<p>I don't know, but I've always dreamed of driving the Porsche 911 Carrera, and that's not going to happen as an engineer. My salary's my #1 priority.</p>
<p>Lmao!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Not everyone is in it for the money. Son would a million times over rather be a Mech Engineer than even triple his salary and be a banker. I have to ask, doesn't ANYONE anymore take on a job or study because they have a passion? Is it always about money? or are my kids rarities?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think it's at all unusual for somebody to worry about salary. After all, college is expensive, so people are justifiably interested in the payback. </p>
<p>I would also say that, let's face it, a lot of students are studying engineering for the money. Engineering does have some of the highest starting salaries of any bachelor's degrees. If that wasn't true, then even fewer Americans would be studying engineering than do so currently.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't know, but I've always dreamed of driving the Porsche 911 Carrera, and that's not going to happen as an engineer. My salary's my #1 priority.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If that's the way you feel, then you should go to investment banking.</p>
<p>I'm planning on getting an MBA. Business actually intrigues me, so that's a major plus. Whether or not I end up as an Investment Banker is up in the air. I'll have to further my knowledge on the high paying business professions. I want to get into a top MBA program in the states after engineering, and I feel like I'm fully capable of doing that.</p>
<p>Well, I guess son is a rarity. He doesn't "worry" about money, is practical about it, yes. But doesn't care what he makes once out of college, as long as he's a Mechanical engineer, lol. btw, he is paying for much of his college so he will have loans.</p>
<p>sorry for using this thread for my question..
it may sound a little out of topic, but I think it fits here though.
just wondering...how much engineering professors make a year?
do they make less or more than that of engineers??</p>
<p>Hey I'm so sorry but this might be a little of topic too........
Does anybody here know how much a person with a masters in Industrial/product design earn in a year? Im planning to get a B.S. in mech engr and mostly a degree in industrial design.</p>
<p>
[quote]
sorry for using this thread for my question..
it may sound a little out of topic, but I think it fits here though.
just wondering...how much engineering professors make a year?
do they make less or more than that of engineers??
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, this is a deeply misleading question because there are a lot of factors at play here.</p>
<p>First off, tenured profs don't work the whole year. They get the whole summer off. They get all of the academic breaks off - i.e. about a month during December/January, a week of spring break, and so forth. They get year-long sabbatical breaks once every 7 years or so. Imagine that - getting a whole year off while still getting paid. Granted, most profs work quite hard on their research during these breaks, but the point is, they don't have to. They can do whatever they want. </p>
<p>Secondly, and far more importantly, tenured profs are basically unfireable. That's what tenure means - it means that you can't be fired unless you do something really egregious like sexually harrass a student or something like that. In fact, that's why some tenured profs choose to do little research and spend little effort on teaching - the truth is, they know they have tenure so they know that they can't be fired, so they can choose to slack off and do almost nothing. They basically get to enjoy life. </p>
<p>Which leads to the third aspect. If you're a tenured engineering prof, you can make a LOT of money off side-consulting and side business ventures, easily making several times what you are making off your prof salary. I know plenty of MIT engineering profs who are serving as directors and principals of venture capital firms or engineering consulting firms, or have their own startup company, etc. I know many who serve as highly paid technical expert witnesses in court cases. Almost all of them have plenty of offers from technology companies to serve as part-time technical consultants. For example, if you become noted for your research in semiconductors, you better believe that the top semiconductor firms in the world are going to want you to consult for them. </p>
<p>Hence, the point is, for a tenured engineering prof at any decent school, they should be making at least 200k, and almost certainly a lot more than that, from both salary, but far more importantly, from all of the side work. If they're not making that kind of money, it's only because they don't WANT to make that kind of money.</p>
<p>I think 200k is kind of pushing it. I agree with the whole working-off-the-side stuff, but 200k is a lot of money, and you really have to be the top to really get those lucrative consulting jobs (and how many people are at the top? 10 in a field? 20? I'm thinking 1 or 2 for each top school.) Being that good isn't exactly easy. So, to really put it all on the whole consulting business can be risky, I think. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I think around 100k (everything included) would be a good average, with 200-300k being at the top of the field.</p>
<p>Nah, no way. I think it is EASILY achieveable. Nobody says that you have to be a "top" person to be a consultant. Trust me, there are a LOT of mediocre consultants out there that nevertheless make huge amounts of money. The truth is, there are literally hundreds and hundreds of consulting firms out there employing tens of thousands of people, most of them not being very good. I'm not talking about the big brand-name ones like McKinsey or BCG. Even many of the no-name consulting firms generate a lot of money. And it's a poorly understood fact that many of these consulting firms are willing to pay an arm and a leg to tenured profs just to be able to SAY that they have a tenured engineering prof as one of their principals or advisors. In other words, many of these boutique consulting firms are just looking to rent your name (or more accurately, the name of your university). </p>
