zbird2134

I've been in BV for about 8 years now. First, the cons:

1. A lot of mediocre people. You get a lot of finance guys who couldn't quite get into banking, asset management, etc. Or you get the bean counters who move up into BV, especially since all the accounting firms now have valuation practices.

2. As an extension to the above, the field is becoming more and more dominated by the accounting firms. They tend to be very formulaic in their valuations, and generally not much insight. Worse, they have increasing clout and are influencing the way the profession is evolving. If you've ever dealt with auditors, then you know why this is not a great outlook.

3. Pay can be crappy relative to other finance jobs. If I were at a big 4, I'd probably be a sr. manager. That pay grade is probably $140-180k depending on the geographic market. Not the end of the world, but definitely not great in comparison to the other jobs you might be considering. There is certainly potential for much higher comp at the partner level.

4. A lot of the same old ideas are rehashed over and over. People do attempt to innovate on the theoretical front, but I haven't seen too much that was truly original. Even then, it wouldn't make its way out of the BV community.

5. A lot of technical knowledge that is really only relevant to the strange little world of BV. As Higgmond stated above, not a lot of lateral moves after you've accumulated 5-7 years.

6. Fees are definitely coming down or at least stagnant. Again, too many bean counters getting into the game.

I could list a number of more cons, but that would just be nitpicking. On the other hand, there are a lot of offsetting pros (otherwise I obviously wouldnt stay in the field). Unfortunately, I find myself out of time as I write this. I'll try to drop back in in the next couple days to provide the flip side. Stay posted for round 2.

pennyless

The analytical skill sets are indeed quite similar, but b-val folks are not viewed as "deal guys", so jump to PE and VC is kind of rare. The jump to research or AM is a little easier, but tends to happen after 2-3 years, not 5-7, because the experience you gain after 2-3 years isn't really a benefit outside of valuation and you would get hired as a staff grunt.

To be honest, you might find it difficult to make the jump to b-val in the first place. To come in at anything higher than a staff grunt, most firms will want direct experience and/or a book of business. Even at the staff level, most firms would likely prefer a recent grad who they can pay $45k and make work nights and weekends when needed because they don't have a spouse and kids to worry about.

jcfa2011

Basically, I have about 10 years in corporate finance, will be doing level 3 next year and am trying to determine if it is a career move that I would want to make at this point. I am pretty familiar with the model, that is of a 3rd party appraisal for M&A clients, experts witnesses for litigation, etc. If I went down the valuation road, I am wondering if there are options to work in PE, investment management, buy / sell side research down the road or if these sides generally stay separated. I would think that some of the skills are transferable, but am wondering if in 5-7 years time, if a change wanted to be made, how transferable those skills actually are. I know that there are additional designations that many appraisers get, AVA, ASA, but don't see many people with them in finance.


I think it can be pretty lucrative, with the right firm and work ethic, just looking for some insight as to where future opportunities and career paths are.

lucasg85

16 years in business valuation at a non-big 4 national firm. What exactly do you want to know?