Recently, Rupert Murdoch has public mused that News Corp. might start blocking its content from Google’s search results. As many of you already know, Google provides search results that link to content from News Corp. (and many, many, other providers), along with a brief summary of said content. Google gets ad revenue tied to these search results, and it keeps all of the money. However, Google contends that it drives significant traffic directly to the sites (on the order of 1 billion page views per month, according to Marissa Mayer), and it allows the content owners to then try to monetize this traffic in any way they deem feasible. Plus, content owners are free to block Google’s search engines from linking to their sites.

Everybody gains, right? Not so fast. The search results frequently contain enough content that viewers do not feel the need to click on the original news link. And, this system puts the control of the viewer in the hands of Google, not the news source, by disaggregating all of the news.

So what is the solution, if you are a content provider? You could do what News Corp. is contemplating, which is to pull your content. Would it really be worth it to News Corp to decrease its traffic in order to spite Google? Probably not, which is why nobody of note has done it yet. One solution that has been rumored is that News Corp. would partner with Bing, a Google competitor, in an exclusive arrangement: Bing gets increased traffic to its search engine, and News Corp. receives some compensation from Bing for this exclusive traffic. However, and this is a big however, many viewers would likely just continue to use Google and then go to non-News Corp websites for their information, except in cases where News Corp. has exclusive content. The only way that this would work is if all of the major news sites signed an exclusive arrangement with Bing (or whomever else). Then they would have a critical mass of content that drives users to a different search engine.

If push came to shove, would Google consider providing a split of some of its revenue to these providers to prevent them from joining the other side? Doubtful. My view is that there is so much news content out there, both from “professional” and “amateur (blogs, etc.)” sources that it would be very difficult to have a concerted effort large enough to make a dent to Google. Stay tuned…

In the media this week there has been a variety of stories suggesting that students are paying companies, which seem to be springing up all over the internet, for advice on gaining valuable internships. For some context, students usually are supposed to at some point in their degree (usually in the first and/or second year) find a three to six month unpaid internship in a sector that they wish to work in. However, finding an internship in Media, PR, Law and Investment Banking as just some widely recognised examples is nothing short of extremely hard; without wishing to blame the recession, there has also been suggestions that this has led to firms being more selective and considering students only from the top universities.

While many students are routinely rejected for internships in the summer of both years 1 and 2 of their degree, they tend to worry about the feasibility of working in their preferred industry, which is where we’ve seen companies offer CV advice alongside tailor made help for specific internship programmes (such as help with tests and interviews). It has come to be expected that to work in some industries graduates will have to work going unpaid or with extremely poor pay. For students who wish to work in journalism, the BBCs work experience programmes are highly competitive and while gaining access to work on local papers can be more easily sought almost always these go unpaid and even if the student was lucky enough to gain a job on a local paper as a reporter they’d expect no more than around £12,000 starting pay (hardly a graduate salary). While some other careers promise higher salaries such as those obtained in Public Relations being closer to £20,000 – this is an industry where like journalism, graduates are expected to work for free for a period of time. Now many might argue that if graduates expect to fly up the career ladder in an industry they’ve always wished of working in, they should expect to undertake 6months to a years worth of unpaid work to get their foot in the door so to speak. While this may be true how can graduates from less wealthy backgrounds be expected to afford living for up to a year with no income (bearing in mind most graduate jobs are located in London).

Unpaid graduate internships and even starting salaries for journalism jobs, I would argue lead to less more than qualified yet not quite middle-class enough graduates turning away from these industries, is it any wonder people bleat on all the time about the lack of working class people in newspapers or high paid jobs? It is arguable that we are getting to the point where unpaid internships are leading to the priviledged getting necessary experience yet graduates who are equally as qualified turning to lesser jobs merely so they can live comfortably or support their families. I think the government should make it compulsory for graduates to be paid the minimum wage during internships, while this may not solve the problem, it will help considerably – many of those who turned down unpaid work with a prospect of their dream job because they couldn’t afford to live in London for a year going unpaid may now give it a go. Surely the skills of a graduate merit minimum wage pay? Companies which offer unpaid internships on the whole tend to be massive organisations that make staggering profits, while it might be acceptable to expect a first or second year student to undertake a few months work with no pay but essential experience gained it shouldn’t be expected for those who are done studying.

