Serving the Quantitative Finance Community

 
User avatar
twofish
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 4:38 am

QuoteOriginally posted by: KackToodlesC'mon, you should know better. UT (and MIT) achieves tech integration by attracting former engineers, doctors and computer scientists to their MBA program and training them to become proper MBAs. That's not the model that either MIT or UT uses. MIT in particular has a lot of informal programs (i.e. entrepreneur contests) that encourage engineers to develop business skills, and a lot of informal networks. You look at someone who has started their own company, and that gives you some idea as to how it can be done. UT has a very good MBA program, but it doesn't have the links with science and engineering that MIT has. On the other hand, UT Austin is really strong at things like project management because of the demand from the semi-conductor industry. Also, an MBA isn't that useful for ***starting*** a company. It's useful for middle managers running a large company, but the skill sets are quite different.QuoteHa ha, if you cannot appreciate that an MBA course is worth much more than $1000, you don't not belong in one. You want it, but you don't want to pay the market price for it. You want to smooooooch! Getting a bank interview through the UT MBA program is worth about $1000 to me. Above that, then there are cheaper/easier ways for me to get those interviews.QuoteWhen you refuse to apply/enroll in the MBA program, you are telling them YOU are not interested in integrating some MBA knowledge. How does letting some untrained (therefore, unintegrated) science phds with zero formal business training interview in their career office "integrating" tech? The important thing in getting interdisciplinary things happening is to get people talking to each other. Just having science Ph.D.'s in the business school allows for some conversations that otherwise would not take place.One other thing..... The reason I'm rather pro-active in doing stuff like this was because I worked in a large oil company for seven years. If you sit down and wait for orders, *nothing happens*. To get anything done in a large bureaucracy, you have be something of a proactive pest. Sit back and follow procedure just causes the company to ossify.QuoteBusiness at the professional level is not some fly by the night activity that any physics phd is suddenly an expert in by expressing an "interest". An MBA entails some serious amount of education in business and economics and human relations. That's why banks encourage even their best employees to go back to get an MBA and sometimes even pay for it. Which I can get by buying books and looking at what is going on around me. I'm not a Ph.D. fresh out of school. I've had about a decade of work experience, and most of that involved development lead work. At some point, I'll probably go back to school, but it will likely be to law school. As far as getting people business experience, I really don't think that the traditional MBA is the most useful format for getting physics Ph.D.'s into the business world. It has a assembly line model of education which I think is all wrong.Everyone is different, and for a lot of people, getting an MBA might be just the thing that they need. However, it annoys me when people sell MBA's like fizzy water and assert that if you get one, people will fall all over you. Business is hard work, but the good news is that there are a million ways of playing the game of capitalism.There seems to be a contradiction here. At one level, you are talking about how wonderful elite schools are, but when I mention the good parts of MIT (the emphasis on technical education and the relatively deemphasis on formal curriculum for learning things) you tend to disagree. Why is that?
 
User avatar
KackToodles
Posts: 0
Joined: August 28th, 2005, 10:46 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 4:52 am

QuoteTwofish wroteI'm not a Ph.D. fresh out of school. I've had about a decade of work experience, and most of that involved development lead work. As far as getting people business experience, I really don't think that the traditional MBA is the most useful format for getting physics Ph.D.'s into the business world. It has a assembly line model of education which I think is all wrong. Yadda yadda yadda. "I have a phd and so much experience, I know it all. MBA is worthless mush. But why won't those recruiters hire me?" We've all heard that before. Boring! QuoteI mention the good parts of MIT (the emphasis on technical education and the relatively deemphasis on formal curriculum for learning things) you tend to disagree. Why is that? We are talking about BUSINESS Schools. Hello?! When did the Sloan school deemphasize the formal curriculum?
Last edited by KackToodles on January 8th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
pgeek
Posts: 0
Joined: April 24th, 2006, 2:34 am

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 9:48 am

Once I was talking to some "MBA type" guys from my UG univ, and while talking about consulting and finance, their opinion was to keep away from very quanty type roles, it was their view that it restricts career options later and narrows ur career. From what i understand MBAs out there are not particularly looking out to be quants, but will mostly be looking at Ibanking or Strat consulting with (no math required beyond simple excel spreadsheets)
 
User avatar
imereli
Posts: 0
Joined: July 7th, 2005, 12:50 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 11:30 am