<p>I'll give you a case in point. I know a guy who doesn't even have a college degree at all who makes well over 250k a year just on simple information technology consulting. Basically, he started his own consulting firm that configures and designs computer networking infrastructure (i.e. routers, switches, and so forth). Like I said, he doesn't even have a degree at all, and he can make a lot of money on consulting. It isn't even particularly high-end consulting. It's just telling companies how they should configure their corporate netowrking gear. So if he can charge that kind of money doing that, just think of the kind of money that an actual tenured engineering prof can charge for consulting services, if he wants it.</p>
<p>The key is that you have to WANT to make it. I agree that many profs are not interested in money and are just interested in doing research that may make them no money at all. Hey, if that's the kind of life you want to lead, then that's fine. But what I'm saying is that if you WANT to make a lot of money and you are a tenured prof at at least a half-decent school, you can certainly do it. Again, if companies are willing to pay small fortunes to mediocre consulting firms, how much do you think they would be willing to pay for the consulting services of an actual engineering prof? </p>
<p>I think you have also vastly understated the earning potential of profs, particularly at the high end. Take MIT as an example. Yes, MIT is a top-line engineering school, but we are talking about who is top of the field. There are MIT engineering profs who are easily millionaires and a few of them are billionaires. Many of them are deeply tied into the local consulting or venture capital industry. In fact, many of the boutique consulting firms in the Boston/Cambridge area were themselves founded by MIT (or Harvard) profs. Either that or they have started their own highly succcessful biotech or computer companies. For example, Amar Bose founded the Bose Corporation (audio technology) while he was still an EECS Professor at MIT (and he still is an MIT prof, although emeritus now). Amar Bose made the list of Forbes 2006 list of billionaires with an estimated net worth of $1.2 billion. Ron Rivest cofounded the company highly successful computer security company RSA Security while he was still a MIT EECS prof. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/10/BVDT.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/10/BVDT.html</a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_Security%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_Security</a></p>
<p>Others may not have become rich, but could easily do so in a minute if they wanted to. For example, Eric Lander, as both MIT Prof and director of the Broad Institute (the Whitehead Institute) has been the one of the main leaders of the Human Genome Project for many years. If he wanted to start his own biotech firm, he would have no problem in securing tens of millions in venture capital backing just because of his prestige and his contacts through years at being at the forefront of the biotech industry. Or he could, starting tomorrow, join a biotech consulting firm (or start his own consulting firm) and make millions in fees because there are plenty of biotech firms and pharmaceutical firms that would just love to pick the brain of Eric Lander. </p>
<p>To give you another example that has nothing to do with MIT, you may remember that Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his discovery of the polymerase chain reaction, also became an possible expert witness for the defense in the OJ Simpson trial. Trust me, he was very very well paid by the defense for being ready to say why he thought the prosecution's DNA evidence was unreliable. In effect, the defense was basically going to be renting his Nobel Prize - effectively saying that here is a Nobel Prize winner and indisputable genius who is disparaging the accuracy of DNA evidence. By a similar token, a lot of engineering profs serve as extremely well paid court expert witnesses. </p>
<p>For example, here's a biomed prof at Oregon State who also has started his own consulting company. One of the things the firm specializes in is court testimony involving biomedical claims and injuries. And in fact, several of his associates at his consulting company are also Oregon State profs.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.hayesassoc.com/CV.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.hayesassoc.com/CV.htm</a>
<a href="http://www.hayesassoc.com/associates.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.hayesassoc.com/associates.htm</a></p>
<p>In fact, just search for keywords such as "expert witness" and engineering and you will notice that a LOT of professors of engineering have significantly side businesses as court expert witnesses. For these kinds of multi-million dollar lawsuits, expert witnesses get paid very very well. </p>
<p>But again, I would emphasize that it is true that a lot of engineering profs are simply not interested in making a lot of money. That's why the average salaries of engineering profs are not that high. But the point is, if you get tenure at a half-decent school, and you want to make a lot of money on the side, you can do it. It's not that hard, if you choose to do it.</p>
<p>''I said it before, I'll say it again. If all that matters to you is money, then don't become an engineer. Just go become an investment banker or related finance jobs. Those guys can easily make more money in 1 year than an engineer can make in his whole lifetime. ''</p>
<p>My uncle got a B.S. in CS & EE from Temple University.