It would be terrible if we got to the point where companies have realised they can take a batch of highly qualified graduates, make them work for a year (yes, proper work – 9-5) then instead of taking on all of those that are good enough, they instead replace many with other highly qualified graduates who will also work for a year for free.

Why does everyone get their panties Ina whirl over hedge fund managers pay? Though they make mistakes, surely their function in society [(usually, though not always) the efficient allocation of capital] is higher than that of an professional athlete whose sole purpose is put a ball in a net.

Jealousy and a culture of victimization.

According to a new study by Harvard University, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Bear Stearns Cos. executives made US$2.5 billion from 2000 to 2008, a sign pay polices may have encouraged risk-taking that doomed the companies.

The top five officials at Lehman, which filed for bankruptcy in September 2008, received US$1.03 billion in cash bonuses and proceeds from equity sales during the period, according to the report, The Wages of Failure, released yesterday by Harvard Law School’s Program on Corporate Governance. Bear Stearns’ top executives made US$1.46 billion in the years before JPMorgan Chase & Co. agreed to buy the firm in 2008.

Losses the executives suffered when the firms failed were outweighed by payouts in the preceding eight years, the study said.

Source: Bloomberg

This is a very quick blog post that should be title Digital Media Strategic Partnership Rule #1 .

Always start with how the partnership will be better for the end user (or the customer) and talk about finance later.

In structuring strategic partnerships, most digital media execs and VPs want to talk about the numbers first…how much money they are going to make on the deal.  Aeey-yah-yaeh.  We need a new breed of CEOs and corporate development execs in digital media that are end user focused or customer-centric.  I guess it is a sign of the times.  Too many traditional media types in digital media who would prefer not to risk their job for the customer.

This could be a point that segways to another blog post.  The model of traditional media companies owning digital media companies is not working.  I think they are suffocating the growth and nimbleness of the interactive properties.  Maybe that is why Google is the only exit game in town.

Hmmm…I think I’m on to something.  Take NY Times owning About.com for instance.  They’re scraping cash out of that company like a fat kid at the bottom of a tub of ice cream.  All that money About.com makes could be used for making a better online product rather than serving NY Times debt.  (I love the NY Times by the way, I just don’t love the print version.)

China is the largest clean technology (cleantech) market in the world, with a market value of over $200 billion in environment protection and renewable energy industries alone. Energy generation became the most popular segment of cleantech investment in  2009 , followed then by the water and energy efficiency segments.

Chinese government spending on cleantech is snowballing. China has tripled its government investments on cleantech to 1.35 trillion yuan in the past decade, and boosted the share of cleantech spending in gross domestic product (GDP) from 1.3 percent to 1.5 percent.

As for the areas of cleantech investment, $172 billion has gone to environmental protection – 37 billion for desulphurization, 25 billion each for industrial waste water treatment and vehicle exhaust gas, and 22 for municipal waste water treatment.

In the renewable energy sector, $2.8 billion has been invested in wind, $8.1 billion on solar thermal energy, $1.7 billion on solar PV, $3.1 billion on ethanol, and 1.3 billion on biodiesel.

For its Five-Year Plan (2006-2010) period and in the long term, China has set two targets. The first is achieving at least 10 percent of total energy consumption from renewable energies by 2010, and the second is boosting the proportion of renewable energy consumption against primary energy consumption from 10 percent to 16 percent by 2020. Meanwhile, the government wants to reduce energy consumption per 10,000 yuan of GDP by 20 percent. It also seeks to reduce the water consumption per industrial output ratio by 30 percent by 2020.

Specifically, development goals of environmental protection for the 11th Five-Year Plan period are to treat 70 percent of municipal sewage and 60 percent of municipal garbage, discharge 10 percent less primary pollutants, and reach a 20 percent forest coverage.

In view of the current situation, China, however, faces tough challenges ahead, such as high energy consumption and high raw materials consumption. China’s energy consumption per 10,000 yuan of GDP was four times the world average and 14 times that of Japan. Raw material consumption is going up rapidly. In 2005, China consumed 310 million tons of rolled steel, up 15.1 percent year on year; 12.84 million tons of aluminum oxide, up 9.7 percent; and 960 million tons of cement, up 12.4 percent.

High environmental costs are offsetting about 4 to 6 percent of China’s GDP growth, only 43.6 percent of polluted water is treated, and 58.6 percent of Chinese cities have unhealthy air conditions. The continuing rapid growth of the Chinese economy presents unparalleled opportunities and challenges.

