6 ms·
Youre all over this thread defending Jane Street. > Jane St (unlike customer-facing finance firms, like Goldman Sachs) does not really engage in this style of
by asdfqweqe12 4y ago
Youre all over this thread defending Jane Street.
> Jane St (unlike customer-facing finance firms, like Goldman Sachs) does not really engage in this style of nepotism hiring that I know of.
Wow i'm sold.
- whimsicalism 4y agoBecause it's a comment thread I find interesting, I made 4 or so comments related to Jane St, 2 of which are replying to people replying to me. I promise you I have no affiliations with JS whatsoever, just think that there is lots of sloppy reasoning going on in this thread.
- hnfong 4y ago> I promise you I have no affiliations with JS whatsoever Makes your claim unconvincing though. At least if you had worked there you might be in a position to make a claim either way.
- whimsicalism 4y agoWell I went to a major feeder school and know a lot of people hired by JS. The class of people hired by firms like Goldman Sachs is obviously nepotistic in nature and very different from the class that JS hires. A substantial portion of the GS mix is athletes & what I would call traditional Northeast elites, Jane St hired mostly out of the top physics, CS & applied math classes I was in. Beyond that, having parents who are prominent professors is nothing special at these schools and definitely would not give you pull at these institutions. Finally, Jane St has no incentive to engage in this sort of hiring because they are not customer/client facing.
- naijaboiler 4y agoHahahah its the funniest thing I ever read. Some people are so doggedly invested in the believing myth of meritocracy. Yeah right a private firms hiring is totally meritocratic.
- unmole 4y agoCultivating relationships with influential people makes sense for an investment bank. Jane Street is a market maker, what exactly would they gain from it?