Goldman sachs

Ask to be partner.  Anything else would be an insult.

Insist that you get a new mop every six months and that they refer to you as “janitor” and not “night cleanup boy”.

[quote=WallStBroker]

I need someone skilled and realistic (please nosense)

I have a friend that can possibly get me a position into GS but now after reading all the GS forums, I percieve that is a very high end firm.  Now someone like me juggled around firms like Gunn Allen and so forth, what is the best recommendation anyone has to suggest.  In order to really show GS that Iam a good candidate for their firm.  Basically iam completely clueless on approaching a big firm like GS so i desperately need help.  Also I have no book and Im 21, again I have a 99% chance to get in.  So what kind of a position do I ask GS?

Thanks

[/quote]

NASDy Newbie...please stop it, I just sprayed of load of coffee through my nose onto the computer screen.   Ouch!!!

Just in case this thread is the real deal (which I'm 99% sure it's not)...you would not be 'just realizing' GS is a VERY VERY high end firm if you've been 'juggled' around different firms like Gunn Allen (assuming as a stockbroker of course).  You would be the most ignorant broker I've ever encountered and wouldn't be worthly of GS in the first place.

This is fairly standard knowledge and it's inexcusable for any broker to not know, generally, the relative standing of his/her competitors.

Brother, unless you're the cream of the crop...you're dreaming if you think they'll hire you as a broker.  MAYBE in another role, but I'd doubt it.

Thanks a lot Dude

This can't be a serious thread. 

a.)  If someone you know is in a position at GS to get your foot in the door, you'd know what that position would be.
b.)  If they don't know what that position is or, at least, could be, they're pulling your leg.

If you knew anything about Wall St. You wouldn’t have written this!

I seriously dont no sh*t about wall st.  I want to learn and explore.  I just dont know where to look or ask.  Dont tell me this is not the place for me because nobody came on to wall st knowing everything.

There’s a peckerhead around here who has gone by Put Trader, NASD

Newbie, and many others who claims to know everything.



Of course, he knows next to nothing in reality.

I don't think anyone really would have come down on you the way they did if your initial post had been coherent English.  But the great news is so far in your expolration you've already learned something...and that is to always conduct yourself in a manner befitting someone intrusted with millions of dollars of people's money.

See, your learning already.

your = you’re

intrusted = entrusted

Wall Street...

Look, you have to understand that most people here would give their left nut (if they're male of course) to work at Goldman Sachs.  Do some thread searching and you'll get some good info.  Sorry about the harsh tone of my original post, but you suggested that you've been around awhile (at Gunn Allen etc...) and I was just very confused how you could be in this business and not have some idea of the statue of Goldman.

this guys just busting your guys ball’s. i think the thread is a spoof.

[quote=dude]

Wall Street...

Look, you have to understand that most people here would give their left nut (if they're male of course) to work at Goldman Sachs.  Do some thread searching and you'll get some good info.  Sorry about the harsh tone of my original post, but you suggested that you've been around awhile (at Gunn Allen etc...) and I was just very confused how you could be in this business and not have some idea of the statue of Goldman.

[/quote]

statue = stature

[quote=WallStBroker]I seriously dont no sh*t about wall st.  I want to learn and explore.  I just dont know where to look or ask.  Dont tell me this is not the place for me because nobody came on to wall st knowing everything.[/quote]

Well....assuming your not just pulling our legs here and have a shred of sincerity, then give us your background.  Were you in a secretarial position at Gunn Allen?  Also, you really should work on your writing skills (not that I'm the Grammar Police or anything ).  Using the word no in place of the word know comes across really po-dunk and unless you're an Edward Jonsie out in the Bayou, it won't fly with clients...especially of the Goldman Sachs variety.

Good luck.  If you want to learn this is a good place.  First lesson is to forget about Goldman Sachs until you finish up that Harvard MBA...then get back to us.

I like the idea of a statue of Goldman, complete with pigeons. And you're right I would give your left nut to work there. 

I also think this thread is a spoof.

How can it not be?  Maybe it’s a poor-spelling version of incredble hulk???

I’ll say this about Goldman Sachs, the avg. partner there makes $7 million a year

Yeah but that’s on the Investment Banking side. A little different from the realities of the brokerage division. Maybe the top 5 V.P’s in the Retail area make those bonuses, but the average broker isnt seeing that large of a check…

babbling looney:

I like the idea of a statue of Goldman, complete with pigeons. And you're right I would give your left nut to work there. 

I also think this thread is a spoof.

------------------------

I'm an organ and blood donor, but I prefer to keep my matched set, thank you very much!

[quote=doberman]babbling looney:

I like the idea of a statue of Goldman, complete with pigeons. And you're right I would give your left nut to work there. 

I also think this thread is a spoof.