Since most of the vast cleantech market in China remains untapped, the country’s policy incentives, such as the latest environment and renewable energy tax, are attracting a lot of investment. Statistics from Cleantech China Research show that cleantech venture capital (VC) grew from a bit over $550 million in 2007 to more than $720 million in 2008, and is expected to reach over billion $dollars in 2009.

What we can see the vast investment would be used to massively expand China’s solar, wind, biofuel, electric car, energy efficiency sectors, carbon capture & store, environment protection and smart-grid markets in a move that could be as groundbreaking as the commercialisation of the internet. China has huge clean energy business opportunities for USA. US clean-energy companies can help Chinese firms meet their enormous energy demands while deploying technology that benefits the environment in the world.

I just wanted to point readers in the direction of this interview with City Girl on the UCL careers service blog, where she argues that contrary to stereotype, discrimination is less likely to be a problem for a trader as everyone is judged simply on the bottom line figures. Trading is a meritocracy with clearly defined results that are hard to argue with. It is an interesting read, with some top trading tips.

There is more from Barbara Stcherbatcheff on her website, in this article ‘Trading – no job for a nice girl?‘ where she tackles some myths about the culture of trading, and ‘Where are all the Citygirls?‘ which I also recommend.

What would put you off from a career as a trader? Is it the hours, the culture, or a perceived lack of equal opportunities?

I know you’ll all have a pretty good idea what a city trader does but how many of you know what life as a trader an at oil or energy company is like?  Differences and similarities? Pros and cons?  What’s the recruitment market like?  How many of you know about specialist international investment banking companies working in the energy sector?  With traditional roles and sectors still seeing turbulant times is it worth investigating some alternatives?  The energy sector has bucked trends, is actively recruiting and offers a wealth of perhaps lesser known roles but offering similar responsibilities and challenges (but without such long hours!).  Intrigued?  Want to find out more?  Then come to our Energy Careers Forum next Monday evening from 6 – 8pm.  No need to book.  Further details are on our website.

We are looking for candidates for a Solution Architect – Banking Software role. This is a permanent position with one of our clients, a Leading NASDAQ listed IT Services company.

Write to rizwan.syed [at] avanceservices [dot] com for more details

Referral Reward – 1000 Euros

There is a referral reward of 1000 Euros on a success fee basis for this role i.e. we will pay this reward if the person you refer is selected for this role, joins this position and meets some basic client obligations in the first 3 months

We will reply to you within 2 business days for any candidates that you recommend and whom we have already spoken to in the past for this role. This referral reward offer is valid only till 30 November -2009

Judith’s come up with some interesting ideas for making extra cash over the holiday season so not to be outdone I’ve come up with some suggestions too!

Thomson Reuters have recently launched a trading game via Facebook.  Not only does it give you the chance to win £1000 but there’s weekly prizes too. If you don’t like what you win you could always ‘recycle’ your gift!  Seriously though the game gives you chance to practice your skills at trading with a £million budget so why not join over 600 other traders on the Thomson Reuters Facebook site  and put your skills to the test? You’ve got to be in it to win it!

Gulf Finance House confirmed at the weekend they’ve placed a $100m convertible murabaha with Deutsche bank. It’s the second deal of its kind, bringing the total amount of finance raised by GFH this year to $500m, $300m of which has been brought in since last month. The deal with Deutsche further strengthen’s the bank’s ties with the international banking community after a placement with Macquarie earlier in the year.

GFH recently stated it planned to focus on investment banking in a move away from projects involving real estate.

It’s a testament to the growing global interest in islamic finance transactions.

More here.

it’s all about sex appeal, and it seems that the cash-poor, unglamorous, ramen filled world of startups has managed to overtake the steel and glass tall buildings, expense accounts and suit and tie life of investment banking in the eyes of college students. of course the first reaction most people while have is d’oh, financial crisis mr blogger? isn’t it obvious. they’ve probably already clicked out.

for those of you who haven’t, i want to engage in a conversation with you that suggests the fundamentals of why young people are thinking more seriously about getting involved in startups, either by founding one, or joining one early-stage, is more fundamental than the economy and the fewer job opportunities on wall street. When I threw away my aspirations to be an investment banking superstar (check out the loser on the left), I thought I was being some kind of rebel, but as most instance in my life, nothing all that special, just context. If you look around, you see a new breed of college student, people call us Gen Yers, Generation U, Millenials. At Blank Label we call ‘us’ Connected Individuals, and have coined the term #CONNECTEDINDIVIDUALISM. We’re impatient, generally needy, have been brought up fairly entitled, mostly in small families. We associate with independence, we see more young people than ever doing really cool shit. And that really cool shit is not making money off the buying and selling of others. Yes, that was a jibe at bankers.

