Thanks to everybody who contributed to this DILO!!!

In order to better understand the answers, heres the background of the folks
mentioned here:

Sudhir Syal: VC, India

Luiz Ricardo Delgado: LBO PE, Brazil
Rishi Sood: Real estate PE, Asia / Middle East / Africa
Anjali Shahi: PE, India
Neel Shah: Real estate PE, India
Do Yoon Kim: PE, Korea
Mikhail Ionov: M&A IB, Russia / CIS

1. Common places to work.

Anjali Shahi: In India, Mumbai then Bangalore are the biggest hubs for PEs and VCs.
Neel Shah: In India, Bombay and Delhi are the two main hubs for PE. Bangalore (probably the
best city to work in for non-Indians) has a larger presence of VCs because of its tech-hub
status.
In Asia, from what I hear Hong Kong has more PE / VCs firms v/s to Singapore. An MD of a
mid-sized PE firm also told me recently that overall, HK at the moment has more investible
capital than Singapore.
Do Yoon Kim: In Korea, most PE houses are in Seoul. You can say there are two kinds of PE
houses in Korea, captive and non-captive. Captive PE house usually exist as a subsidiary of
large conglomerate or financial group. Sometimes its just a division of investment bank or
asset management company. A large portion of local PE house is captive.
Mikhail Ionov: In CIS, the only meaningful hub for both VC and PE is Moscow. As Im
interested mainly in VC funds outside CIS, in United States major VC hubs are believed to be
Silicon Valley, NYC, Boston and Boulder. In Europe, London and Berlin are often mentioned.
2. Availability of summer internships.
Anjali Shahi: Can only speak for boutique PE firms. Internships are available but unlike ibanking, job offer isn't guaranteed. But you have the opportunity to network with other PE
firms. With boutique firms, its very much about a cultural fit. I've had an offer (verbal) from a
fund invested in our fund just after one dinner meeting with its partner.
Neel Shah: Internships in PEs / VCs are certainly harder to obtain as opposed to banking /
consulting due to the confidential nature of the business. I know of a few firms which are
reluctant to take on summer interns because simply because of non-public information which
they have access to.
Having said that, my friend just interned with Warburg Pincus over the summer and also
claimed to have internships with other large buyout firms. Im guessing the fact that he was
attending a top tier business school Wharton did help.
Considering that finance is not INSEAD career services strong suit, Im assuming that at some
point we will have to use the INSEADs alumni network to help us gain better access to these
off-market
internships
and
long
term
positions
at
PE / VC
firms.
Re translating a summer role into a full time position depends on your performance and

whether the management thinks you are the right fit for the role. Like Anjali said, its about
creating the right rapport with partners and about fitting into the firm culture.
Do Yoon Kim: Summer internship is available, but 2 months can be short period to experience
the investment process. Also, full-time position is usually not guaranteed.
Mikhail Ionov: From what Ive heard, only large PE funds recruit interns on a rolling basis,
but Im not sure whether there are summer internships available and more, the post-MBA place
is not guaranteed. To secure a place, its better to do it with the help of networking, especially
in the VC industry.

3. Typical options available post-MBA in these industries.

Sudhir Syal: Therere generally 4 levels in a VC firm - Associate, VP, Principal, Partner. After
MBA, Associate might be too low, aim for a smaller VC firm, aim for VP.
Luiz Ricardo Delgado: There're generally 5/6 levels in a PE firm - Analyst, Associate, Sn.
Associate, VP, Principal, Partner. After the MBA the entry point is usually as a Sn. Associate. In
smaller shops, if you have prior PE experience, you might be hired as a VP to accommodate the
comp.
Anjali Shahi: There is not much hiring happening at mid-tier levels these days. I know people
with 5-6 years PE experience who are not finding jobs (INSEAD grads). One should expect to
start as an Associate/Senior Associate.
Neel Shah: Given the uncertainty of fund-raising in the current economic environment, the
industry is more or less stagnant. Firms are reluctant to hire unless they are going to expand
via additional fund raising and have the resources to cover the additional fixed and variable
costs. Its going to be hard for both people with and without experience to get a role which
they feel is not regressive to their career progression.
Do Yoon Kim: People with relevant experience can expect a senior associate or VP depending
on their track record, skill set, network etc. If you have no relevant experience, mostly you will
start as an associate, especially if you worked around 5 years before MBA.
Mikhail Ionov: My experience fully corresponds with the said above. Expect Associate / Senior
Associate, depending on your background.