He also got a M.S. from the same college.
He's about in his early 30s, so he's been working for 10 to 12 years.</p>
<p>He works as a consultant in some software firm, makes around 100$ per hour.
Thats $192,000 per year.
[ofcourse the work place is in NYC, he lives in northern NJ though]</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm not talking about the big brand-name ones like McKinsey or BCG.
[/quote]
who says big brand-name ones are necessarily good?
[quote]
he doesn't even have a degree at all, and he can make a lot of money on consulting.
[/quote]
who says someone without a degree is necessarily not good?
[quote]
Others may not have become rich, but could easily do so in a minute if they wanted to
[/quote]
for those rich people(especially engineers), did you count the time they spent on studying/working their butts off to learn the hard stuff really well?
[quote]
The key is that you have to WANT to make it.
[/quote]
please tell us how to become rich since I'm sure almost everyone here wants to.
[quote]
I would emphasize that it is true that a lot of engineering profs are simply not interested in making a lot of money.
[/quote]
I have not heard a single case like what you said and most of my close friends are engineers. It's true that most of them are very interested in doing research/technical stuff, but that doesn't exclude their desires to become rich. The fact is: they simply can't become rich but this cruel fact usually doesn't make them regret that they picked engineering.
Conclusion: as we all should know, the ratio between people who become rich and people who want to be rich is so, so, so... small.</p>
<p>The key to this process is the ability to get tenure. I have several professors in my extended family who now have tenure and the stories that they tell about what goes on trying to get to that point were scary to a guy who is pretty well versed in office politics. It is certainly not any type of sure thing that you will get tenure once you are hired as an assitant prof or lecturer. My guess would be that about 25% make it and the other 75% end up doing something else at the end of the day.
Straight salary for full tenured profs ranges from about 75K up to over 125K. Staying on top of your field requires a significant amount of research and publishing. It is a pretty good living but certainly no walk in the park.
If you really want to make money you need to look into illegal drug importation and distribution. Otherwise you should find something that you enjoy doing and get a job working at that. If you don't like what you are doing, spending 2000 hours a year doing it is going to really suck before too long.</p>
<p>
[quote]
who says big brand-name ones are necessarily good?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I didn't say that they weren't good.</p>
<p>I simply said what I said to deal with an objection that I thought would be raised in that it is difficult to get an offer from a top consulting firm. This is true, but my response is basically that you don't need to get into a top consulting firm to make good money. </p>
<p>
[quote]
who says someone without a degree is necessarily not good?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I didn't say that either. In fact, that illustrates my central point - that even people who don't have college degrees can make good money. Hence, somebody with a degree have the chance to REALLY be able to make good money, if they tackle the problem correctly. </p>
<p>
[quote]
for those rich people(especially engineers), did you count the time they spent on studying/working their butts off to learn the hard stuff really well?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. My point is that even some people who don't work that hard can make good money. Hence, if you work hard, you can REALLY make good money. </p>
<p>
[quote]
please tell us how to become rich since I'm sure almost everyone here wants to.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The most straightforward way to become rich is to become an entrepreneur. Open your own small business doing something that you are good at.</p>
<p>Now, don't get me wrong, I am well aware that a lot of people simply don't have the psychological makeup to become an entrepreneur. I agree that it takes a certain mentality to do it, because it is risky. But that gets down to the heart of the matter - you have to teach yourself to tolerate risk. If you can do that, then you can become a small businessman. </p>
<p>I'll give you a very simple example. It's not that hard to learn basic computer services, for example, how to maintain Microsoft Windows, Exchange (email), routers, switches, web-servers, basic databases, basic programming, and the like. You get a bunch of computer books, a bunch of computers to practice with, and you just practice for, say, a whole year. After that whole year, if you've worked hard, you're going to be pretty decent at computers. Then you just sell your knowledge as a computer contractor/consultant. Trust me - there are PLENTY of small companies out there that have computers but don't really know how to install and maintain them, and they would be happy to do business with you. So that can be your own small business. </p>
<p>Lest you think I'm just making this up, let me say that this is EXACTLY what a number of my friends have done, including people who have never even graduated from college. Some of them make over 200k a year doing this. Obviously they didn't make this to start, but they started out with basic computer repair, and then moved up from there to do ever-more-complicated IT services. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I have not heard a single case like what you said and most of my close friends are engineers. It's true that most of them are very interested in doing research/technical stuff, but that doesn't exclude their desires to become rich. The fact is: they simply can't become rich but this cruel fact usually doesn't make them regret that they picked engineering.
