Dawson Leery

BECAUSE THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISION HAPPENING RIGHT NOW

Sorry I realize that wasn't clear. The promotion in 7 months is with my current firm - I'll either get a promotion and ~50% increase in comp, or get the boot. No clue what promotions / raises would be like at the new firm (big topic - my main focus for the next discussion).

It was never brought up or listed in the job description. I really had no idea where it would shake out, but I was hoping it would be close to the other offer. Financial Considerations:It's 40-55% less than the other firm's offer. It's about a 40-50% cut from my current comp. However, I think it's likely I will get promoted in 7 months - with the promotion my comp will increase by about 50%. If I don't get promoted I'm out of a job. Other Considerations:I like the firm, I want to get into investing and this is very much what I'm interested in. I have to move across the country in a month if

Got an offer from the firm I wanted for significantly less (like 40-55% less) than the other firm...also a substantial pay cut from my current job...being poor's not that bad, right Shake/Napa?Really wish it had been close to my current comp, would have made life a lot easier...

I now assume that Shake also has to clean the bathrooms as part of his job

I left out this detail

EXCEPT THAT DAWSON IS TURNING INTO SHAKE/NAPA/STRAT WTH.Applicable posts below. Napa gets it I have heard from the firm I want, but nothing definitive yet...still hoping/trying not to freak out.Now you're updated on the thread.

What if he dies in the bed? Is that still an upgrade?

I feel like Speedz is discounting internet fame and I don't like it

brvheart's wife

Yeah I was talking about spread. 90 degrees is a good rule of thumb.

Gotta have a thick tie with a half windsor. Real question is how wide was the collar of the shirt?

Seriously, who's ghost-writing Napa's posts these days?

Rolled the dice, turned down the PE offer...haven't heard anything since my interview yesterday from the firm I want (they know I had an offer that expired today, so I thought I would have heard something...)

U jelly bro?I feel like I'm getting a lot of shit for this. If you were my age, had a pretty serious girlfriend and were told you had to move across the country in 6 weeks or find another job, had an offer you didn't really want that is going to self-destruct in 24 hours and an interview with a firm you really wanted but hadn't heard anything from them, you would probably be freaking out right now too. I know that financially the options I have are good, but still a lot of big life changing decisions going on here, so BACK OFF EVERYONE.

Got the offer delayed til tomorrow, interviewed today, waiting to hear back about it (they know about my timeframe). Trying to keep my shit together.

Unless they'll extend the offer, I think I'm gonna roll the dice. I'll keep you updated on how this turns out, in as smug of a manner as possible.

So I got an offer from a PE firm today. It expires tomorrow. Thursday I have an interview with a firm that I want way more. What should I do?

I like this Speedz98 guy

I was about to help you out, but then you spell champing at the bit wrong...

Just found out my office is closing at the end of the year. So I either have to move to NY or SF, or find another job (which I've already somewhat started). So this is what it feels like to be Napa and/or Shake.

Goose Island 312 is my favorite beer ever. More snobby beer people like their other beers (Matilda, Green Line, etc.) - you should check them out. Reminds me of a great scene from West Wing: Nice, but you're an idiot for saying Thanksgiving meal sucks.

That's pretty crazy. In general, I agree with the statement in the article "The justification for the exception is that a guilty man could game the system by refusing or even fighting testing at trial, then fight for testing after conviction to buy himself some time before sentencing is carried out." In this case, I can't believe that it's a even question whether he can get the testing done now, knowing that he requested the testing but his corrupt public defender / former prosecutor decided not to pursue it. I would think that would be grounds for a mistrial?

From the article:"Authorities said cuts on Skinner's hand came from the knife used to stab the men. Skinner claimed he cut it on glass. Some DNA testing was done, which implicated Skinner, but not on the items he now wants tested."Why didn't he call for them to be tested initially? Isn't that what his defense is for during the trial? I don't think a defendant should be allowed to argue that other defenses should have been used during the trial, if those defenses were available at the time of the trial. In this case he's suggesting additional DNA testing, which seems legitimate, but where do yo

I thought that was going to be about The Boss