Why do investment bankers work up to 80-90 hrs a week?

Salami and bread wrote:

They make very good money... base salary of $70k at major firms (ie. Goldman Sachs) and bonuses can add up to $100k at the end of the 1st year.

But the thing is they are on-the-job 7 days a week.

Dinner with the girlfriend? Nope, come back to the office to serve a client

Drinks with friends? Nope, back to the office, now.

And 90 hour workweeks are not uncommon.

So why do IB'ers put themselves through this torture? Even for the sake of money, do they not have relationships, friends, and health to nurture?

They're too stupid to do anything else. Also, not good at anything with real value.

They buy into the alpha culture, and see long weeks as a badge of honor.

Salami and bread wrote:

They make very good money... base salary of $70k at major firms (ie. Goldman Sachs) and bonuses can add up to $100k at the end of the 1st year.

But the thing is they are on-the-job 7 days a week.

Dinner with the girlfriend? Nope, come back to the office to serve a client

Drinks with friends? Nope, back to the office, now.

And 90 hour workweeks are not uncommon.

So why do IB'ers put themselves through this torture? Even for the sake of money, do they not have relationships, friends, and health to nurture?

The upside after a few years is much more than $200k per year. Lots of people start out and end up realizing they can't hack it or it isn't worth it.

I think the real question is how productive is somebody working that many hours? Why not hire two people instead?

You know how as a society, we need more doctors, and yet going into med school and actually becoming one is extremely tough?

It might have to do with: less positions = higher demand = higher salary

Some people just love money. MOST people wouldn't work so hard, even for that kind of money, but some people will. And if there aren't enough people to fill the job, they just pay more and it raises the threshold to a point where more people are willing to work.

It also weeds out people who aren't 100% committed to the company. That's why medical school residencies have equally ridiculous hours: they want your work to BE your life. They expect that level of dedication, even though it's well known that the additional 40 hours on top of "full time" are nowhere near as productive as the first 40. In the case of doctors, it's done even at the expense of patient safety. Residents who are overworked and sleep-deprived regularly make mistakes that get people killed.

They work at these jobs to make millions not 200K

IB that have been around at Goldman for 5 years or more are making millions not 200K.

Just because some find it offensive or stupid there is nothing wrong with having a goal and working towards it if it does not hurt anyone else.

Putting together deals or financing new companies requires intelligence and perseverance.

If money is important 90 hours a week for a while seems like a fair investment to make millions.

You're quoting the first year salaries+bonuses for junior analysts fresh out of undergrad. MBA's often start with double that in salary and bonuses to match. And in a lot of cases, even the undergrads will end up making partner before 35 (or 30) and pull in well over a million a year, retiring in early 40's. Total lifetime hours? Less than yours. So its definitely worth it in those respects. Now the real question is whether its worth it to put your outside life on hold while you're still working those 70 hour weeks.

And by the way, 80-90 hours is an exaggeration. From what I've heard, average is maybe 50-60 for the hard workers. At the end of the day though, results are what matters, and a lot of banks seem to be putting in caps to the number of hours employees can work.

asdfasfadsdf wrote:

Some people just love money. MOST people wouldn't work so hard, even for that kind of money, but some people will. And if there aren't enough people to fill the job, they just pay more and it raises the threshold to a point where more people are willing to work.

It also weeds out people who aren't 100% committed to the company. That's why medical school residencies have equally ridiculous hours: they want your work to BE your life. They expect that level of dedication, even though it's well known that the additional 40 hours on top of "full time" are nowhere near as productive as the first 40. In the case of doctors, it's done even at the expense of patient safety. Residents who are overworked and sleep-deprived regularly make mistakes that get people killed.

You are incorrect about the reason for long hours in residency. A resident has to work a lot of hours per week in order to gain the necessary experience within a reasonable timeframe. If surgical residents only worked 40 hours per week, they would have to spend ~ten years in residency.

incorrect wrote:

You are incorrect about the reason for long hours in residency. A resident has to work a lot of hours per week in order to gain the necessary experience within a reasonable timeframe. If surgical residents only worked 40 hours per week, they would have to spend ~ten years in residency.

I don't think anyone truly understands how hard medical residents are working. Recently, ACGME imposed an 80 hour workweek restriction on residencies. 80! That's because general surgery was requiring 100-120 hours out of their residents. 'Softer' fields like internal medicine were still over 80 hrs per week. A lot of those hours were done in 30 hour shifts at a time. Residents are called residents (or housestaff) because traditionally they literally lived in the hospital.

The whole idea being that by the time you graduate, you will have the work experience as if you had already finished an entire career. That's the kind of expertise that is expected simply to BEGIN a real medical career and have people trust you with their lives.

Certain general surgery programs around the country are conducting a study right now that allows them to do away with the 80 hr restriction. They are going to compare patient outcomes under the two regimes and see if giving residents an easier time actually translates to fewer medical errors. If it doesn't...120 hr work weeks will be the norm once again.

Another opinion wrote:

And by the way, 80-90 hours is an exaggeration. From what I've heard, average is maybe 50-60 for the hard workers. At the end of the day though, results are what matters, and a lot of banks seem to be putting in caps to the number of hours employees can work.

Totally and utterly wrong.

No investment banker ever will put in 50-60 hours. ~80 is the norm. 100+ would be during heavy deal flow.

Very few people stay in Ibanking a long time. You do your stint of 2 years then go get an MBA, or go into private equity.

