#Capital iq plug in software
#Capital iq plug in windows

#Capital iq plug in software

I worked on software for many years that was used side by side with Bloomberg. Not all Bloomberg users are traders though, and that's where I would try to challenge them. They get a commission actually for introducing you, but it's nowhere near what a recruiter would get. How? I don't know, get to know employees and then have them put in a good word. Making yourself really indispensable is the trick there, and it's very possible.Īctually my advice to you is this: if this is a whole year away, look around and see what companies you like and form connections with hiring managers WITHIN that company, rather than external recruiters. Their company is a meritocracy, and if you want to keep one thing in mind, it is this: the more good work you do and the more indispensable your work is, the more you will be able to ask for in a couple years. Still not as much as a trader or quant getting multi million dollar bonuses to stick around. Unless you're really instrumental to the company, then you'll be making $500k probably. If you stay for years then over time you'll be making more, probably around $200-300K. If you can somehow apply without a recruiter and have them really like you, you can probably get a larger salary. Like any other company, a lot of it has to do with their commission to the recruiter that they pay. I got $95K straight out of a master's program. If you are a developer in general you get around $80-120K starting. That's a tough team to get into, since it's one particular team. If you teach devs in their classes you can get a starting salary of around $150k. I am going to speak from what I saw two years ago. Yes, and in fact if you look at the job boards you can get a picture. As they became successful their competitors shut them down and they had to scramble to replicate datasets by themselves. Initially CIQ was just the website, and they bought their data from competitors. CIQ, for example, is (or was back then, anyway) a tiny shim of a crappy tech company in New York and thousands and thousands of people doing data collection in India.

All of these companies are vertically integrated. One other giant stinking reason it's really hard to innovate here is data. It's hard to attack this with modern methods. People like it in part because it's insane. His superiors explained to him very slowly that although the terminal looks like obvious insanity to a tech person, it's embedded in the culture in finance.

#Capital iq plug in windows

In my last interview with a director, he described an experience he had rewriting quite a bit of the Bloomberg terminal as a modern (for the time anyway) Windows app as some kind of skunkworks project. (I recently reminisced a bit here: )Īt one point I was offered a job with Bloomberg that I didn't wind up taking. I worked for CIQ from 2003-2007, it was not such a great time. Having never used or seen Bloomberg, I immediately started describing a system of keyboard shortcuts, to which my interviewer responded that I was basically just describing Bloomberg terminal. They asked me to design an interface that would allow people to access financial information quickly. Even if you create a perfect replica of Bloomberg, would I stake my clients money on your track record? Even with a good track record, why would I not trust Bloomberg when it's the de facto standard?Ĥ) IP? not sure about this one, but I imagine there are a lot of features baked into Bloomberg with legal protection.ĥ) The cost is insignificant for most of wall street.įunny story: on a whim I interviewed with capital IQ while I was in college. It's kind of like open-sourcing security pricing monitoring.ģ) Reputation. Also, Bloomberg leverages its network to constantly monitor prices, so pricing problems are discovered REALLY quickly. Bloomberg messenger is the way to communicate in finance. Bloomberg was incredibly reliable on the other hand, and their support team responds to issues within minutes.Ģ) Network effects. When you start to go outside of the US, there's some really bizarre logic.

Connecting to hundreds of exchanges with thousands of securities is difficult. Despite all its resources, Reuters proved time and again to have pricing issues. I imagine that when a major pricing error occurred on any exchange, I would find out within 30 seconds to a minute. I worked on a support desk where I had both Reuters and Bloomberg (at a cost of something insane, probably close to 100k/yr).

Traders need a highly reliable connection. If I'm a trader with 300MM in my pocket, then I need access to information. There are a couple reasons why it's really difficult to disrupt this industry:ġ) An mvp won't cut it.