 |
bostonbubble.com
Boston Bubble - Boston Real Estate Analysis
|
|
SPONSORED LINKS
Advertise on Boston Bubble
Buyer brokers and motivated
sellers, reach potential buyers.
www.bostonbubble.com
YOUR AD HERE
|
|
DISCLAIMER: The information provided on this website and in the
associated forums comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, expressed
or implied. You assume all risk for your own use of the information
provided as the accuracy of the information is in no way guaranteed.
As always, cross check information that you would deem useful against
multiple, reliable, independent resources. The opinions expressed
belong to the individual authors and not necessarily to other parties.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Boston ITer
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:56 pm GMT Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | I've heard that getting attention from a professor at MIT as an undergrad is extremely difficult |
The attention I was alluding towards has more to do w/ research than let's say learning. Even during our earlier years, it was expected that the textbooks, notes, and outside readings were suppose to form the bulk of one's formal education. I'll give you an example of the primary issue here... I knew an undergrad at Univ of Conn who had a difficult time getting to do her undergrad research at a lab, at her college, 'cause the no of slots were tight and some other highly motivated undergrads were already in those spaces. In contrast, a like student at MIT would be in the UROP program and find an equivalent lab to do something really close in Cambridge, perhaps not choice 1 or 2, but at least 3. Instead, this UConn student found a summer stint at one of the NYC research institute, I think MtSinai, and then she transferred to CUNY, studied part-time while doing her research at the medical ctr, the rest of the time. I believe she got two publications before getting her B.S. degree and then got accepted to a few MD/PhD programs. Typically, elite private college attendants can generally do the above without needing to skip around too much because their schools have the resources (i.e labs, journals, etc) to accommodate them w/o the crowding effect of huge blocks of student population trying to do the same thing. At the moment, this works out because State Us don't have too many self-starter types (5-10% are like the above) but if parents all start to push their kids to take the low cost approach, this problem could easily escalate.
| Quote: | | Not sure if there is much that can be done about it except by reducing the influence of finance in this country. |
The country is all about finance. Our entire account deficit is about the trade of T-bills; that's pure financial engineering. All and all, the propaganda machine of moving around asset classes has made the real sciences, outside being premed, the pariah of academics or at least the dumping ground for socially inept mathematical geniuses (see 'Good Will Hunting' or 'Beautiful Mind' for typecasts). If you need to know what bankers are like see movies like 'Bonfire of the Vanities' or 'American Psycho'. This is not a clubhouse of enlightened gentlemen like some Anglo-American clique of Ben Franklin, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Buckminster Fuller, but a bunch of Wharton/Harvard/LBS cronies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
samz
Joined: 19 Feb 2008
Posts: 102
Location: Medford, MA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:15 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
Part of the problem, from a professors standpoint, is that we're expected to excel in both teaching and research -- two very different skills. Furthermore, we receive hardly any training for the former. If you're on the tenure track (possibly, an outdated model, but that's a whole other discussion), you need to produce top-quality publications and bring in grant funding in order to survive. So, unless your institution explicitly rewards teaching, there's really no benefit to spending time with undergrads.
I'm still seeing quite a few CS majors who go to NYC to do programming and econometrics for financial firms. Like others here, I find it troubling that finance has become a "first-order" business. Finance used to be a business that supported other businesses (by providing capital), but now I think they've figured out how to decouple themselves from the rest of the economy (witness the huge rally in the stock market at the same time everything else goes to hell). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
balor123
Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 1204
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:44 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
| A friend of mine recently graduated with a Phd in CS from Stony Brook. He got an offer from Amazon and another from a hedge fund. The hedge fund beat Amazon by about 50% in base pay and also threw in a large signup bonus. GS software engineers make $250k - $400k while software engineers virtual everywhere else make about $100k. Even Google, also ridiculously profitable, doesn't pay near that much. I'd still recommend to upcoming graduates that they try to go into finance because that's where the money is by a long shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boston ITer
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 4:26 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | but now I think they've figured out how to decouple themselves from the rest of the economy (witness the huge rally in the stock market at the same time everything else goes to hell) |
Think about it like this, the money needs to float around and in essence, when institutes are not hoarding cash, it needs to slosh around and in essence, our markets are that. Really, without the discipline of ordinary dividends, the stock market is only a sliver higher than a Ponzi scheme. Unfortunately, it's a vast majority of everyone's 401K plan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boston ITer
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 4:46 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The hedge fund beat Amazon by about 50% in base pay and also threw in a large signup bonus. |
Hedge Funds are all about P/L. If the programmer is either high enough on the food chain, which in this case means to the actual *trading desk*, then one gets a bigger cut of the P/L. So in effect, if the Fund let's say makes $100 million dollars, the firm itself takes $20-30 million (leaving the other 80% for the partners --- the ownership class), the trader/sales principals splits the $20-30 million perhaps in thirds, and then, the bonus pool for the key programmers/risk analyst comes from a tinier $5 million pool which is plenty for most of us with normal jobs. Eventually, one wants to be the *trader* oneself, to insure a regular 7 figure salary. Once your reputation is established, there'll never be a shortage of work for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GenXer
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
Posts: 703
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:25 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
| Hedge funds are like huge stock market casinos. If they actually held an S&P index fund with some portfolio insurance, they'd actually do better for investors. However, this is how it works: one year the fund rakes in 50%, bags lots of bonuses. The next year the fund loses 50%, still bags bonuses. Third year, fund collapses, investors withdraw funds, fund liquidates. Then it reopens under a new name, and the process repeats. Turns out that S&P index beat all of the hedge funds long term, simply because none of them are designed to be long term. They are designed as a giant pyramid scheme, a legal Madoff outfit. No need to cheat lie and steal when you can take everything legally. So this is why they are paying obscene salaries. As long as the fund lasts, that is, and few do last more than a couple of years, because they engage in very risky practices. So now most are firing instead of hiring. But it is true that financial software is always in demand, though the quality of the software is questionable beyond the window dressings and guis. However, this may not last forever. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boston ITer
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:42 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | However, this is how it works: one year the fund rakes in 50%, bags lots of bonuses. The next year the fund loses 50%, still bags bonuses. Third year, fund collapses, investors withdraw funds, fund liquidates. Then it reopens under a new name, and the process repeats. |
Here's the underlying problem... true, there are some Livermores and Soros out there, however, the typical HF management alpha male makes some $50 million or so, by year number three so really, where's the desire to re-organize for a new market condition, in other words, be in it for the long haul? So what happens is they basically blow up because all forms of restraint and caution are thrown in the wind and at the same time, many of them are hacks who're basically volatility scalpers or go long/short on predictable cycles, like the whole commodities/REIT bull run. The end result is that they take the money (P/L percentage) and run and start over with a new capital pool acquired by cronies from Wall Street. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boston ITer
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Forum posts are owned by the original posters.
Forum boards are Copyright 2005 - present, bostonbubble.com.
Privacy policy in effect.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
