Here's the latest BonusBumper chart. Thanks UBS, for driving down the median. Bonus numbers are starting to roll in, and while there isn't any speculation on whether bonuses are higher than the amounts listed, there is speculation that they may be a tad lower. It's also possible that the majority of bonuses have diverged so far from the top that no one knows what the real top is anymore. It doesn't help that that top analyst is usually a complete pain in the arse and the one person in your group who's mum about the extent of that obscene lump sum.
Comment or send any bonus info to: tips at dealbreaker dot com
Posted by f u dlbrkr , Jun 29, 2007 11:09AM
Way to get people's hopes up. You suck.
Posted by , Jun 29, 2007 11:21AM
Sounds like someone's balance sheet didn't balance...
Posted by joe , Jun 29, 2007 11:31AM
I've been hearing Wachovia is more like 60 for first years, but i'm not in banking, don't care about the rumors and have no idea if the drunk who told me this was trying to make me feel better about me working in banking in 2002, or for those who weren't around "the year of the zero bonus"
Posted by , Jun 29, 2007 11:36AM
I heard top for UBS, CS and Citi was all 90K
Posted by Anon , Jun 29, 2007 11:45AM
You should do Associates, too.
oh, and 11:36, you are definitely wrong for Citi at least.
Posted by , Jun 29, 2007 11:49AM
Wachovia was 100K, 120K, 140K for top 1st, 2nd and 3rd years. The guy who said 60K probably got a 1.
Posted by luca , Jun 29, 2007 12:00PM
The real # are not even close.
Posted by shut up associate , Jun 29, 2007 12:01PM
someone tell the idiot associates who always comment on here asking for associate numbers that not only did they waste $100K on an education they could have had gotten from actual work experience but also their bonus cycle pays in the winter...which is 6+ months from now
Posted by Clarify , Jun 29, 2007 12:04PM
Please clarify on your chart which numbers are confirmed and paid out and which are still based on complete conjecture / wishful thinking.
Posted by ML , Jun 29, 2007 12:19PM
I have also heard 90 and 110 (paid, not conjecture) for UBS 1st and 2nd years and 85/110 for Credit Suisse
Posted by , Jun 29, 2007 12:21PM
As a non-banker, I get quite a bit of pleasure reading all the analysts' comments - scampering to determine the cost of their souls.
Posted by , Jun 29, 2007 12:57PM
CS paid $100K, $120k and $150K for top 1st, 2nd and 3rd years. CONFIRMED.
Posted by Anon , Jun 29, 2007 12:58PM
shut up associate- sounds like someone got rejected from MCC's MBA program. so sorry, enjoy being an AVP for the next 20 years...
and analyst 2006 numbers were on dealbreaker about 6 months ago....
Posted by Anon , Jun 29, 2007 12:58PM
shut up associate- sounds like someone got rejected from MCC's MBA program. so sorry, enjoy being an AVP for the next 20 years...
and analyst 2006 numbers were on dealbreaker about 6 months ago....
Posted by jt , Jun 29, 2007 1:27PM
So we're to believe that 1st years are getting almost 200% of their base in bonus this year, maybe the #1 analyst in goldman m&a but no way is the average tier 1 ibanking analyst getting a $100+k bonus (although a friend in dcm at a euro bank here in ny claimed to get $45k but, like investing in High-Grade Structured Credit Strategies Enhanced Leverage Fund, is highly speculative)
Posted by 90, 115, 140 , Jun 29, 2007 1:32PM
90, 115, 140.
That's the "Street" for top 1, 2, and 3 yrs respectively.
Some banks may vary by 5-10k up or down, but majority are at that level. Done and done.
Confirmed by majority of bulge and some non-bulge (BofA, UBS...)
Posted by , Jun 29, 2007 3:01PM
Nobody claimed that this was the "average," but thanks for playing.
Although even as top ends, they were largely too high.
Posted by , Jun 29, 2007 4:06PM
too high
Posted by anon , Jun 29, 2007 8:59PM
those numbers are completely off. 2nd year high is 115k
Posted by anonymous , Jun 29, 2007 9:03PM
While these numbers may piss most people off, I like to think about it this way: these analysts work 100 hours a week. Therefore they really work 2.5 jobs-- If we define job as most america does: 40 hours a week. Therefore they really only make 40K per job. This roughly translates to 20 dollars an hour. I made more per hour bartending in college.
Posted by , Jun 30, 2007 1:06AM
Yes, $20 an hour for our bonus, plus the $60k we get paid during the year, so really that's more like $32 / hour.....and at the same time, the amount analysts make now is nothing compared to what they will get for having done 2 years as an analyst
i hope that bartending in college takes you places later in life though
Posted by anonymous , Jun 30, 2007 3:04AM
actually bartending did take me places.
want specifics?
Job after college: Associate
Hours per week: 50
Starting Salary: 100K
Cosmo: Vodka, Cranberry Juice, and Lime Juice
Posted by banker who can do math , Jul 01, 2007 10:55AM
2.5 jobs? I assume you're saying 100k is 2.5x your 40k job.
That's the BONUS. Add the 10k to sign and the 60k base and that's 170k.
No wonder you're a bartender.
Posted by analyst who got paid already , Jul 04, 2007 3:46AM
Real numbers:
Most banks 70-90k for 1st years
A select few paid 100K top for 1st years as they were scarred about underpaying. A few still haven't heard at are wondering where they fall out between the 90 and 100K. Needless to say, it was a good year to be an analyst.
PE here we come!
Posted by analyst who got paid already , Jul 04, 2007 3:48AM
I also want to thank the RBC analyst who clearly put this spreadsheet together for scarring the bejesus out of staffers and HR around the street.
Posted by Anon , Jul 04, 2007 6:08AM
Any news on Technology Analyst Bonuses?
Posted by DB1stYear , Jul 09, 2007 5:57PM
90k top
Posted by anon , Jul 30, 2007 5:09PM
anyone vouch for GS figures? i hear 100k top