But if you think about those characteristics as a generation we generally embody, a lot of them are closely correlated with why young people are starting companies these days. We’re giving the finger to the corporate rat race. We’re thankfully irrational enough to think we actually have a decent shot of founding a startup, I’m sure by serious of orders of magnitude if you measured what young founders thought their chance of success was vs what was realistic based on balance of probabilities, the economy would be seriously worried. Thankfully that’s a hard study to do. What the real catalyst driving a lot of this is the actual success of young entrepreneurs.  Much of the reason why I wanted to go into banking is because peers who were a few years older were talking about the six figure salary, the friday night open bar parties, the ass-kicking intensity. This was all incredibly sexy to me. And amazingly, sex appeal is important to a young 20 something year old male. With the growing list of young rockstar entrepreneurs spread around, the attention has turned to being sexy by starting a company. And think about the ego rush of a young person hiring someone older than them. Damn! And the king of them all Zucks is getting a freaking movie made about him!

Entrepreneurs south of 30 will always be a minority in comparison to those who spend time as academics or research experts, those who get corporate gigs, and those who just want to spend their time surfing. Everyone’s different, everyone’s passionate about different things, and I fully respect that. But there’s no doubt in my mind that this generational group of entrepreneurs has been growing over the last 10 years, and will grow at an even quicker rate in the next 10 years. Make no mistake, I am not qualifying necessarily massive hits from young entrepreneurs, only that more young people are founding companies or getting involved in startups. What this really stresses is that there’s an amazing opportunity for schools, government and the investment community to seriously change the impact young people have the future of the world, and it’s amazing how large an impact small tweaks can have.

Been wanting to blog about this.

Strange how Client X was completely dismissive towards me, probably because of my youth (I’m hoping, ha!). He had no interest or whatsoever in what I have to offer, weren’t the least concerned in what I’ve to say even when my boss directed the attention to me. He was just completely disengaged and slightly … condescending.

The conversation steered towards the nature of the small business I set up (with my partners) and he suddenly lit up. He told me about how his relatives have a similar business and how they are operating in London and exporting from the Asian countries. His attitude took an immediate 180 degrees turn.

I don’t know what to make out of it -should I be happy, upset or just… ignore it? – ‘cept that sometimes, in life, I guess you don’t move forward by virtue of your academic prowess or achievements but by how you can strike a familiar chord with another person.

So – you think you want to be a banker, and you don’t know where to begin.  Whether you’re still in college, a couple of years out, or already in an established career and looking for a change, it’s never too late to begin a career in finance.  Finance is unique among many high-paying professions in that successful bankers come from a very diverse range of backgrounds.  You don’t necessarily have to graduate from the most prestigious school, have the most impressive GPA, or complete a specific (or any) graduate program to make it.  You simply have to have what it takes to get ahead and stay ahead in what has become one of the most competitive professions in the world.

Step 1: Do Your Homework

For many people, banking as a whole first comes to their attention by means of its lucrative and infamous salaries.  There are few jobs out there that can garner as high a wage as a successful career in finance, but the field itself is very diverse and includes much more than your stereotypical private-jet-owning investment bankers.  If you haven’t already, take a look through online resources detailing the differences between areas like corporate finance, financial planning, hedge funds, investment banking, and private equity to get a feel for what you might be interested in.  Attend conferences, go to lectures, and if you can, pick up an internship. Since the recent financial crisis, Wall Street firms have been pulling more and more new hires from their summer and year-long internship pool, and taking an internship will allow you to explore and discover exactly which areas you might be interested in.