4. The skills and knowledge required to achieve the spots, the difficulties for
newcomers without prior experience.
Sudhir Syal: What are VC firms primarily looking for? Individuals with a Tech background /
Folks with a great network within start-up communities / Folks with a genuine love and passion
for working with start-ups.
Luiz Ricardo Delgado: Ideally a pre-MBA PE experience. If it's not the case, IBs and MCs
usually are able to find placements. The skills needed for the job are the traditional IB/MC skills
coupled with business and investment judgment. Not rocket science. The difficulty to enter the
industry is more due to the scarcity of positions and size of the teams than to the skill set
needed.
Rishi Sood: A key point to note is that from the Analyst to VP levels, I have seen technical
skills to be fairly key to your success in the industry. Above that level, it really all comes down
to deal making and the ability to sniff out an opportunity when one may not seem to exist.
From this point of view, industry specific, or deal specific experience is vital and as such, I've

always favored the industry->PE fund approach rather than beginning with an agnostic PE fund
and taking it from there. What otherwise tends to happen is the "curse of the winner" effect
where funds essentially over-bid for deals they don't have total technical expertise in and
therefore find the deal non-workable or underperforming after an extended period of time due
to their driver expectations having been incorrect initially. What I am trying to get at is basically
that having some form of industry expertise in addition to the technical skills (CFA, financial
modeling experience) is very handy and can ease the transition.
Anjali Shahi: Financial modeling, need to be well versed with all methods of valuation (in the
end the value is negotiated between investor/investment committee and management, one has
to use the valuation which justifies this price, lol), most importantly possess the ability to read
pages and pages and pages of legal docs without dozing off! A lot of soft skills like people
management, co-ordination, negotiation, etc come into play too. For portfolio
management/turnaround, you need to don a consultant's hat.
Neel Shah:
i) Valuation and modeling skills - While this is usually a pre-requisite, it isn't really rocket
science and can usually be improved on the job. A fund will train you in modeling skills based
on their formats, so being familiar with different valuation methods is probably more important
than having excellent modeling skills.
ii) Industry experience - For non-PE people this is probably your best bet to getting into a PE
firm. PE firms love specialists, and even if candidates do not have finance experience, being an
industry specialist will infinitely improve your chances!
Not so important:
iii) Structuring and legal documentations Bankers and PE analysts will have some experience
with these and newcomers will be at an inherent disadvantage here. Again these are refined on
the job and the more you do the better you get at it.
Important:
iv) Negotiation and deal-making skills - I think negotiation and deal making abilities are more
critical skills to have, though they cant really be put to the test in a non-board room situation.
Maybe if you are able to negotiate your way to a job, then that is probably good testament of
your negotiation abilities. Again, deal making skills are acquired over years of experience
though some people just have that flair for making deals happen.
v) Market relationships - I feel this is essential to any successful PE person. You need to have
deep relationships with bankers, lawyers, consultants and industry (company management)
people.
So for people wanting to get into PE post INSEAD make sure you use your the year effectively
to network - network and network.
Do Yoon Kim: I think the most important technical skill is valuation (including due diligence).
Analyzing financial and non-financial data and building financial model will be common role of
an associate. Also, you need to demonstrate that you have a decent people skill. If you have a
network for deal sourcing, it will be a great plus. You do not necessarily have to have prior PE
experience. If you worked for IB, accounting firm (financial advisory, M&A), consulting, or
similar role, you can be a candidate.
Mikhail Ionov: All the crucial points are mentioned above, and the only thing which Id like to
add, an associate does a lot of cold calling, so the strong communication skill is a must. This
applies both for VC and PE.