Gentlemen, the field is very competitive, compensations are high. There are too many candidates. Employer needs to reduce their number.One criteria is a brand name, there is more probability that person selected knows math. I think it is hard to find best selection rule.Another sample can be experienced postdocs after one or two posdoc terms. One can restrict their number requiring publications with large number of citations. The analytical skills, programming, feeling of numbers (this is more important than knowledge of design patterns) is garantied in this case. The question is, who needs a team of such people? This is good for reasearch, not for industry. Some of them will be happy with high salary, some of them will be bored because job is not interesting.The scientsts are free people, they do not always follow orders, they can question authority of team leaders and so on.This will be a disaster. Take a look at ordinary quants (try to read some of the discusions on this forum). Young guys went to industry, they have more money than their talanted friends who did not leave academia. They believe that they are smartest people in the world, adore their banks and team leaders and do their calculations. The team leaders, trully smart people who can be succesful in science as well, can handle such a people easily. They do not require from their teams new BS equations. So, I admit that my comment about asking candidates knowledge of C++ was stupid. The banks definitely know that they do not select among really smart people. Banks usually have enough smart quants to invent something new and to lead the teams. For routine work, they need to hire average level fresh graduates, not more. This is a best combination. In public they claim just opposite to attract the clients, "we have brillliant PhDs from Harward and MIT and blah-blah-blah".
 
User avatar
twofish
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 2:50 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: KackToodlesYadda yadda yadda. "I have a phd and so much experience, I know it all. MBA is worthless mush. But why won't those recruiters hire me?" We've all heard that before. Boring! Ummmmm.... You do realize that I have a job.The three problems in getting quant work that I've had are 1) I want to do something China specific 2) I'm not sure that I want to move to NYC and my wife *definitely* doesn't want to move to NYC and 3) I put a very high value on spare time. Nevertheless, I've managed to eek out an upper middle class lifestyle, am doing more or less useful things in academic quantitative finance (i.e. interface R and Quantlib), and I've got enough bargaining power to choose what jobs I take rather than being forced into a corner.There are a lot of ways to make money. One thing that I have learned is if someone tells you that they are the only option, they are probably wrong.QuoteI mention the good parts of MIT (the emphasis on technical education and the relatively deemphasis on formal curriculum for learning things) you tend to disagree. Why is that? We are talking about BUSINESS Schools. Hello?! When did the Sloan school deemphasize the formal curriculum? The formal curriculum at MIT is very unimportant. What is useful about the place is the culture that you learn, and the networks you get attached to. Part of the culture of MIT is a very strong dislike for authoritarianism, secrecy, and branding and a like for technical excellence, creativity, and sharing information.
 
User avatar
twofish
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 3:18 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: imereliGentlemen, the field is very competitive, compensations are high. There are too many candidates. Employer needs to reduce their number.And when I see this, I see "red alert", "red alert", "red alert." If there are too many candidates then it means that the invisible hand is telling you that salaries are too high. You can get away with being overpaid for a while, but eventually the law of gravity will take over. The problem is that when this sort of thing happens, people react irrationally. People assume that if you get stamped with the brand name that they get to the inside, when all that happens is that you end up with an overproduction of brand names that moves the market even more out of equilibrium. The question I think people should ask themselves before signing on to an MBA is do the people who advocate those programs seem to have a basic grasp of the principles of economics, risk management, and business. From a strategic standpoint, it makes little sense to go to school for a brand name. Brand names are valuable because they are scarce. The moment you make it non-scarce, they are less valuable, and if you keep then scarce than there is much less of a chance that you will get them. It's really, really important that everyone understands business because the days of a corporation that will take care of you are over.QuoteBanks usually have enough smart quants to invent something new and to lead the teams. For routine work, they need to hire average level fresh graduates, not more.And looking forward, there are a lot of people in India and China willing to do routine work, really, really cheap.
 
User avatar
imereli
Posts: 0
Joined: July 7th, 2005, 12:50 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 4:27 pm

I agree with you, twofish[\B]. The compensations are too high. You can find many candidates even in the USA willing to do the same for $80-100K+NYC correction (instead of 200 and more).Nobody will pay for the simple calculations 4-5 times more money than full professor's salary. At least it will not last long.
 