Step 2: Understand the Lifestyle: You are NOT in a 9-5 Desk Job

Readers beware: while a 6-figure salary straight out of college may seem like a dream come true, let there be no doubt in your mind that you will be working hard, long hours to earn those 6 digits.  For those who choose to follow their hearts to the large firms of Wall Street, first year investment banking analysts have been known to work 100+ hours a week, running on nothing but ungodly amounts of Starbucks coffee.  Think long and hard about what the position entails and why you are suited for it.   Also, interviewers will be able to tell if you don’t actually know anything about the culture of finance when you come in.  Do some research, ask around – know about the different fields and the different lifestyles attached to each one.  Follow the news in finance beyond picking up a Wall Street Journal the night before you interview.

One [perhaps dramatized] example of Wall Street culture:

Step 3: Network Like Your Life Depends on It

Landing your first job at a bank is all about getting your foot in the door.  Be proactive about meeting people wherever you go.  Take business cards.  Search your current network for people within the firm you hope to apply to.  According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 70 percent of all jobs are found through networking.  Use resources like Doostang or LinkedIn to your advantage to search for positions and make connections along the way.   Knowing people within a bank you’re applying to will be able to set you apart from the hundreds of applications that are received every year.

Step 4:  Send in Your Resume, and Be Yourself

Unlike career paths in academia, jobs in finance, especially in areas like sales & trading, don’t always rely heavily on your academic credentials to gauge potential.  A successful analyst or associate is often someone who possesses certain personality traits – like the ability to prioritize, to work well as a part of a team, and to take entrepreneurial initiative.  If you think that finance is a field in which you will excel, go for it and have faith in your abilities!  it may take an untraditional applicant a bit longer to move up and land the job that you want, but soon enough people will catch on to your potential and you will be on your way.

Step 5: If at First You Don’t Succeed

Like we said, a lot of breaking into finance is simply about getting interested, informed, and your foot in the door.  If you really think that you’ve got what it takes to be successful, don’t give up until you get a chance to show your stuff.  Once you’re in any kind of job or internship, you’ll be able to learn and move up in rank quickly if you have the right skills and personality.  So don’t let a round of disastrous applications get you down.  Try applying to a smaller bank or for a job in a related field first.  Work hard at whatever you’re doing, continue to network, and chase after that job until you land it.

And our last bit of advice: just be honest.  Be honest with yourself, and be honest with the people you meet.  If there’s something you don’t know or are unsure about, say something.  People are much more likely to care about you and your career if you are honest with them from the get-go.  By approaching each situation with sincerity, enthusiasm, and integrity, you will be sure to nail your interview, land your job, and create a successful and fulfilling career.

Best of luck future Wall Street wanderers,

Team Doostang
:: :: :: :: ::

Financial services looking ahead.
October 11, 2009
Click here for entire article.

A conversation with the MD of XXX company, who is offering me a great job in Hong Kong with unparalleled exposure, frequent travel and extremely irresistible pay.

“So, Anna. Why are you rejecting this job?”

“Well, being a buy-side investment analyst is my dream job and I will like to pursue it when I am still young.”

“But we give you exposure, travel, awesome benefits and money that will fund your MBA.”

“True but the experience and kindness that my CIO gave me is irreplaceable, I can’t be an ingrate. “

“So you won”t change your mind at all? Tell me, what is the one thing that you dislike about your job?”

I thought hard for a minute.

“I suppose, having to wear stuffy suits and being in a prim and proper attire all the time for credibility.”

“What??? “

“Well, the point of me working hard is to earn more money to buy nicer clothes, cute dresses and fashionable items like sky-high stilettos that probably won’t be fully utilised but are utterly gorgeous to look at. Work hard = more money = nice clothes. But being in research, I have to maintain a decorum of respectability by wearing boring, conservative office wear which… defeats the purpose of earning money and working hard. “

” …….”

It was one of those comments that I blurted as a wise-cracking joke to get out of  a sticky question. Then I hear myself and think about it and get really embarrassed at how close to the truth it was. Hahaha!

xxx

Afterthought// Guess maybe, the job he is offering is worth its mantle. I can network, get wined and dined, travel to places on company’s expense and… most important consideration of all, dress in pretty frocks.

I’ve major envy for friends who work in PR/Marketing/Corp. Comms jobs that basically allow them to wear anything they want. Sneakers, jumpsuits, berms, flats to work! Lucky them!