Very few ibankers make millions, analysts and associates pull 200-400k. Managing directors will make millions yea. You want to make million go into Ibanking, do your time time and go private equity. That's how you make millions.

Another opinion wrote:

And by the way, 80-90 hours is an exaggeration. From what I've heard, average is maybe 50-60 for the hard workers.

No it's not.

100 hours/week, baby; 100 hours/week. Partner stops by on Friday night, says, "I need this," you're calling home with "hey, honey, I'm on the cot again."

100 hours/week.

ivyivygradgrad wrote:

No it's not.

100 hours/week, baby; 100 hours/week. Partner stops by on Friday night, says, "I need this," you're calling home with "hey, honey, I'm on the cot again."

100 hours/week.

Then when she hangs up, she says, "Hey sorry it was my i-banker husband, he won't be home tonight. Want to stay over?"

Then I say, YES

Let me ask you this: just what do you do during that time? Why can't you do the same work in half the time?

TLW wrote:

Another opinion wrote:

And by the way, 80-90 hours is an exaggeration. From what I've heard, average is maybe 50-60 for the hard workers. At the end of the day though, results are what matters, and a lot of banks seem to be putting in caps to the number of hours employees can work.

Totally and utterly wrong.

No investment banker ever will put in 50-60 hours. ~80 is the norm. 100+ would be during heavy deal flow.

Very few people stay in Ibanking a long time. You do your stint of 2 years then go get an MBA, or go into private equity.

Very few ibankers make millions, analysts and associates pull 200-400k. Managing directors will make millions yea. You want to make million go into Ibanking, do your time time and go private equity. That's how you make millions.

Overall good post, but even MDs don't usually pull >= 7 figures unless they have 15+ years of experience and/or are at a bulge bracket. The vast majority of MDs at decent but not GS/Barclays/DB/MS/CS type firms are in the 500-700k range and work 85+ hours a week.... Banker MDs are usually status-obsessed workaholic types or couldn't crack the buy-side recruiting process (where you need a top-notch MBA), those who are really just after the $ will go into private equity or hedge funds after an MBA + 2 years as an analyst.

burned out ex-banker wrote:

Overall good post, but even MDs don't usually pull >= 7 figures unless they have 15+ years of experience and/or are at a bulge bracket. The vast majority of MDs at decent but not GS/Barclays/DB/MS/CS type firms are in the 500-700k range and work 85+ hours a week.... Banker MDs are usually status-obsessed workaholic types or couldn't crack the buy-side recruiting process (where you need a top-notch MBA), those who are really just after the $ will go into private equity or hedge funds after an MBA + 2 years as an analyst.

I agree with this.

jjjjjjjjj wrote:

Let me ask you this: just what do you do during that time? Why can't you do the same work in half the time?

Big dogs could be in meetings all day, you get something dropped on you at 6pm. You are staying all night because client requested something at 9am next morning.

Heavy deal flow could be going on and you are working all day.

It's unpredictable that's why you can't do the same work in half the time. Things can change on the fly.

burned out ex-banker wrote:

Overall good post, but even MDs don't usually pull >= 7 figures unless they have 15+ years of experience and/or are at a bulge bracket. The vast majority of MDs at decent but not GS/Barclays/DB/MS/CS type firms are in the 500-700k range and work 85+ hours a week.... Banker MDs are usually status-obsessed workaholic types or couldn't crack the buy-side recruiting process (where you need a top-notch MBA), those who are really just after the $ will go into private equity or hedge funds after an MBA + 2 years as an analyst.

The MDs I'm talking about are at BB firms.

TLW wrote:

burned out ex-banker wrote:

Overall good post, but even MDs don't usually pull >= 7 figures unless they have 15+ years of experience and/or are at a bulge bracket. The vast majority of MDs at decent but not GS/Barclays/DB/MS/CS type firms are in the 500-700k range and work 85+ hours a week.... Banker MDs are usually status-obsessed workaholic types or couldn't crack the buy-side recruiting process (where you need a top-notch MBA), those who are really just after the $ will go into private equity or hedge funds after an MBA + 2 years as an analyst.

The MDs I'm talking about are at BB firms.

This is the most boring thread of the day.

TLW wrote:

Another opinion wrote:

And by the way, 80-90 hours is an exaggeration. From what I've heard, average is maybe 50-60 for the hard workers. At the end of the day though, results are what matters, and a lot of banks seem to be putting in caps to the number of hours employees can work.

Totally and utterly wrong.

No investment banker ever will put in 50-60 hours. ~80 is the norm. 100+ would be during heavy deal flow.

Very few people stay in Ibanking a long time. You do your stint of 2 years then go get an MBA, or go into private equity.

Very few ibankers make millions, analysts and associates pull 200-400k. Managing directors will make millions yea. You want to make million go into Ibanking, do your time time and go private equity. That's how you make millions.

I disagree. The average analyst is definitely working 80 hours a week at a BB, maybe 90. An associate, less. His boss, even less (until he's a partner, then it's back to hell). And keep in mind, the average age of an Ibanker is something like 35, not exactly average analyst territory. I think these horror stories about months of 100 hours a week get played out because of all the analysts that quit before they get anywhere, and the fact that, as people have said, its like a badge of honor to work that much (leading to rampant exaggeration). Maybe my estimate was on the low side, but I still suspect the overall number is a bit less than 80.