Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.

"Want a Wall Street Job? Start Preparing Now"


Replies to: "Want a Wall Street Job? Start Preparing Now"

  • Mr PayneMr Payne Registered User Posts: 8,850 Senior Member
    Disagree. A science major might be the only way to prove your IQ.
  • aquamarineeaquamarinee Registered User Posts: 3,028 Senior Member
    so... science/engineering major + business/econ major [therefore, a double major] would be ideal then?
  • red sox 7327red sox 7327 Registered User Posts: 765 Member
    no, don't do that. If your going to double major then you need to do it in subjects that jive well, like math and physics (unless you want to stay 5 years or really put a lot of pressure on yourself --- If your school doesn't have a core then it might be a little more conceivable). Majoring in a science and econ would require you to take a ton of required courses. Now, you could minor in one of those or just take electives that match your banking interests, but double majoring is not likely going to push you over the top for such jobs.
  • TheMK99TheMK99 Registered User Posts: 1,019 Member
    Disregard Mr. payne, he is an engineering ****. If you like engineering/math/science etc. than go for it, but don't think you need those majors to make Wall Street.
  • foxdie!foxdie! Registered User Posts: 832 Member
    I disagree Mr. Payne. But in the end it also depends on what field within investment banks one is vying for. Corp fin/advisory has many history majors for example.

    For non-targets they need to study applicable majors such and finance and economics. Science from non-targets would only work if the person in exceptional. Remember there are also plenty of scientific majors from top schools with high IQs.
  • nuveennuveen Registered User Posts: 319 Member
    That article makes me continue to wonder why people want these jobs so badly... I understand that people want money, but are they so dead inside that they want to sacrifice (and now I'm going to draw words from the article) any chance to be creative or caring, and plunge yourself into mind-numbing work in which you really don't produce anything or render any service (technically, you can render services, but its often like servicing an already serviced car)? And it's all just for some short-term comfort and long term excess. On the other hand, realistically speaking, 80-90 percent of jobs probably suck, so I can understand the desire to get a high-paying mind-sucking job rather than an average-paying mind-sucking job.

    No doubt, it sounds exciting when you read about in the WSJ.
    Is that where the excitement ends?
    Does it get more exciting as one advances in a firm, (if one is so fortunate to be able to do so)?
  • AureliusAurelius Registered User Posts: 585 Member
    I hear that in investment banks, the higher you get promoted the harder you work (unless you become the CEO or something). This has become true in many fields, including law, consulting, etc.
  • nuveennuveen Registered User Posts: 319 Member
    Ah, I can understand that. But does the work become more engaging or fascinating?
  • sammy101sammy101 Registered User Posts: 124 Junior Member
    well obviously it will. I mean think about it....as you progress from the analyst/associate level to the vp/md level your work is no longer about number crunching and looking at excel spreadsheets the whole day, and more about the client interaction aspects of the business.

    Your no longer the guy who works all day in the office enduring mental and sometimes physical abuse(mostly in trading) and instead are the guys who call up the analysts on the weekends from their residence in the Hamptons assigning all the grunt work. The VPs are the guys who process the deals and so require management skills while the MDs are the people who bring in new business, which requires interpersonal and mingling capability. Also, the hours spent in the office go down significantly as you progress but your responsibility drastically increases....and of course so does your pay, which skyrockets.
  • AureliusAurelius Registered User Posts: 585 Member
    Not in terms of work hours. VP's work harder and longer than associates. Associates work harder and longer than Analysts.

    I think your idealization of "higher up = easier job" is an outdated view of corporate culture.
  • tonerangertoneranger Registered User Posts: 3,723 Senior Member
    Based on my experience in a bulge bracket, they ALL work long hard hours. The higher-ups do get more money but the hours don't go down significantly. They generally travel more - and are ALWAYS "on" - 24 hours per day. Yes - the work can get more interesting - especially if you prefer managing people and making deals to crunching numbers.
This discussion has been closed.