<p>They have corporate advisory and restructuring groups.</p>
<p>Basically to get into blackstone at the undergrad level you have to be from 1) Wharton and then 2) Harvard.</p>
<p>I’ve heard that even that’s not enough. Getting into a PE firm from undergrad basically requires inside connections. That’s why so many people wait until after they have a few years of i-banking experience and an MBA before they try to break into PE.</p>
<p>Of course thats not enough. Being at Wharton and Harvard is just one of the “smaller” requirements. However, I wouldnt say connections are absolutely necessary. Its possible to get a position if one is determined. Communication, intellect and a nice dose of luck.</p>
<p>Well, anybody could potentially be recruited based on intellect and communcation skills, not just Whartonites and Harvardians. Btw, it’s interesting how Blackstone recruits from UT and UVa. Why do those schools make the list and not some other top schools, like Princeton, MIT, NYU Stern, etc?</p>
<p>Actually on the undergrad level it is almost exclusively wharton and Harvard. I have yet to see a undergrad analyst from some other school who went directly into the firm. Its probably because of the firm’s partners who decide to bring in people from their alma mater. Thats why alumni connections with the educational institution is important.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>on the undergrad level, they’d probably only be recruiting UT BHP kids, the business honors program is quite hard to get into, they say that their only real competition is Wharton.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.mccombs.utexas.edu/programs/bhp/corporate/recruit.asp[/url]”>http://www.mccombs.utexas.edu/programs/bhp/corporate/recruit.asp</a>
there’s a link to their top hiring companies, it’s pretty impressive.</p>
<p>Does anyone have exact stats for Blackstone’s recruitment? If the firm only recruits from Wharton and Harvard, what’s the point of visiting those other schools?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.blackstone.com/team/alphabetical.asp[/url]”>http://www.blackstone.com/team/alphabetical.asp</a></p>
<p>better yet, only analysts:
<a href=“http://www.blackstone.com/team/title_tl.asp?titleid=17[/url]”>http://www.blackstone.com/team/title_tl.asp?titleid=17</a></p>
<p>When you plug in just analysts you also get guys who have been in other fields for a while. Go through the list and try and figure out the guys who joined Blackstone from undergrad. Almost exclusively those two schools (many more Whartons than Harvards). Keep in mind I am talking about the analysts in N. America not in Europe (where it seems to extract from the elite schools as well)</p>
<p>whats your guys’ facination with blackstone? do they pay like insane salaries or something? work 90 hours a week?</p>
<p>It’s a well-known PE firm, that’s all. PE is very popular in the financial world and also very hard to break into. It can pay very well and is less intense than the hell of i-banking. Many people try to get into PE firms after a few years in i-banking and deciding that i-banking’s too much for them to handle, and/or they want to try something new, more fun, and potentially more lucrative.</p>
<p>My friend’s brother was accepted into Blackstone after undergrad from Michigan (Ross) with a 4.0 GPA, but he chose Goldman instead. But I’m sure it’s pretty rare. I heard they pretty much only look at Wharton/Harvard for undergrad, as most people here already indicated.</p>
<p>There a good chance that within our lifetime the entire noton of private equity firms will disappear within 10-15 years</p>
<p>Well that was said in the 1980s nyusternman… but its still going. The basic idea about the concept of PE (bring in a business in house and then spinning it off) will be around for a long, long time.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be surprised if in a few years there’s only a couple of PE firms left. The whole concept is bs.</p>
<p>How is the whole concept BS? It will be interesting whether you have some tangible reasons as I cant seem to find any.</p>
<p>Funding money for someone or a group of people. It’s not even an actual product or service. If people could get larger, better loans from banks there would be no need for PE. The people in PE are as big of leeches as ibankers.</p>
<p>When you borrow from a bank you need to pay interest and its much big of a paperwork hassle. Instead when you go to PE groups they provide capital for a part of a business. If PE was bad then of course investing in stocks at publicly traded companies is also being leeches eh. The difference is that PE groups keep their investments in private sectors while the hedge funds and market vehicles make investments in the publicly traded sector. The principle is the same. Ibankers are middle men, PE guys are the buy side.
When you start a business you will know the huge hassle it is to recieve funding from banks. They dont even typically fund high risk projects. This is why you have the tech guys going to VCs instead of their local citibank to raise capital.</p>
<p>thats why I said IF. and working in PE involves kissing ass, not intelligence.</p>
<p>So how are they not providing a service? They are filling in a social need for capital that fund these projects. BTW loans always have interests. I dont understand the IF part. Thats saying that banks will become PE firms themselves. What will be the banks return for the risk it assumes? </p>
<p>Kissing ass is a part of almost any job. Tell me of a job that doesnt involve politics. And yes intelligence is required. Deal making requires considerable knowledge and aptitude. Otherwise every other guy would be the next Kravis or Peterson.</p>