5. Common job functions of a freshly hired MBA graduate.

Sudhir Syal: Work involves sourcing deals - helping grow companies - helping recruit for startups - structuring partnerships/alliances and the sort.
Luiz Ricardo Delgado: Work involves sourcing deals, executing transactions and participating
in the portfolio management. Associates participate in the board as listeners. Sn Associates
usually have BOD seats (depends on the firm). In the beginning a PE career is more focused in
the IB+MC skills, but as you move along you start to use a lot project management, people,
negotiation and legal skills.
Anjali Shahi: There is no such thing as a typical day! My day depends on which phase of the
deal I am working on. Giving two examples. Deal origination: meetings with management of
companies we are interested in, preparation of marketing materials, discussions with partners
analyzing the companies, finding public comparables to get an idea of valuation (whether deal
size is something our investors would like). Deal signing: after the valuation has been agreed
upon, you negotiate the other terms of the investment, as a minority investor you typically
want a list of veto rights, as well as other demands like X number of board seats, right to
appoint a CFO, etc. You sit through meetings/calls where the partners discuss these and then
liaise with lawyers to draft them in. Finalizing the agreements can take anywhere from 3 to 9
months.
Neel Shah: I guess the best part of my job is that there is no typical work day. Every day is
unique and is largely determined by which part of the deal cycle we are in.
Deal sourcing and investment: (in addition to what Anjali described) Determining whether
projects or companies are worth investing in based on our internal valuation. Involves
screening a ton of investment proposals and recommending the most viable ones to the
investment committee based on quantitative and qualitative parameters. Once an investment
decision has been made, working with tax consultants and lawyers to determine optimum
investment structure and preparation of the legal documentation including an investment
agreement and share purchase agreements etc.
Post Investment: Meeting regularly with the management teams of the investee companies to
discuss performance, strategy and other business initiatives. Working with our investee
companies to optimize their business processes and information systems, and prepared them
as IPO candidates (this is very common as many of the companies in which opportunistic funds
invest in are very inefficiently run organizations which have very little organizational skills).
Monitoring investment performance and reporting back to investors.
Do Yoon Kim: Mostly you will spend most of time reviewing investment opportunities.
Depending on the stage, you can build and negotiate terms with a seller or a target company.
(Especially if its a minority investment, you will spend lots of time adjusting terms) Once your
company becomes serious about certain deal, you will have to interact with external advisors
(accounting firm, consulting firm, law firm, IB etc) for DD and negotiating the contract. You
also draft a report for investment committee to make an investment decision. You usually do
not manage existing portfolio companies, but if you take over a position of predecessor, you
could. Once your investment is done, you will start to interact with the invested company to
monitor performance and create value. You are also responsible of exiting the investment, and
so after 2-5 years, you get involved in the sale process such as IPO or M&A.
Mikhail Ionov: Without direct exposure to the industry, Id rather rely on what you guys
describe here.

6. Average workload and the overall feeling of work/life balance.

Sudhir Syal: At least in the Indian VC Firms - Work / Life balance seems very good.
Luiz Ricardo Delgado: It's definitely better than IBs and MCs. Things get real hard only when
you're about to close a deal, its like 20 hours per day, 7 days per week. From my personal
experience, I work in this pace around 4 months per year. Otherwise its 9/9, including all the
networking you do having dinners etc.
There are shops called "Lifestyle PE Funds", where you work less, and earn less too (I don't
know the figures). Even in those shops, my impression is that is really hard to close a deal
(especially in the final parts of investment negotiation and internal approvals) without burning
yourself a bit. Of course, those are funds that close deals once every 2 or 3 years. That makes
life much easier, but will have impact in your experience, as closing a deal is the only way of
really having PE experience. Otherwise, you're usually stuck doing sourcing and memos. If you
do a deal and an exit its even better, but that's very unusual for less senior professionals.
Anjali Shahi: If its deal signing and closing, I work Saturdays. Day ends at 11:30 pm and
starts at 8am. If its deal origination, its 8-9 hours a day. I get to work from home too as my
partners are traveling most of the time. A lot of deals happen in Mumbai itself so travel is not
so much.
Neel Shah: One of the biggest advantages of PE is that unless you are the in the midst of
closing a deal (12+ hour days), there is the possibility of having a life outside of the office.
Typical work day is from 9:30 6 and I also have the added flexibility of working from home
when Im not required in the office.
Do Yoon Kim: It depends on the team culture and style of your boss. But generally work/life
balance is better than IB or consulting. If you are in the middle of an important deal, you will
work late during the day, and work on weekends. When deal flow is slow, you work only 8
hours a day. But you are supposed to meet a lot of people after work for building network,
finding deal chances, etc., so you dont come back home that early (in Korea, building network
often involves a fair amount of drinking). About travel, if you manage a regional fund, you will
fly a lot. In my case, since our team mostly invests in local companies, I dont travel abroad
much. But sometimes potential target companies and portfolio companies (especially factories)
are not located in Seoul. In that case I drive or take train for visiting those companies (once a
week on average).
Mikhail Ionov: In Russia, the majority of boutique PE funds is quite relaxed when not closing
a deal, average workload doesnt exceed 50-55 hours per week; but one should expect quite
hectic workdays (and weekends) when finalizing an investment. At the same time, Ive never
heard of anybody putting in 130-hour weeks as Luiz describes, usually its 70-90 hours at max.
I think it heavily depends on the fund: folks in large funds tend to work more, not being shy to
pursue every deal possible, while in smaller / captive PE funds, the work/life balance is better
(but the experience is of another level, too). As for VC funds, I have no info.