User avatar
KackToodles
Posts: 0
Joined: August 28th, 2005, 10:46 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 4:33 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: imereliYou can find many candidates even in the USA willing to do the same for $80-100K+NYC Nobody will pay for the simple calculations 4-5 times more money than full professor's salary. Hello?! Do you know that even a HIGH SCHOOL math teacher in NYC public schools make $100+ K?? And even so, NYC has very difficult time recruiting decent teachers because pay is too low and cost of living is too high. You guys should really get your elementary facts straight!
Last edited by KackToodles on January 8th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
twofish
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 5:28 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: KackToodlesQuoteOriginally posted by: imereliYou can find many candidates even in the USA willing to do the same for $80-100K+NYC Nobody will pay for the simple calculations 4-5 times more money than full professor's salary. Hello?! Do you know that even a HIGH SCHOOL math teacher in NYC public schools make $100+ K?? And even so, NYC has very difficult time recruiting decent teachers because pay is too low and cost of living is too highLet's look at this from an MBA's point of viewWhat is the market telling us:1) Quants are paid more than the market clearing rate2) NYC high school math teachers are being paid less than the market clearing rate3) NYC prices are too high ($100K in NYC is different than $100K Austin) - In economics this is known as the Penn Effect. It would be interesting to try to apply the Balassa-Samuelson model to this.If we assume that things will go to the market equilibrium then we can expect that1) Quant salaries will go down2) Quant work will move away from NYC. The standard argument against 2) is that quant work requires people to physically be in the same room. I don't know if this is going to be the case five years from now.Now what does this mean for me:1) It means that I shouldn't take a low salary job with the expectation of big bucks later. Right now an entry level quant makes less money adjusted for NYC-cost of living than I do right now. Some HH's have promised big bucks later on. I'm skeptical.2) It also means that it makes no economic sense for me to try for an entry level quant job at all. What does make sense is to specialize in some bizarre field that might pay off in a few years.... Or not.... That's risk for you. :-) :-) :-)3) It also means that I don't have to be that eager to move to NYC, since the invisible hand is pushing jobs away from NYC toward lower cost areas. If the jobs end up in Austin or in Shanghai, then I'm set, and I can do what I can to try to help the invisible hand pull jobs my way (i.e. helping to develop online collaborative systems, participating in Austin business events, etc. etc. etc.).This sort of business case analysis is really useful, and learning to do that is a skill that I picked up on the job. If someone is going to do an MBA to learn how to do this, then that is fine. If someone is going to do an MBA and views it as some sort of ticket to riches, I don't think that will work too well.
 
User avatar
KackToodles
Posts: 0
Joined: August 28th, 2005, 10:46 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 9:18 pm

fishy, your arguments and non-sequiturs are very entertaining indeed. Congrats on your creative application of the "penn effect" -- a macro inter-COUNTRY effect -- to labor economics. Are you pulling my leg? Ha ha, very funny! When you make these arguments to a bank interviewer (or HH), you must appear as spectacular as the physics crank who uses newtonian gravity to draw outrageous conclusions about the orbital structure of electrons around nuclei! Thank you, fishy, you make my day.
Last edited by KackToodles on January 8th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
twofish
Posts: 0
Joined: February 18th, 2005, 6:51 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 10:58 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: KackToodlesfishy, your arguments and non-sequiturs are very entertaining indeed. Congrats on your creative application of the "penn effect" -- a macro inter-COUNTRY effect -- to labor economics. Are you pulling my leg?Just being creative. There is no reason that the Penn effect or Balassa-Samuelson has to be restricted to inter-country effects. Think about it, if the Penn effect applies to Greece and Germany which are in a customs and currency union, then why shouldn't it apply to New York and Mississippi. Also labor is just a non-tradable service.QuoteHa ha, very funny! When you make these arguments to a bank interviewer (or HH), you must appear as spectacular as the physics crank who uses newtonian gravity to draw outrageous conclusions about the orbital structure of electrons around nuclei! Thank you, fishy, you make my day. Can you explain why the Penn effect or Balassa-Samuelson explanation is not applicable for price differences between New York and Texas? Customs union? Common currency? Those are the case for EU states.I'd argue that this is precisely why someone should hire me. I don't just repeat what I read in books. I actually think about the principles and see if they are applicable in my daily life. So maybe no one else in the world has applied Balassa-Samuelson to intra-country markets. So what? Someone has to be the first.FYI: Balassa-Samuelson is the standard economic explanation for why price levels in high income areas are higher than low income areas. You divide the economy into tradables and non-tradables. Tradable goods cost the same in Texas and New York. Non-tradable goods (like houses or services) can't because you can't ship them. Because the overall level of productivity and wealth is higher in NYC, the price of non-tradables gets bid up. Bonus question: What happens when a non-tradable service like quant'ing suddenly becomes tradable due to technological changes?
 
User avatar
ckelvin
Posts: 0
Joined: May 31st, 2005, 2:08 pm

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 11:38 pm

Two highly experienced and qualified people argue in such a manner. This is not a good sign.
 
User avatar
veeruthakur
Posts: 0
Joined: January 8th, 2007, 4:51 am

once again on brand names

January 9th, 2007, 11:46 pm

What was the original question again? This has degenerated into a mess.
Last edited by veeruthakur on January 9th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
KackToodles
Posts: 0
Joined: August 28th, 2005, 10:46 pm

once again on brand names

January 10th, 2007, 1:27 am

QuoteOriginally posted by: veeruthakurWhat was the original question again?At last, some sense. The question at hand is, "Does working at the structured finance desk pay more than working at the structured derivatives (exotics) desk?"
Last edited by KackToodles on January 9th, 2007, 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.