Good advice Gw. However, before you enter a room and criticize the advice of people inside I suggest you find out a little about their background first.
Look, my understanding is that this is supposed to be a forum of quant jocks/wannabe quant jocks on Wall Street. If you can't stand the heat on a relatively anonymous (not withstanding the screen naming rules - which is admirable) forum, then yer not cut out for the crap you'll get on the street. If you aren't incredibly lucky to have a mentor run interference for you, you'll get chewed up and spit out in no time.
As for finding out their background first before commenting.... If George Soros went up and said something stupid, yes, because of his background I might take a second look to see if I missed something, but I'd call him on it. How do you think George would take it? He'd respect me. That's how it's done on the street. The way I do it may not predispose him to me, but he'll respect me however I do it.
All we have here are our words. If we can't stand behind them, why say them? In turn, if I say something stupid, I hope someone will point it out!!!
I could also turn this around and say, before you criticize me, shouldn't you know if I have had some sort of experience in the industry? I could re-iterate what I have done, but I feel my words speak for themselves and I don't need flaunt what I have done (or not have done! lol). In other words, my words speak for themselves!!!!! (now there's an ugly sentence)
For the nick you chose on QN (Wallstyouth)
you are the candidate for getting your risk-taking ambitions rewarded!
Do you have experience on the Street? It really depends on his situation. If he's a first year, then this is a serious risk!!! Completing the 2-year analyst track practically guarantees you entrance to the very tip top MBA schools. Not completing the 2-year track, jumping ship to a startup that sinks, will not go well when applying to for graduate school, yeah there's a story to spin, but it's a lot easier just going the 'standard' track. The OP has got to balance the pros and cons and not just jump cause the upside he's got already is incredibly high and it's quite hard to find an opportunity with a higher upside!!!!!!
I don't know how it works in a large corporation, but in a boutique company there is often no one to turn to for advice if you have questions, so you would need to figure out many things by yourself. Especially for a start-up, each member of a team (including the manager) is a trail blazer, who has to apply one's experience in order to discover and invent things anew.
This is not a startup where everyone is new to the business. This is taking an existing business unit and making it standalone. Matter of fact, there should be no one "new" to the business. But yes, learning and figuring things out in the industry is a part of the process (just as if he was in a large organization). The supporting structure is what is different. A large part of that is the philosophy of staffing. That's the purpose I instructed the OP to ask for the MD/VP/Assoc/Analyst ratios. This gives him an idea of how much support he'll have, and in turn, how much support he's going to give.
Considering you already have experience from your current job, I would go for the start-up.
I guess folks are not familiar with IB. IB is a much different track than quant groups. I'm talking about IB groups like fixed income, healthcare, Petrochem, High-yield, agri-foods, etc....
You learn a lot as an Analyst, but then again, you don't learn much either! lol The first six months is really about learning terminology and the tools of the trade. The next year is about understanding how things in the industry work together. If the Analyst is REALLY good, then the last six months he/she can actually contribute valuable comments to the team: like make intelligent comments on disclosure or due diligence.
Now that's a very general statement. A lot depends on the group you are in and the chances you get but most importantly the Officers you are working for, but in general, an IB Analyst is a glorified secretary. This is a lot different than a Quant Analyst! Least from my experience with quant groups and IB groups.
__________________________________________________________
Now here's a challenge. Everyone keeps saying: "research the background of managers"; "research the personality of the owners".
How is the OP to do this? Not withstanding the fact that in all probability he works with these people cause that's how he got the offer.
Cause you know the bios in the back of pitchbooks are all glorified and pretty. So they don't help a hell of a lot.
So, how does the OP "research" the "managers" and their ability to be successful?
g-
gwkenny
