man, this ET forum is a real time killing. Damn it. hehe. If I didn't have an email notice everytime I get a new post. haha. Yes, it's just the lowest commissions. not bids as it bid/ask. trader99
Well, here's an article from the FT(Financial TImes) about recruiting at an IB, which is NOT the same as a hedge fund, because hedge funds do NOT usually hire new college graduates. They want some with more experience. Anyhow, I hate to read this gibberish about recruiting practices of IB and their hurdles(who gives a shit right?? hehe) but for some of you that are interested go ahead. trader99 _________________________________ Students reveal how to win an internship at top banks Sarah Butcher - 7 May 2002 Winning a place as an intern in an investment bank in London this summer has been much harder than usual, as the banks have cut back on numbers in the economic downturn. But some students made the grade. Discussions with four successful candidates suggest that all that was required was an impeccable academic record, wide ranging extra-curricular activities and previous work experience - whether at a leading genetics laboratory or McDonalds. Academic success was the first and highest hurdle. Investment banks' stringent academic requirements are legendary; 2002 was clearly no different. Of the successful applicants who spoke to eFinancialCareers, each had at least 4 'A' levels, mostly at grade A. Two candidates were endowed with 5 'A' levels at grade A. All four applicants had studied maths at A Level - which may or may not be a coincidence. Recruiters at banks generally say they are as happy to take a theology student as one studying maths or economics. The candidates all pursued extra-curricular activities as well, variously demonstrating qualities of team-playing, competitiveness and determination. Neil Mahapatra, who was offered an internship in Morgan Stanley's corporate finance division, formerly held the much sought after position of president of the Union at Oxford University. Sarah Holliday, who is destined for an internship at JP Morgan, is a top rowing cox at Cambridge University. Claire Goodeve, a prospective intern at Goldman Sachs, has won national skiing and platform diving competitions. Work experience is a big plus, although where it was gained seems to be less important than the benefits derived from it. Holliday spent four years working at McDonalds during holidays. But this was no 'Mcjob': during that time she was promoted from crew member, to floor manager, to shift-running floor manager. Similarly, students from continental Europe can make the most of military service. Johann Georg Von Hülsen, a student at EAP university who will be interning at UBS Warburg in London this summer, says the time he spent in the German army improved his ability to take responsibility and to work with other people. Continental European candidates are notable for being older and having significantly more work experience than their UK counterparts. Hence Von Hülsen, who is 28, already has three years' work experience, at companies as diverse as Mercedes-Benz, UBS Warburg, KPMG Consulting, L' Oréal, and Robert Bosch. One rejection is not the end of the world. Although academic achievements, work experience and extra-curricular activities might be expected to provide an objective portrait of individuals, banks appear to have distinctly diverse tastes. Some candidates received instant refusals from some of the top banks, even as others competed for their services. Strong performance at interview is crucial to success. But the candidates were divided on how much preparation is necessary. Mahapatra spent 6 months reading the financial press and familiarising himself with corporate finance before interviewing at Morgan Stanley. But Holliday said she just spent a couple of weeks reading The Economist before she interviewed at JP Morgan. She said friendliness and experience of high pressure and long-hour environments was more important than detailed knowledge of how bond markets work. Nevertheless, going into the second interview without some technical knowledge is not recommended. First interviews tend to be informal, but the second can be more testing. At Goldman Sachs, Goodeve was asked asked about yield curves, how interest rates affect bond prices, and to calculate 1/8 of 1% of $1,000,000 over 3 months. She presumably answered the questions correctly, but she plays down the importance of mental gymnastics. "The best advice to someone keen on doing an internship in an investment bank is be to be confident in yourself. "Know why you want the job and keep your fingers firmly crossed; I do believe it is a bit of a lottery!"
When I read this, I was about to reply and say as dark says. I trade every day and watch every tick of some core stocks. I can spot a "fund" with it's huge paw like a cougar "upwind" of a lion after me. Once I know it's there, its is like printing money, and other daytraders, like piranhas, share in the feeding frenzy. Believe me, this does not take 15 minutes - it comes in waves - and we stalk the fund once we have seen the footprint for _DAYS_ in some cases. nitro ps I read this and _NOW_ it makes sense:
Yeah, what 99 is talking about-program trading- is basically like a foreign language to me. But if Marty Schwartz thinks it's a load of $@#%@ then I'm not going to argue w/ him (he rants about it in his mwizards interview). All I know is those guys make the big ups bigger and the meltdowns nuclear when they act all at once. Like a shot of volatility from hell when the dominoes all line up.
Well, let's get the facts straight. Marty Schwartz in Market Wizard's interview was CONFUSED between program trading and index arbitrage. And Jack Schwager frustrating tries to explain the difference to no avail. Program trading is NOT index arbitrage. And even now, close to 2 decades later, and the general public still thinks it's the same. Because I still hear people saying on this board,"Why don't you just use index futures?" Program trading is very simple. It's just like what daytraders call "basket trading" except it's a bit more automated with more parameters and quantitiative whizbang. But in the end, it's just a quick way to execute tons of shares at once. That's all. Nothing more and nothing less. So, don't confuse an exeuction method(program trading) with a trading/investment strategy which can be index arb or convertible or risk arb or any number of infinite possiblities! trader99
Like Axl Rose said, it's all Greek to me. Push a button, buy or sell a trainload of issues with similar characteristics. Rock on
Dark, I have an inkling of your style and I [think] I understand why you dismiss this as a triviality. But make no mistake, program buying, usually "predicted/indicated by" by PREM, is so fundamental to the short term trader that if you can tell when "your" core stocks move with PREM, you are on your way to acquiring one of _THE_ principle tools of the short term trader, at least for this short term trader. Trader99, I find your gracious explanations a real education. nitro
I appreciate the clarification too- my dismissal was tongue in cheek. I always like to hear new perspectives and observe new angles on familiar subjects. Nice to get a better feel for what goes on behind the scenes- depth of understanding helps to anchor the emotions and adds to the foundation of confidence necessary to act swiftly and smoothly.
I wanted to point out an interesting point I've observed in "size"; for most correlate the size function as a mystical phenomenon that adversely effects a fund and assign an essoteric theory in a pseudo-quantum manner to sidestep the issue. We all now that volume is a variable in any market; running the gamat from NASDAQ to FOREX to SWAPs so I'm going to temporarily disregard this given. The problem that funds run into when handling size is the inability to employ the capital. I believe the that the fund managers framing is biased to "I have to employ this capital" as opposed to objectively quantifying risk-return on strategies. Its quite a simple reflexive system. It can be easily observed in the well docuemented case of LTCM re: shorting Berkshire & having Italian debt exposure (partially insured)-- to name a source. A fund manager in my oppinion deviates from "what worked" in an effort to "employ". So what other options do we have? Close "new money" or Distribute earnings to investors. A short walk through history has demonstrated when these alternatives have been disasterous. It is easiest to raise money when you don't need, and inversely the most difficult when you do.
It's just simple common sense. No different than a 300 pound fat guy trying to squeeze into a movie theatre seat or an aircraft carrier trying to do a 180 degree turn. If you are big you need more time to move from point A to point B and more room to turn around. Nothing mystical about that at all. In terms of raising money, I think that this is where the pride/greed problem kicks in. It's also a phenomenon that the bigger these guys get, the bigger a portion of profits comes from the management fee as opposed to the profit incentive fee. If you have a billion that you earned w/ your reputation, you can slack off and still live like a king off the 2% mgmt or whatever.