6 ms·
For the most part, the jobs in tech are just better jobs. The senior people you work for are less likely to treat you as if you are "useless" and only worth wha
by mathattack 13y ago
For the most part, the jobs in tech are just better jobs. The senior people you work for are less likely to treat you as if you are "useless" and only worth what you're paid because you are "available at all hours."
The work is more psychologically rewarding and has less social stigma attached to it. You don't have to wear a tie. And there is the perception among young people that the potential financial upside is larger in tech than in banking (this is not entirely accurate but that's beside the point).
Goldman's move to free up the weekends of investment banking analysts is no doubt driven by an understanding that the market has changed. Finance no longer has a monopoly on smart kids looking to make a lot of money. It has to compete to win them away from tech.
This is exactly it. Investment banking barely pays more than tech for analysts. Banking IT pays engineers less than Google or Twitter. Add in the social prestige, quality of life, and respect from management, and it's understandable why they are having a harder time hiring the best.
Goldman has a choice: Pay a lot more, Accept less worthy talent, or treat them better. They chose #3.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- zallarak 13y agoEntry-level engineers in NY or CA with a relevant degree make more than entry-level investment bankers on Wall Street..
- mathattack 13y agoI'm not sure I agree, but if I'm wrong, it even further explains why GS is doing what they do. My impression is that the analysts can make 100K in year 1, and 200+K by year 3 or 4, but no equity. I would think that folks at Google making 200K after 3 or 4 years are outliers. Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm a little out of touch for what large tech firms pay.
- zallarak 13y agoNah, analysts will make 100Kish for up to 3 years, where they can then be promoted to associate which is 150-200K, maybe more if they are great or the firm has a great year. Some firms offer up to 150K for entry-levels but half that comp is an end-of-year bonus which sucks because its at the end of the year (lock-in) and it gets taxed at a higher rate. Engineers at the big tech firms pull in 100K+ (this plus literally means up to 200K.. more for some real talent) with solid signing bonuses as a starting salary. No end-of-year lock-in bs either.
- mathattack 13y agoMore on folks leaving Wall Street here.... http://www.cnbc.com/id/101156782 http://www.cnbc.com/id/101156782
- gaius 13y agoGoogle isn't making anyone rich anymore - they have >20,000 engineers. They aren't a startup, they're on a similar scale to HP or Accenture. Decent salaries but no equity worth a damn and senior management have no idea who you are. And secondly, 19,999 of those engineers are working on displaying ads and billing companies for displaying those ads. I'd wager that isn't actually very exciting work.