------------------------

I'm an organ and blood donor, but I prefer to keep my matched set, thank you very much!

[/quote]

I think she was addressing me...but if you want to take this one, go for it bro.

[quote=blarmston]Yeah but that's on the Investment Banking side. A little different from the realities of the brokerage division. Maybe the top 5 V.P's in the Retail area make those bonuses, but the average broker isnt seeing that large of a check....[/quote]

That is true, before GS went public, the rule was that only ONE retail person was allowed to be a partner at any given time. This is one of the reasons that so many people left.

I agree that this thread is a spoof, but I recently spoke with someone who was VERY established and left our firm to go to Goldman (he did a brief stint at our wirehouse). He said that the one striking thing was that EVERYONE works 12 hours a day there - no matter how established...

San Fran,

That is not that shocking to me. What is shocking to me is how terrible there mutual funds’ performance is.

there=their

and u  r right, awful funds

[quote=rook4123]San Fran,

That is not that shocking to me. What is shocking to me is how terrible there mutual funds’ performance is.

[/quote]

That has been my observation over the years, yet their asset allocation funds seem to be pretty darn good.  Anyone care to comment?

I have a buddy who swears by the GS Allocation Funds. I believe he uses the Growth/ Income model. He uses it for all accounts under 100K. He places 90% there, then takes 5% positions into two tactical ideas. He was bragging the other day about the performance, and it has seemed to work in recent years…

blarm, don’t post specific funds on here…you’ll inadvertently give trolls like bamburger free advice…

ACEIX does  a pretty good job as well.

[quote=Indyone]blarm, don’t post specific funds on here…you’ll inadvertently give trolls like bamburger free advice…[/quote]

yah but bamburger probably won’t buy it anyway because it’s one of those evil “load” funds.

I like GGSCX from the Goldman asset allocation funds. 

Anyone here care to post their asset allocation funds (regardless of fund family)?

I have used Accessor in the past.

The asset allocation funds are good bases, but I wouldn't put everything into one (unless you're doing the obligatory Roth for your clueless brother).

They are driven purely by asset class allocation, not fundamentals.  There is very little "stock picking" going on.  It is almost like a basket of index funds (but against an asset class, not an index).  So you are relying on the accuracy of the models (yes, GS is very good at this).

But, it is a different approach than most funds, so it acts as a bit of a hedge against some of your other funds or ind stocks.

[quote=Broker24]

The asset allocation funds are good bases, but I wouldn’t put everything into one (unless you’re doing the obligatory Roth for your clueless brother).

They are driven purely by asset class allocation, not fundamentals.  There is very little "stock picking" going on.  It is almost like a basket of index funds (but against an asset class, not an index).  So you are relying on the accuracy of the models (yes, GS is very good at this).

But, it is a different approach than most funds, so it acts as a bit of a hedge against some of your other funds or ind stocks.

I have been very happy with the GS Asset Allocation strategies.  I have used the Growth fund and the Equity Allocation (used to be called Aggressive Growth) fund for about 3 years now.  Both of these now have over 5-year track records. One ticket drop, and a couple of my more "informed" clients were impressed with the Goldman name, which made it that much easier to sell.

Unless I feel it's at least somewhat "balanced," I would never put all of a client's money into just one fund.  I'm a big fan of allocation funds.  The only problem is that most are so new, it's hard to get a handle on them.

[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=Broker24]

The asset allocation funds are good bases, but I wouldn't put everything into one (unless you're doing the obligatory Roth for your clueless brother).

They are driven purely by asset class allocation, not fundamentals.  There is very little "stock picking" going on.  It is almost like a basket of index funds (but against an asset class, not an index).  So you are relying on the accuracy of the models (yes, GS is very good at this).

But, it is a different approach than most funds, so it acts as a bit of a hedge against some of your other funds or ind stocks.

[/quote]

ummmmm....excuse me for interrupting your obvious expertise, but aren't most of the underlying funds ACTIVELY managed?  Based upon FUNDAMENTALS?
[/quote]

[quote=Broker24]

The asset allocation funds are good bases, but I wouldn't put everything into one (unless you're doing the obligatory Roth for your clueless brother).

They are driven purely by asset class allocation, not fundamentals.  There is very little "stock picking" going on.  It is almost like a basket of index funds (but against an asset class, not an index).  So you are relying on the accuracy of the models (yes, GS is very good at this).

But, it is a different approach than most funds, so it acts as a bit of a hedge against some of your other funds or ind stocks.

[/quote]

With the GS funds, the underlying funds are actively managed, and they also use the GS qualitative team (I think I know what I'm talking about? maybe not)  Let's say A TEAM FROM GS actually provides the info for manager Cathcart to tactically allocate quarterly, from my understanding.  I've been reading their quarterly recommendations that they send out, and they've been making very smart  and specific bets to get in front of the markets, IMO.