I was young in the 80s and again in the 90s. Learned a huge amount, made money, had a ball. 4. ask the VC guys about their deals - what’s their pipeline - time horizons - have they had any wins - see if it makes sense and passes sanity test. If it sounds flaky then steer clear of it. 5. mutual fund is more traditional path - probably more stable. Downside is that if you do well you’ll probably just end up a hack senior analyst or PM at a mutual fund in 20 years - still working for the man, still on a salary, and still worrying about your next bonus - who wants that? - and who buys mutual funds anyway?? (sorry, I’m biased…) if both operations look solid - if you’re young, fit, mobile - join the VC, go see the world and make your mark! cheers…
excellent job, null&nuller. It’s really helpful for people who want a great career.
null&nuller, thanks for your insights. My first choice would be VC and then Mutual fund. Acutally, I have send out a few applications for VC jobs in the past month. Wish I could get one in the near future.
Cat Fanciers’ Association Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hey Golfer, > > Is ING really that bad? Just asking because I’m > exploring some opportunities in Europe and since > they’re a big player I may look into the company > some. Thanks. Haha! Nice name.