<p>From reading this board, it seems that the traditional career path of i-banking wannabes is to get an MBA after several years of working, preferably in I-banking consulting firms. </p>
<p>Since admission to MBAs is so uncertain and not directly related to academic performance, I feel like if I really want to be an investment banker one day(right now, it is only one of my several choices), I will feel insecure, since the future is unpredictable. I have heard about degrees in Finance and related fields. Could those degrees be used as alternatives to MBA if one wants to be an I-banker but does not like the unpredictable nature of MBA?</p>
<p>First of all there is nothing called Ibanking consulting.</p>
<p>Ibanking is not the faint of heart. You will be always facing uncertainty and MBA is the least of your worries in the field. You might very well be fired for p.issing off a MD even before you begin your business school apps. Heck statistically you are probably not even going to be offered a prime ibanking job. Stop worrying about your MBA and begin worrying how you will first get an internship and then worry how you will get a job and then worry how you will not screw up and after all that start thinking about biz schools. </p>
<p>As for degrees finance, math MAs and PhDs are more suited for the trading floors and funds than at ibanks. Its really more of a ritual to get a MBA degree after 3 years of being an analyst. Only for the exceptional and the well connected do they make an exception.</p>
<p>Actually it isn't very hard to be directly promoted to associate from analyst. If you have a pulse, and you do what you're told...most likely you'll be promoted directly to associate; however, most people do not want to endure 4 more years of hell.</p>
<p>Are you sure about that, uc_benz? I heard quite the opposite, that it's ridiculously difficult to get promoted straight to associate. The vast majority of analysts are "let go" (to use a polite term) after two years, when they are expected to get MBA's and possibly rejoin the firm later. And it's not always a matter of performance that gets you promoted; i-banking is a very social career, so intangible aspects such as character and compatability with the VP's and MD's seems to play a major role in determining who will be given the coveted promotion to associate.</p>
<p>I-banking salaries are among the best you can get, which is why it's such a popular and competitive career. The major downside is that the lifestyle is absolutely terrible (100-hours per week of work, high-risk, high-pressure environment, etc.), so many people burn out after a few years and/or move onto other careers. And yes, the job is very boring at the analyst level (lots of data crunching on Excel, drafting pitchbooks, and other entry-level grunt work). I-banking is a very popular route for pre-business students because of the mega-salaries at the higher levels, but unfortunately, very few actually get to that level.</p>
<p>I dont know what firm you are talking about Uc Benz but from the people I have talked to getting that promotion from associate from analyst takes some good backing from the superiors as well as some great connections (son of MD, brother of MD etc). </p>
<p>Yes climbing to be a partner at a law firm also has intangibles.
Let me put it this way, to get to the top you have to be the best. Thats the way life is and ibanking/law is the same as any other jobs. You just have to be the best to get the best positions to earn the most. If you think that you will earn 8-9 figure packages just by entering one of these fields then you are wrong. If you are satisfied with a 6 figure package sure ibanking and law is the way to go. Every job has intangibles. Ibanking is the same as other jobs: you have bosses, you do grunt work until you prove to be a deal maker, and you have to keep in mind the human factor.</p>
<p>And yes the salaries are good. This is why all of sudden everyone and their mom on CC wants to be an ibanker. ;)</p>
<p>Well I was talking to a friend of the family that is the head of M&A at BB firm, and he said that it is really not that hard. Of course by hard, it is relative to getting the job in the first place and being able to keep your job throughout the three years. Most people don't get "kicked" out of i-banking; they CHOOSE to leave.</p>
<p>Here's how it basically works: In the first year or two the best analysts move onto stuff such as PE/VC/HF, and the worst analysts are fired. That leaves analysts that are mid to upper echelon of the analyst class. About a fifth of the remaining analyst class is offered a promotion to an associate. </p>
<p>So, like I said earlier, if you stay with the company and do what associate/VP/MD tells you to do then you would stand a fair chance to be promoted. It's not easy in any sense of the imagination, but you don't have to go down on your boss to get the promotion.</p>
<p>But you will probably end up going down on him anyways because you want a high bonus ;)</p>
<p>There really is nothing like "the best" analysts. The guys that get positions at PE/HF firms are mostly people with connections. Some make connections because they were born into them while others make connections through deal making. The "worst" analysts are probably the ones that p.issed off an MD because of something stupid.</p>
<p>In my own experience, there WAS something EXACTLY like "the best" analysts.</p>
<p>When I was there, my firm made a transition from retaining zero analysts (they all left after 2 years) to making associate offers to a small number of analysts; maybe 20% of them. All the cases I personally know about were analysts who were not connected, but were "the best", taking prior performance in their analyst role and potential for their new role as investment bankers into account.</p>
<p>They also started asking some few analysts to stay a third year, without an offer of promotion to associate. These were people who were valued and good at their current jobs, and were needed, but maybe didn't have what it takes to be a banker down the road.</p>
<p>I only know of a couple analysts who were asked to leave before their 2-year stint was up, but the vast majority left, per expectation, after 2 years. Most of these were extremely bright and capable individuals in their own right, and many went on to great jobs in banking and various other fields after getting an MBA.</p>
<p>Of course that's just the way my firm worked, at that time. It may not work exactly that way now, and moreover other firms may have different policies/practices about analyst promotion. I don't think they were all the same back then, either.</p>