Conclusion: as we all should know, the ratio between people who become rich and people who want to be rich is so, so, so... small.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree that the ratio is small, but only because most people don't have the temperament required to become entrepreneurial, and thus rich. Let's face it. It's simply EASY to let other people worry about the headaches of running a business, like doing all the taxes and the accounting and worrying about getting business insurance and business licenses and all that jazz. It's EASY to become an employee and let others worry about that stuff.</p>
<p>But my point is, if you really want to make more money, learn a marketable skill and become a contractor.</p>
<p>For example, just fiddling around on dice, I see the following contract that pays $70-80 an hour. The skills that are required are not THAT hard to learn. Javascript, Ajax, WireFrames, etc. - those skills are not that difficult. You could pick them up by working for a company (as a regular employee) for a couple of years and then have the right skillset to take on this contract.</p>
<p>But think about that contract money. The truth is, most computer guys work around 60 hours a week on a regular job. But as a contractor, you'd be billing for every hour you worked. So if you worked 60 hours a week for 50 weeks a year, at $80 an hour, you'd make $240k for that year. That's good money. </p>
<p>Now, of course, this contract would probably not last the whole year. In fact, as the description says, it may only last for 3 months. But that means that if you're entrepreneurial, you can string together a bunch of these contracts back to back and make very good money for the whole year. </p>
<p>Furthermore, by taking these contracts, you're constantly building your skills, which makes you eligible for even better contracts later. This dice link is just one that I pulled up with literally less than 5 seconds of searching. If you're entrepreneurial, you can pull up plenty more, with pay rates that are going to be much higher. For example, I have heard of some J2EE/EJB/Oracle expert consulting contractors getting paid over $200 an hour. I am fairly certain that that qualifies as 'rich'. </p>
<p>Look, this has been one long digression, but to make a simple point which is that it's not THAT hard to make very good money if you're hard-working and entrepreneurial. The truth is, computer skills aren't THAT hard to learn. For example, it's not that hard to pick up a whole bunch of Java books, study hard, and in a few months, become reasonably competent with Java such that you can pick up some low-end software development contracts, and then from there, work hard to build your skills to get better and better contracts. </p>
<p>The problems with entrepreneurialism are many - chiefly psychological. For example, it is definitely true that as an entrepreneur, you don't have a steady paycheck. In some months, you may make nothing, and that's unacceptable for many people who need a steady income. Entrepreneurial income is definitely not steady. This eliminates a lot of people. Other problems are that, in the beginning, you have to spend upfront costs in getting a proper accountant, a proper lawyer, a business license, liability insurance, etc. This is money you have to spend with no assurance that you will get anything back. This also deters some people. I also think that the biggest problem of all is that a lot of people are simply not independent. They need a boss to tell them what tasks need to be done. But as a contractor, nobody is going to tell you what contracts to pursue, or what skills to develop. That's all you. Many people find that scary. </p>
<p>But my point is, this is mostly psychological. If you can get over it (and not everybody can), then you can make quite good money.</p>
<p>I have dipped into the "independent contractor" thing and YES, it allows you to get that $120-150/hour instead of that company-paid $75/hour (of course I am talking DC-area defense/intelligence I.T. contracting)...BUT...</p>
<p>1) Like Sakky said, you have to worry about getting outbidded on a contract and possibly having no steady income.</p>
<p>2) You have to keep all-types of workers insurance and other company benefits up to maintain your "credentials" as a small-corporation.</p>
<p>3) Oh, yeah...don't forget the taxes</p>
<p>All of that ON TOP of actually doing the technical work at your client site. Some folks (myself included), especially after having a family would rather work for some other entity (ex: corporation) that will handle "find the work" and all you have to do is remain marketable. Will you be rich?...NO!, but you can gross $150-200K a year going that route and that will leave you time to catch your kid(s) events and catch the college football games on Saturdays.</p>
