Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

wesdesilvestro.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 325 posts

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#131

Post by dvtrn »

seppin wrote: post #118
Gunax wrote: post #111

I don't think a lot of people know what they want. There is just as much guessing as to which job to take as employers have choosing who to hire. Taking the most prestigious or most compensation is the safest bet, given that you don't really know what you want to do other than 'I like coding and interesting problems'. Partly I think that Harvard students have been adapted to seek prestige (else they probably wouldn't…

Exactly, everyone acts like there is some grand plan/design to all decision making. Everyone is just winging it.

I felt that way about my own life. Still so sometimes. Though far, far less than I used to, and feeling noticeably less anxiety about it previously.

A Relevant bit of reading, I think, I hope: https://fs.blog/2014/05/hunter-s-thompson-to-hume-logan/

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#132

Post by ivanamies »

Tomminn wrote: post #119

This essay is weakened significantly by one glaring clanger. If this person had equal levels of talent and yet wasn’t from the place they are, they would never make the foolish statement: “exposure to prestige can't make you successful any more than spending time around rich people can make you wealthy”. Apart from that I think they’ve got some of the causality the wrong way around. Consulting and finance are not buy…

>So he doesn’t need to worry about the future. The future is fine. Him and his classmates were never the future, except for the future of extracting large fees from high net worth individuals and companies.

Excellent insight

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#133

Post by thrav »

dvtrn wrote: post #131
seppin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, everyone acts like there is some grand plan/design to all decision making. Everyone is just winging it.

I felt that way about my own life. Still so sometimes. Though far, far less than I used to, and feeling noticeably less anxiety about it previously. A Relevant bit of reading, I think, I hope: https://fs.blog/2014/05/hunter-s-thompson-to-hume-logan/

Yeah, this is a popular saying, but couldn’t be further from the truth for the most successful people.

Generally, they begin with an end in mind. It’s a lot easier to get where you’re going if you know where that is.

Or, as the Cheshire Cat says to Alice, “Which way should I go?” “Where do you want to go?” “I don’t much care.” “Then it doesn’t really matter.” (Abridged)

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#134

Post by thatindiandude »

hailwren wrote: post #64
whimsicalism wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the typical Harvard student, tech is better paying than consulting unless you are an extraordinarily successful consultant. > It’s not uncommon for people in consulting to be making $500k-$1m annually by the age of 40 This is not "uncommon" in FANG either (just take a look at the salary charts), and if anything can be reached earlier. > there was a golden era of startups capturing value from the old guard, but th…

5 year EV is much lower in tech than finance for Harvard grads. I'm not sure ab consulting. Consulting and tech have similar starting salaries, but consider finance/hedge fund engineer starting tc is about 3-4x tech for top 3 grads rn.

I would contend that 5 year EV is probably higher in tech than across all of finance unless you manage to get into only the MOST exclusive megafunds (Hellman-Friedman, Silver Lake, Bain Cap, or Apollo, as most are coming in as associates in 200-300k range) or exclusive HFs (Viking, Citadel, Elliot) and even then, you're usually on a 2 year contract or up-or-out plans. The HFs will need to see you perform well to get anything more than base and your bonus (the chunk of how you get comped) will be at the discretion of your manager anyway.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#135

Post by thatindiandude »

shuckles wrote: post #24
wayoutthere wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in consulting, and I’d say the top-end in consulting is still higher and much more of a safe bet. It’s not uncommon for people in consulting to be making $500k-$1m annually by the age of 40. If you’re a partner, compensation can be significantly higher than that; in the $2M-20M range. I think there was a golden era of startups capturing value from the old guard, but that era is largely over IMO. All of those t…

It is not uncommon for people in technology to be making $500k-$1m annually by 30, and the lifestyle is much better if you have outside commitments.

Are you assuming you make L6 IC/Manager by 30? Realistic, but not everyone does it.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#136

Post by howlgarnish »

wayoutthere wrote: post #16
notacoward wrote: post #6

I find two things to disagree with in this article. First is the premise that equally high compensation is offered elsewhere in each industry. I don't know about finance or consulting, but at least for FAANG it doesn't seem to be true. Second is the overlooked explanation that it's headroom - not prestige - that accounts for the difference. I'll provide an example that illustrates both points: me. When I went from Re…

I work in consulting, and I’d say the top-end in consulting is still higher and much more of a safe bet. It’s not uncommon for people in consulting to be making $500k-$1m annually by the age of 40. If you’re a partner, compensation can be significantly higher than that; in the $2M-20M range. I think there was a golden era of startups capturing value from the old guard, but that era is largely over IMO. All of those t…

However, isn't quality of life as a junior hire in both finance and consulting much worse than in tech? Every Goldman or McKinsey hire I know was worked like a dog for their first ten years, while at a FAANG you can generally work 9-5 and still have a pretty successful career.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#137

Post by zug_zug »

jyu wrote: post #125

Curious why he would need to move to a more prestigious position? Most people realize by their 30s that prestige is a sucker's game; it's a way of inducing people to do things that aren't much fun and they wouldn't really want to do on their own, by lauding them with accolades from people they don't really care about. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11833832

To double down on this -- I think there was an era 10 years ago, when working for google or facebook actually impressed the average person.

Now (that it's privacy killing adtech) it's vaguely slimy, maybe not as slimy as being a lawyer, but I don't see it impressing people other than recruiters. Which is probably a good thing, honestly.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#138

Post by albacur »

whimsicalism wrote: post #49
lotsofpulp wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know why the article’s author thinks prestige is about anything other than money/power (for the population as a whole). People would rather work at FAANG than Stripe because FAANG will get you a lot more pay and connections. And people know that, so they will value people from FAANG for it. But it comes from the root fact that FAANG makes a ton of net income per employee, same as some finance/consulting firms…

> People would rather work at FAANG than Stripe because FAANG will get you a lot more pay and connections Pshh what? You work at FANG and think this?

I think Stripe is one of the few bad examples they could have picked to compare against FAANG. Among late-stage startups, it seems highly regarded and its employees' options are likely to hold real value in the not-so-distant future.

But generally I think the OP is correct: working for FAANG has made many, many people far more money over the past decade than they would have otherwise made on average in a startup.

I suspect that eventually the tide will turn, as it always does. The companies will get middle-manager bloat, MBAs and accountants start pinching pennies, systems get dragged down in technical debt, and more nimble competitors eventually outcompete. But we're not there yet.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#139

Post by gnicholas »

It’s about having options. There’s not much downside to taking a job with the most elite/selective/prestigious company in a field you want to work in because you’ll be well-paid and you can jump to pretty much any other company later.

Compare that to starting off at a company that is less well-known in the general sector or less selective — you may be able to jump later to a more selective company, but you’ll have more of an uphill climb.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#140

Post by xwdv »

jyu wrote: post #125

Curious why he would need to move to a more prestigious position? Most people realize by their 30s that prestige is a sucker's game; it's a way of inducing people to do things that aren't much fun and they wouldn't really want to do on their own, by lauding them with accolades from people they don't really care about. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11833832

Some people really need the validation that prestige gives.
Post reply on HN