One of the most obvious observations any Ad:Tech 2009 attendee was likely to make is that the conference attracted a very diverse crowd, in terms of age and professional expertise, among many other factors.  That being said, the presentations clearly illustrated some general trends and ideas regarding the Digital Media sector that are pertinent to all attendees. First off, the conference provided a general reminder of the relative sectors’ state in our currently struggling economy.  Healthcare and Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG) have proven themselves to be best at weathering this mighty storm, although it is also comforting to know that the Auto sector may be poised for a rebound, given Ford’s resilience, especially in the context of the Detroit Three. 

Within the digital media sector, Search and Mobile were repeatedly defined as the most proliferated platforms.  Generally speaking, pure play companies have been doing well, and the online video platform is back on the rise.  Most importantly, consumption of online material has had a linear, upward trend in dollar terms, indicating that an understanding of the factors driving the growth is particularly significant at this time. 

 Ultimately, the focus in terms of building a successful company in this space should be on finding ways to develop a strong understanding of both the consumer and the data.  A most basic illustration of this concept can be made by distinguishing between Facebook and MySpace users: the former are more interested in knowing what people are up to, whereas the latter are more likely to look at what people are into (s.a. their music tastes, for example).  This focus on the demands of the consumer and the meaning behind the data may provide an answer to why Twitter numbers have been going flat, for instance.  Perhaps the site is not quite a youth phenomenon, but an adult one, which may have been posing limits on Twitter’s success, since the segment of consumers it does not appeal to happens to be a major overall consumer of digital media.  Meanwhile an analysis of consumption data may prove that Facebook has made Twitter less appealing with its “status” feature, for example.  If this were the case, then it is likely that Facebook is ahead of the game and has successfully understood its consumers and data, and has followed both as they change over time.

 A question that was raised by knowledgeable speakers and curious audience members alike is how to separate paid from unpaid content on sites.  Jonathan Miller, head of the Digital Media Group at News Corp, emphasized the importance of establishing a “crystal clear value proposition.” Miller referred to the Wall Street Journal as a company that has not only been successful revenue and reader-wise in distinguishing between paid and unpaid content on its site, but has gone as far as to raise the bar for others determined to profit from the same separation.  In order to arrive at Miller’s proposition, we must define “quality content” in the context of a particular platform, which once again demands an understanding of the consumer, the data, as well as some brainstorming as to who will produce this content, once it has been defined.

There were many, many more ideas that were raised at this conference, but on a most basic level, I hope the ones above give some insight into the rapidly growing and changing digital media sector.  Sir Martin Sorrell, Founder and CEO of WPP, casually remarked that “things are getting less worse, but they are not significantly better,” which should remind us all that the steady increases in online material consumption provide tremendous opportunity.

* Yes, the title is from a Kelly Clarkson song.  I’m not ashamed.

During the summer before my senior year of college, I did an internship at a large investment bank in New York.  To get the job, I professed my love for DCF models and calculating betas.  I made myself sound like the most interesting person in the world: “I enjoy reading Reuters.com, making data tables in Excel, and taking nonlinear walks along the beach.  I don’t always drink beer, but when I do, I prefer A&W.  That company’s got quite the cash flow.”

I suppose it worked.  I accepted an offer from a prestigious bank in midtown Manhattan, working in equity research for the summer of 2006.

I thought I would need a few weeks to determine whether I’d find my calling in finance.  But after just a few days, I already hated it.  I hated the dress code, the formality, the hierarchy, and the Big Brother-ness of it all.  I hated the work, which teetered between mundane and soul-sucking.  Most days, I just felt like a highly-paid supermarket cashier, plugging in numbers and being rude.  I quickly learned that there were three tenets of business: 1) Jerkiness is a coveted personality trait…  2) “Fuck” can be used as a noun, verb, adjective, adverb, insult, directive, and occasionally, term of endearment…  3) Lastly, in order to fit in, you have to be strongly opinionated about HR, women leaders, and taxes.  (The opinion must also be negative, although you can “support them in concept.”)

Throughout the summer, I felt like I was part of a giant sociological experiment, where you throw fifty impressionable college kids into (what I would consider) the worst job in the world (except, maybe, dairy farming) and record their reaction.  The people who loved it also seemed to hate it as well, but they had all accepted that hatefulness was part of the job, and therefore it was palatable.  And for a summer at least, it was palatable, especially given the fact that we were well-paid, well-fed, and living in New York with an unlimited reign over the four-letter word dictionary.

