Fresh Grad Masters

[shipun]

how much would a masters fresh grad from Australia's top uni be looking at?

In particular the real estate industry (funds, investment, brokerage)

Originally Posted by shipun

how much would a masters fresh grad from Australia's top uni be looking at?

In particular the real estate industry (funds, investment, brokerage)

should be 8-9k if join reputable co

Originally Posted by Unregistered

should be 8-9k if join reputable co

I'll be surprised. I was thinking 6k to 8k actually if no relevant experience. What you got after undergrad and before your masters?

[shipun]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I'll be surprised. I was thinking 6k to 8k actually if no relevant experience. What you got after undergrad and before your masters?

Nothing in between, one internship and some part time work in the real estate sector. went straight into masters after my undergrad

AM starting is usually the region of ~8k.

Originally Posted by shipun

Nothing in between, one internship and some part time work in the real estate sector. went straight into masters after my undergrad

Then I'm sticking with 6k to 8k. Different story if your Masters is from a top 10 US school.

I also work in a reputable fund, at least locally in Singapore, and those are the numbers. The usual talk is come in and prove yourself then you'll get more. Without experience, I doubt you know that much of the industry to be the money making machine.

So employers will get you first to train you and / or perform specific tasks. You'll start to see why they'll want to pay you more. Do well, find out where the alpha is, then you'll get to command the big bucks.

I was like you, thinking I could turn X dollars into Y dollars on day one while all in the end I was just 5% of the money making process commanded by the more senior guys.

Anyway, when I drive along Shenton Way, I see this company, Lucrum Capital, which does real estate investing. Go check them out, probably up your alley.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

So employers will get you first to train you and / or perform specific tasks. You'll start to see why they'll want to pay you more. Do well, find out where the alpha is, then you'll get to command the big bucks.

*why they wouldn't want to pay you more

[shipun]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Then I'm sticking with 6k to 8k. Different story if your Masters is from a top 10 US school.

I also work in a reputable fund, at least locally in Singapore, and those are the numbers. The usual talk is come in and prove yourself then you'll get more. Without experience, I doubt you know that much of the industry to be the money making machine.

So employers will get you first to train you and / or perform specific tasks. You'll start to see why they'll want to pay you more. Do well, find out where the alpha is, then you'll get to command the big bucks.

I was like you, thinking I could turn X dollars into Y dollars on day one while all in the end I was just 5% of the money making process commanded by the more senior guys.

Anyway, when I drive along Shenton Way, I see this company, Lucrum Capital, which does real estate investing. Go check them out, probably up your alley.

thanks for that. I am currently looking at companies like lucrum capital but at the same time, kinda tossed between funds and brokering with say CBRE or knight frank.

Also, with the economy remaining sluggish, should I be expecting a lower pay as compared to the post GFC boom?

Originally Posted by shipun

thanks for that. I am currently looking at companies like lucrum capital but at the same time, kinda tossed between funds and brokering with say CBRE or knight frank.

Also, with the economy remaining sluggish, should I be expecting a lower pay as compared to the post GFC boom?

Definitely. But I doubt a lower pay, and I mean ~6k, is not a function of post GFC. It's just based on your working experience which is nil.

Things you should always remember concerning starting salaries in AM and fund management industry. They are highly volatile and less structured compared to banking. Yes, join a top MNC bank and you'll start you with 8k right off. It's because they have structured recruitment programs and their salaries are standardized across the street. Funds don't have that scheme because their structures are just different.

Banks all have large number of employees. Funds, some run by 10 people some run by 100 people. Then look at that with respect to their asset under management (AUM). Then look at that based on their management fee. Then, to get an average salary per head, take management fee x AUM / number of employees. Of course, that's the average. The portfolio managers are probably paid 4 times the new analyst. Now you start to see how they do their budgeting.

To make things even more interesting, their budget has to also reflect their branding. Every NUS kid knows Goldman. How many know Lucrum capital. This isn't to speak bad about them. The point is, while funds may want top talent, they have to pay more to pull graduates from the Goldmans of the world. But even if they want to pay more, can they given the management fee they're receiving.

Banks can get a fresh grad and just churn the excel sheet. Funds may need someone to do just marketing. Funds may need someone to do analysis. Heck, funds may need someone to do both.

Lastly funds vary a lot in terms of strategy. I can speak for real estate. But say for equity investment, how will they justify paying top dollar for the guy who is a top fundamental trader but the investment is technical bias.

My point is, it's harder to price employees going into funds than employees going into banks. Just take note of my few pointers when you are negotiating your salary.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Definitely. But I doubt a lower pay, and I mean ~6k, is not a function of post GFC. It's just based on your working experience which is nil.

Things you should always remember concerning starting salaries in AM and fund management industry. They are highly volatile and less structured compared to banking. Yes, join a top MNC bank and you'll start you with 8k right off. It's because they have structured recruitment programs and their salaries are standardized across the street. Funds don't have that scheme because their structures are just different.

Banks all have large number of employees. Funds, some run by 10 people some run by 100 people. Then look at that with respect to their asset under management (AUM). Then look at that based on their management fee. Then, to get an average salary per head, take management fee x AUM / number of employees. Of course, that's the average. The portfolio managers are probably paid 4 times the new analyst. Now you start to see how they do their budgeting.

To make things even more interesting, their budget has to also reflect their branding. Every NUS kid knows Goldman. How many know Lucrum capital. This isn't to speak bad about them. The point is, while funds may want top talent, they have to pay more to pull graduates from the Goldmans of the world. But even if they want to pay more, can they given the management fee they're receiving.

Banks can get a fresh grad and just churn the excel sheet. Funds may need someone to do just marketing. Funds may need someone to do analysis. Heck, funds may need someone to do both.

Lastly funds vary a lot in terms of strategy. I can speak for real estate. But say for equity investment, how will they justify paying top dollar for the guy who is a top fundamental trader but the investment is technical bias.

My point is, it's harder to price employees going into funds than employees going into banks. Just take note of my few pointers when you are negotiating your salary.

What class honours degree is what determines your pay.