<p>What I like about the hourly contractor business (either 1099 or W2) is that you are getting paid for every hour that you work. This is a far cry from what happens as a regular salaried employee. What that means is that if you're a contractor, and you are called in to work on a weekend, at least you make extra money during that weekend. Yeah, you lost your weekend, but at least you can sit and count all the extra money you made.</p>
<p>But as an employee, you can get called into a weekend, and get nothing for it. You just lost your weekend for nothing.</p>
<p>About engineers becoming investment bankers...</p>
<p>the biggest problems i see with it:</p>
<p>what if you don't make it ? By the time you want to
fall back to engineering, the industry will consider you<br>
obsolete....you'll have spent 4 (B.S) to 6 (M.S) yrs of your life for nothing</p>
<p>investment banking you say... seems to me just like another white-collar form of gambling.</p>
<p>More like being the "house."</p>
<p>
[quote]
what if you don't make it ? By the time you want to
fall back to engineering, the industry will consider you
obsolete....you'll have spent 4 (B.S) to 6 (M.S) yrs of your life for nothing</p>
<p>investment banking you say... seems to me just like another white-collar form of gambling.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, how is it 'for nothing'? One of the most common exit strategies for former investment banking analysts is to go to business school and get their MBA's upon which they can be hired as a manager, either at a tech company, or a regular company. If you're talking about being an investment banking associate, and you don't make it, you can become an manager in the Corporate Finance division of a company, and from there, move up. Or you can join a VC firm, a private equity firm, etc. </p>
<p>To give you an example, take the software company Oracle, which is the second-largest software company in the world. The company is still led by founder Larry Ellison, who never even graduated from college at all. But who is right below him? The 2 co-Presidents, Charles Phillips and Safra Catz, are former investment bankers. Phillips was a former Managing Director at Morgan Stanley, Catz was a former Managing Director at DLJ (which is now part of Credit Suisse First Boston). So basically, the entire top management of consists of non-engineers. Plenty of other engineering/tech companies are basically run not by engineers, but by finance guys. </p>
<p>Look, I agree that after spending some years as a banker, it's difficult to go back to engineering. But frankly, you won't want to go back to being an engineer, because you'll have something BETTER. Like, for example, being a manager at an engineering company. </p>
<p>I also disagree with the characterization that you will have spent 4-6 years in getting BS/MS eng degrees for nothing. One could say that about any degree. For example, a guy who studies, I don't know, Art History at Harvard for 4 years and then becomes an investment banker could be said to have 'wasted' 4 years of his life. In fact, most degrees are effectively 'wasted' in the sense that most people do not take jobs that have to do with their particular major. For example, few history majors actually become professional historians. Few psychology majors actually become professional psychologists. Few sociology majors actually become professional sociologists. So, in that sense, most people are 'wasting' their time in college. Engineering is certainly no worse in this score, and probably better. After all, the percentage of engineering students who actually work as engineers is clearly higher than the percentage of history students who actually become historians. </p>
<p>Besides, I don't think this is the right way to look at the situation anyway. If getting a degree helps you to get the job that you want, then who cares whether that particular job is tightly related to the degree? The degree accomplished its purpose in getting you your desired job. Nothing more, nothing less. Hence, it was effective. A huge chunk of students at the top schools such as Harvard get degrees in various eclectic subjects before taking jobs in consulting or banking, or heading off to law school or medical school. I don't consider that to be a waste. They came to Harvard with the goal of getting matched with the job they want, or with the graduate program they want. Nothing more, nothing less. And they accomplished that goal.</p>