7. Anticipated post-MBA remuneration.

Sudhir Syal: India compensation would assume is $60,000 for an Associate, $80,000 for a VP,
$130,000 for a Principal and Partner is anyone's guess. Carry starts kicking in from the Partner
Level. There is only 20% carry to be divided, so there is not that much to split between other
folks working for a VC firm.
Luiz Ricardo Delgado: Compensation is good - large buyout firms would assume is $150-200
for an Analyst, $200-250 for an Associate, $300-400 for a Sn. Associate, $350-450 for a VP (a

bit overlap here), $500k + for Principals and MDs. All those figures are gross. After Sn.
Associate you'll receive a carry on top of the cash comp. Carry starts kicking in from the Sn.
Associate level, usually vests in 5 years.
Comp is salary+bonus. Post MBA positions have salary+bonus+carry. I didn't do an estimate of
the carry because it depends on so many factors (period of investment, structure of the fund,
etc) that it would be completely wrong.
Anjali Shahi: In India, comps are low. I would second Sudhir here.
Neel Shah: Had picked this up from a report last year:

Figures do not include bonus which could be up to 100% for the junior guys. Senior guys are
paid partly in the form of carried interest of a percentage share of the profits of the fund(s).
Do Yoon Kim: As an associate, if you work for local PE house, normally base salary will below
$100,000. If you work for global PE house, it can easily be over $100,000.
Mikhail Ionov: Local PE fund in Russia gives a post-MBA associate at around $80,000$100,000 gross, and the bonus comprises 50%-70% of the annual salary. The good thing in
Russia, gross and net salaries are often the same, lol. No clue for large PE funds and VC funds,
though.

8. Career progression within the industry and possible rational exits.

Luiz Ricardo Delgado: It's very hard to steal a PE guy after he's been getting carry for a
couple years. That's why moves usually occur right after MBA. It's hard to see MDs and
Directors changing funds.
Anjali Shahi: Make it to Partner or set-up own fund if you find a family office willing to invest.
Neel Shah: Moving up the corporate ladder is similar to an investment bank:
Analyst (2-3 years) ---> Associate (1-2 years) ---> Senior Associate (1-2 years) ---> Vice
President (2-3 years) ---> Director (2-4 years) ---> Partner / Managing Director.
Do Yoon Kim: Korean PE industry has about 10-year history, so there are not many cases.
Within the industry, you will be a partner in your company or set up your own fund. Otherwise,
you can go back to prior job such as banking, be a CFO of invested company, or transition to
the strategic investment function of various companies.
Mikhail Ionov: As for PE, Neel Shah described the ladder in detail. Within VC funds, the
situation is different. In a seed/early-stage fund, a typical post-MBA associate works 2-3 years
for the fund, and then either joins a portfolio company in a key business-build role or starts his

own business. After a successful exit, he may return to a VC as a partner. In a growth stage VC
fund, which closely resembles a PE fund, the career progression is like in PE as well.

9. What were the reasons to enter the industry?

Anjali Shahi: I like the intense work pace and the multitude of skills one gets to deploy.
Ultimately I wish to be an entrepreneur and being in PE is a way to vicariously live through the
trials of running a business and learn how to work past them.
Neel Shah: Working at an investment bank prior to my current role, the focus was very
different as we were trying to facilitate numerous transactions a week. The biggest drawback
was that it was extremely hard to gain any in-depth knowledge on any one sector (I was a
generalist back then) and / or view companies with a long-term perspective. My main reason to
move to PE was to gain a more in depth perspective regarding managing investments and
businesses and growing companies.
Do Yoon Kim: I wanted to get involved in the decision making process more actively as a
principal rather than just support the decision as a financial advisor. Also, PE looked attractive
because I could get involved in the management side/operation and make things better.
Mikhail Ionov: Ive interacted a lot with PE funds throughout my entire career, but I have
never worked for a fund myself.

