well, I guess I'd have to invoke diminishing marginal utility in Jordan's case. He received more utility from winning than the extra pay.

QuotePay is typically based on the job requirements not the education level. I do agree.I guess what i meant is that since skills/requirements don't match education in this particular posting (they list skills which are very unlikely to be held by someone with the degree requirements), how can I tell which it is they want?as an example, I had a previous interview for a job with a description that implied Phd or an ABD person. Later, I found out that the manager had someone else write the description....the mgr. knew very little about the stuff (which is OK), and had not budgeted or intended to pay the market rate for someone with those skills (not OK).Hopefully, since the employer with this new listing does employ quants, they are already aware of what is appropriate.Thanks.

When this question came up on an earlier thread, I made fun of posters for speaking casually about billions of dollars of other people's money but not being willing to mention the number of thousands of dollars they make or want to make. dc has stepped up with some numbers, but now people are telling each other not to mention a salary requirement or to try to guess the most you can get.Anyone who is afraid to negotiate or embarassed to talk about money should find another field. HR is being straightforward, not pushy, to ask you want you want. I wouldn't look twice at a candidate for a financial job who wasn't ready to name a figure when asked.Of course, as others have said, starting base salary is not the most important consideration. Think honestly what you want to get out of the job and negotiate based on that. The advantage of naming the first number is you get to pick the terms of the discussion. "I want to make $1 million in my first three years" or "I want 15% of my trading profits" or "I want to own 5% of the company in five years". Don't worry about what others are getting, that's greedy. Ask for what you want, and make sure you're worth every penny. If someone tells me they want to get rich or move into an ambitious new job; she has to prove to me that she's better than a guy willing to work for average scale with no promises to help him along.Once you name what you want, you should be flexible in how you get it. If the interviewer says "there's no possibility of that here," you should walk away with no regrets (or you've set your figure too high). If he says "you'd have to be in the top 1% of people we've ever hired," you have your choice. If he says, "wow! we'd have paid twice that to get you," you should equally have no regrets. You won't take every dollar on the table in every negotiation you ever do, and trying to do that brings failure, not success. Also, different firms have different systems, so you will have to tailor your general terms to the specifics of the firm. Maybe they have a limit on first year bonuses, or make you take a lot of the compensation in stock options. You have to be flexible.Be sure you're talking to the right person when you make your salary pitch. You don't want to be negotiating with someone who can't make the deal, nor with someone who won't keep promises. If you don't meet anyone high enough during your interviews, ask to see someone higher up (or just figure the place doesn't want you very much). The person who hires you establishes a relationship of mutual obligation, you want to have that with someone powerful and trustworthy. And be sure you make a two-sided deal, the employer will get you the money, training and opportunities you want; you must do some good things in return.Having shot my mouth off, I'll give different figures than dc. I don't think I'm right and he's wrong, these are just two data points based on our personal information. I'm talking about the big, publicly-owned investment banks in New York. And I'm assuming you want to work with models rather than manage or trade.If by "junior quant PhD" you mean no financial experience, degree in math not from a name school, decent but not exceptional programming skills, and no other assets (great contacts, manner, other achievements). This market is pretty depressed. There is a large supply of these people worldwide (Russia, China, India, Turkey), and a large supply of unemployed people with all this plus experience. I think you'll get a programmers' salary, say $60,000 in New York, or maybe $10,000 more. Signing bonuses and first-year guarantees are unlikely, it's difficult even to get relocation expenses. Figure 10% lower in major US financial cities other than New York, even lower in smaller places. I don't know the international market. That's no reason to get discouraged, lots of people live on less money and if you're good and right for the field, you'll be out of the piecework pool in a hurry.At the other extreme of "junior quant PhD" you might have a finance PhD with a quantititive dissertation from a name school with a couple years on Wall Street before you went back to school and a name professor to push you. That's a different league. For base salaries it's hard to go beyond the low hundreds, even with a lot of experience. So, I'll say $110,000. But you should expect a 50% bonus with decent work, 100% with good work. You might get a first-year guarantee, but I wouldn't ask for it. You'll probably do better without it and it looks too risk-averse. If you're front office, the bonuses can be higher, but they'll depend on the desk's profit. Also, in the current environment, everyone's bonus can be cut if the firm does bad. Expect 25% or more of your bonus to be in restricted stock and options.

Somehow the figures I quoted for starting salaries are being attributed to dc - not that I mind, but I thought that he might not want to take responsibility for the quality (or lack thereof) of the information I provided. As I stated, my figures were based on a few points of anecdotal evidence, and it should be obvious that the results you get will be based on your unique blend of qualificaitons, skills, what area you are interviewing with, the point in the business cycle, and other factors.I think Aaron makes an excellent point that your goal in salary negotiation shouldn't be to get the absolute maximum that the employer is willing to pay, but rather to get what you believe your time and expertise is worth. This is especially true in a first job out of school where you have very little leverage (there are lots of grads looking for jobs), and where pay scales tend to be fairly standardized, at least at larger firms.It would be a mistake to choose a job, especially at an entry level, based on the first year pay package. The money you make in your first year out of school will probably be a very small fraction of your total income over the duration of your career.

QuoteOriginally posted by: AaronAnyone who is afraid to negotiate or embarassed to talk about money should find another field.As a point that of clarification, I would like to emphasize that my argument is not "if" one should talk about compensation, but "when". Earlier I argued one's bargaining power is at a maximum when there is an offer in hand. However, if you wait for an offer, you may be conceding a "first-mover" advantage - if one exists. So, which is it? Wait for them to commit and then stick them up for more? Or, hit them with an offer at the high end of their range and hope they'll take it. The former is a reliable and conservative strategy. Before you opt to be more aggressive as the first mover, you should make sure that you have an edge - such as a competing offer, an information advantage (i.e. knowing in advance what they are willing to pay while they still don't know what you will demand), or some proprietary competitive advantage versus competing final round candidates. Lastly, if you opt to move first, you MUST be willing to walk away if your bottom-line is not met. The right move is a tactical decision that you'll have to make based on your unique circumstances.