Nearing the end of my two-month stint, I had to meet with HR (ugh) to discuss full-time opportunities.  The bank was well-known for only hiring first-years from its summer intern class.  Even though I knew, deep down, that I didn’t want to do this for two full years, I still wanted to get an offer.  I still wanted to have a job lined up, even though I swore I wouldn’t take it.  I wouldn’t.  Even though it was a prestigious firm.  I wouldn’t.  Even though I’d built up a strong network.  I wouldn’t.  Even though I’d get to live comfortably in New York City.  I wouldn’t.  Or would I?

During my session with HR, I was bombarded with a barrage of questions that I hadn’t prepared for: “What are your three biggest weaknesses?  What would you title your autobiography?  Which historical figure do you identify with most?”  To the last question, I blurted out “Abraham Lincoln,” after a long, awkward silence in which I contemplated whether Chairman Mao had any redeeming qualities.  (For some reason, he’s the first “historical figure” that pops into my head.)  After trying to justify to HR that Abe was a perfectly legitimate answer (“I see myself in him through his honesty…his passion for humanity…his log cabin roots”), I realized that I would always be better at BS-ing about Lincoln than modeling cash flows.

So when I got my full-time offer, I turned it down.  I took another job, still in finance, but at a media company where I could learn to hone my creative talents.   And now, two years later, as I’m coming to the end of my term, I have to make another decision — whether to stay in my backup plan, or to go ahead and do something crazy, like compare myself to Abraham Lincoln.  Like eschew a stable finance career for the peripatetic life of a starving writer.  I’m leaning towards the latter, because I’m young, hungry, and ready to give it a real shot.  And as they say, it will work itself out in the end…

After all, the full-time offer I turned down, in the winter of 2006, was from Lehman Brothers.

Peachtree has lately busied itself making rounds at November conferences.  Following a successful ad:tech NY 2009, we attended the Web 2.0  Expo last week in New York.  Introducing myself to other attendees at these conferences is always fun; the term “investment bank” more often than not elicits a response of discombobulation invariably followed by a valiant attempt to decipher the code: “Oh, like real estate investments.”  Anyway, I digress.  Since Elena has already provided a comprehensive recap of the ad:tech proceedings, I’m skipping over ad:tech to offer some Web 2.0 musings.

In contrast to ad:tech, which consisted of advertising, advertising, and (gasp) more advertising, Web 2.0 explored a plethora of topics ranging from social media to mobile to government 2.0.  And in case you were wondering, yes, much of the attention centered upon Twitter and Facebook, resident darlings of Web 2.0 as we know it.  To make sure you didn’t miss Twitter, the folks at Web 2.0 were so kind as to provide a theater-sized live Twitter feed behind the podium during keynote sessions.

Baratunde Thurstone, comedian and web editor of The Onion, then fed the Twitter-hungry attendees (“the twitterati”) a serving of hashtag lunch during a Wednesday keynote, which they promptly ate up.  In case you aren’t familiar with Twitterspeak, hashtags are a way of grouping tweets (#dogs would be a way of identifying your tweet as dogs-related), and also what Thurston calls ”mini grassroots movements.”  Possibly offering more comedy than substance, Thurston used case studies of, amongst others, #SwineFlu, #WorldsThinnestBooks, and #RejectedPalinTitles to demonstrate the viral nature of hashtags.  If you can spare fifteen minutes of your life, the complete presentation is here.

Alas, the conference did not pass without hashtags rearing its ugly head as well.  The aforementioned live Twitter feed enabled audience members to broadcast tweets on-screen by applying the #w2e hashtag.  As tweets flooded the feed during keynotes, the experiment not only illuminated the power of Web 2.0 technology but also served as a fantastic medium for instant feedback — that is, until Microsoft researcher Danah Boyd started speaking too fast for the crowd’s liking during her keynote entitled, “Streams of Content, Limited Attention.”  What began as several tweets requesting a slower place quickly escalated into full-blown ridicule of her presentation skills complete with incessant laughter as members of the twitterati excitedly joined the spectacle. Funny maybe, for the twitterati, but certainly rude and humiliating to Danah, who could not see the tweets behind her and later blogged that her presentation “sucked.”

Of course, some other things happened at Web 2.0 as well. Anil Dash delighted that the government is finally warming to embrace new media and Gina Trapini kind of explained how Google Wave works, but make no mistake, Twitter and its band of twitterati brought out the best and worst of Web 2.0 Expo. Which, actually, serves as a microcosm for the world we live in today.