10. What do you like and what do you not like within the industry?
Luiz Ricardo Delgado: What attracted me to the PE industry in the first place was what I
consider to be a blend of MC, IB and Law (I have an economics + legal background, so I've
always been attracted to contracts and stuff). So far my thesis has been proved correct.
Another thing that attracts me a lot is that in a PE you really need to have an opinion and view
on everything you do, since the work really starts after you close the deal (one thing that really
annoyed me on the advisory side was that I didn't really have to have an opinion, and took no
risk at all).
Anjali Shahi: With just 1.5 year experience, I am still a baby in the industry enjoying the ride,
so cant comment.
Neel Shah: What I like: what I love the most about working for a real estate fund is that I
spend 1-3 days outside the office at the construction sites of our various investments. I love
getting my feet dirty and I am extremely fortunate to not be stuck in the office staring at a
computer screen for 5 days a week.
What I do not like: one thing HATE about the industry is that how management relations
(between the investment firm and the management firm) govern the decision making process.
I have seen deals being broken at the last moment because of a clash of egos despite making
outstanding deal sense (a PE investment is a marriage of the minds of investors and sponsors)
and I have also seen how close relationships have caused deals to go through, despite the
ridiculous valuations.
Do Yoon Kim: I like that I get exposed to new products and services, learn something every
day, and have many chances to listen to CEOs or CFOs views on their business. Work/life
balance is also a good thing. A bad thing is that you could be in trouble if your investment is
not successful. Its not a stable job, and I personally believe luck plays an important role for
success (actually it applies to many other finance jobs too). Even if you are very smart, and
possess a lot of good skills, network and passion, you can still easily fail in certain investment.

Sometimes when the invested company is suffering from losses or having liquidity issues, you
really have to come up with a solution to get out of trouble. But its usually very difficult, and
when things are uncontrollable, it is so frustrating.
Mikhail Ionov: My main interest is the VC industry, especially the area of internet startups.
The main reason for this choice is that the work in this area allows not only to fill in the bank
account, but also to take part in the surge of internet and technologies area, which Im keen
on, and to gain amazing experience of communicating and working directly with entrepreneurs.
Among its disadvantages Id point at a huge amount of uncertainty at every work level within
the industry, both in paycheck, bonus and promotion. It is certainly not a traditional career
path, as I see it.

11. Do you plan to return to the same industry post-MBA, and why?
Luiz Ricardo Delgado: After I finish the MBA I'll come back to the PE industry, most likely
with Carlyle. I really like the industry, and probably would leave it only to become an
entrepreneur (maybe try to open an asset management house or something, but it's all
longshot).
Anjali Shahi: Yes. As I would like to get exposure to a lot more industries and experience the
entire cycle from entry to exit of a company.
Neel Shah: I have thoroughly enjoyed the last 5 years in the industry but Id like to keep my
post MBA options open.
Do Yoon Kim: I will. I like my job, and want to be better in many aspects to become a
successful PE professional. Currently, a large portion of local PE funds in Korea is only focusing
on minority investments. I personally believe there will be lots of buyout opportunities for SMEs
in the near future. Lots of companies established by first-generation entrepreneurs will have
succession issues because the children will not want to take over. I believe China and other
developing countries will experience a similar thing. Since I developed my career mostly in the
finance sector, Id like to learn/obtain something through MBA so that I can add real value to
the invested companies.
Mikhail Ionov: For me, its not about a return, its about breaking into the VC industry which
is likely to be a perfect fit for me, at least from the standpoint Im taking now.

12. Any other questions to be covered?

Mikhail Ionov: Let me give a brief overview of VC and PE perspectives here in Russia.
Actually, Ive written it for completely other purposes, but maybe it would be helpful for some
of you.
The Russian VC industry is at the very early stage of development, and the vast majority of all
VC funds are actually not funds in the classic way, but instead one-man shows (those who
successfully exited from IT-related business and started doing VC investments). A good start
for these folks, but not for young professionals eager to gain experience. My view is that there
will be a reason to enter it not earlier than in 3-5 years, when the culture of VC investments will
develop. Remark: do not consider as Russian such firms as DST Global or RTP Ventures, as
both their capital, team and investments are outside Russia.
The Russian PE industry is still suffering from the crisis, as majority of the investments were
made in 2004-2006 with the view of exiting in 2008-2009, which was obviously impossible. Its
also worth to mention that there are a lot of captive PE funds, which are still doing
investments, in contrast to classic PE funds. Majority of them are based on oligarchic capital,

but are run by professional teams of managers. These funds are a good place to earn money,
but not to gain professional experience, because the deal flow and execution often substantially
differ from the western standards. To forecast the future of this industry in Russia is a very
complex task, especially in the current political context.