Aaron great post but permit me make some comments -----Anyone who is afraid to negotiate or embarassed to talk about money should find another field. HR is being straightforward, not pushy, to ask you want you want. I wouldn't look twice at a candidate for a financial job who wasn't ready to name a figure when asked.----I tend to agree. But most books that advise about the interview process recommend to refrain any discussion about payment particularly during the first rounds. Perhaps they think that a job seeker synonym to beggar. In past interviews whenever asked to state how much i need, i have been always replied an amount close to the market rate after many questions regarding the job profile duties and the working environment. Most of the times i ve seen a pressure, sometimes with a not very elegant way, to decrease the compensation i demand. I have also seen attempts to force me accept terms that clearly violate the current labour law. I guess that they bet at the employee's probable ignorance.I can also guess HR managers have budgets as well, and they are compensated according to them, they have every good reason to reduce the payroll expenditures. Not to ommit managerial hubris and arrogance...---------and a large supply of unemployed people with all this plus experience-----------------There must be a threshold payment where at any price below this people prefer leisure over work. That means that the threat of unemployment (actual or not) cant be effective in such a situation and shouldnt be used to reduce salaries.----Also, in the current environment, everyone's bonus can be cut if the firm does bad.-------One point is who's bonus can be cut? The one's who has a basic salary of 80K$ or the one's who has a basic salary at least as high as 5 times the previous figure. It is definitely not the same -------- Expect 25% or more of your bonus to be in restricted stock and options. ---------------------As an employee it is not my business to take over or permit transfered entrepreneur's or shareholder's risks. Since we are talking about listed companies i can always buy in the market stocks of the company i work, cant i? (albeit a bad action from a diverisfication's perspective) Furthermore, i can sell it or buy more anytime i wish to do so. Thus i can always do it by my self without anyones pressure. For those reasons i would prefer any bonus in cash only.....Eventually, one more question. Is Unionism such a bad word in US?

on a slightly different issue, how far could a quant guy go with 10+ yrs experience? other than the big name guys like Derman (who just left last yr) or Rebonato, is there anyone in the market who stays as a quant guy in i-banks for 10+ yrs without moving to trading/structuring or academia? Someone mentioned a scale of 150-200-250k base for vp/director/md in a separate thread, which I think would be applicable. But what kind of bonus could one expect in a reasonable year (i.e. not 2002), without running a book or directly P&L responsbilities?

Another thing to consider when taking a job is how well respected the firm you are going to work for is, especially with respect to the product line you hope to be in. If you have an area focused on (Fixed Income, Credit Derivatives, Equity Underwriting, Real Estate...etc.) get yourself a 2 week trial at some industry rags and see who's doing what and in what size. Also getting a 60 day trial on Bloomberg is not such a bad idea either. You can check league tables, news and even some job listings. I think my advice falls under the advice to consider where you want to be in 3-5 years, so do consider it. Earning 110K at a bank that has limited presence in your area of interest isn't the worst thing in the world but getting 90K working on something you like I think is much better. Of course you may have no idea which areas you are interested in or would like to focus on. That's okay too.

RowdyRoddyPiper,It obviously matters whether the institution is valued or not. But it is also important what kind of things you will be doing. In less developed institution there should be a good chance for an able individual to take over inetersting and creative tasks linked with developing new products etc. While institutions that have developed the area a lot tend to give formal and less creative tasks to new joiners. Not only many interesting thing have already been developed but also there are more experienced employees to deal with more sophisticated problems.CF

Having a name brand, such as a bulge-bracket i-bank, on your cv definitely opens up more doors as far as recruiters and HR departments. This can result in better, more interesting job opportunities a few years down the road.But working at less well-known institution usually provides more opportunities to do creative, interesting work at an earlier stage. It's a personal choice as to which alternative is preferable.

My point is not that the only way to go is working for a bulge bracket bank or that you should only look to work for something with brand name recognition. My point is that if you know what area you want to work in, figure out who the big movers are in that area. There's no point in going to work for a shop that doesn't get anything done in the market. You have to get deals done in order to get experience. That's it. So I'm not saying to ignore a small shop, just make sure that it is getting business done.

QuoteOriginally posted by: HKQuanton a slightly different issue, how far could a quant guy go with 10+ yrs experience? other than the big name guys like Derman (who just left last yr) or Rebonato, is there anyone in the market who stays as a quant guy in i-banks for 10+ yrs without moving to trading/structuring or academia? Someone mentioned a scale of 150-200-250k base for vp/director/md in a separate thread, which I think would be applicable. But what kind of bonus could one expect in a reasonable year (i.e. not 2002), without running a book or directly P&L responsbilities?Top compensation has always gone to successful entrapreneurs. That won't change. If you're willing to put your name, time and capital on the line starting a hedge fund or other venture, you can make (or lose) the most money.Below that, there are three main routes to top ($500K and up) compensation.Profit production: front office work, either trading or directly supporting traders, can do this, of course compensation depends directly on trading profits.Revenue production: sales work for investment banking, hedge funds, consulting services, softare or other businesses. Of course, compensation depends on your revenue.Management: either managing a large group of people (as in head of research for a large bank) or taking essential executive responsibilities (as in CFO or CRO, even for a relatively small organization).If you don't aim for one of those four areas, you will probably find your earnings leveling off after 10 years. You can make a nice living building models, producing reports, writing research papers, consulting and teaching; but it's hard to get rich without risk or direct participation in profits, revenue or management.