Comments on: I should be a personal-finance carnie

By: R

Sun, 30 Nov 2008 04:18:22 +0000

I am also a consultant (not senior) at a litigation consulting firm. To be 100% billable you would have had to put in more than 8 hours a day. When I used to be a management consultant they billed me out at $300 an hour as an analyst and I was making 60K a year as a 22 year old. In my litigation consulting firm, I am billed out at $150 an hour as a consultant and I make only slightly more than I used to at a mgmt consulting firm. There’s also a lot of costs the company shells out for each employee- medical expenses, life insurance, disability insurance, 401K matching, profit sharing, parking, FICA, Unemployment tax…

By: Mrs. Micah

Mrs. Micah — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 00:52:11 +0000

I guess I’m less than 2x? I’m paid $15 per hour and I’m hired out at $27.50 per hour.

By: Imtos

Imtos — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 13:54:54 +0000

So, what is the “right” answer? did I get it right? Did I win a prize? a pat in the back?

By: Shreenath

Shreenath — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:38:19 +0000

I work at a consulting firm myself and yeah I think the calculations of Imtos is probably right on~
we bill lower for litigation than strategy (think Mckinsey/bain/bcg) but bill every hour while in strategy we bill fixed 8 hr days irrespective of time worked.
To all those going on about overtime, this is a salaried job and most of us do not get overtime!
Also, making 60-100 k out of college is fairly easy if you did engineering. I had an offer for 80 in some god-forsaken town in texas which i obviously turned down!
Anyhow, another great blog ramit~

By: Imtos

Imtos — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:26:37 +0000

She makes 40/h and works 2,000 hours a year = $80,000 in salary for her

Her firm bills her at 280/h (7×40/h) for 2,000 hours a year = 560,000

Now, the firm also pays her a bunch of extra stuff like medical, dental, 401k match, insurance, vacation time, social security, other FICA, etc… so her cost for the firm would be aprox. 80,000 x 1.5 = 120,000

So for the firm: 560,000 – 120,000 = 440,000 in profit from her work but they also give her a nice office, computer, blah, blah and blah so she generates probably around 300k for her employer per year. Of which, most goes to the partners pockets and Uncle Sam!

By: gophersker

gophersker — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:44:38 +0000

Maybe its just me, but I’m confused about what the question is….but anyways,

I work for a consulting firm as well and often times speak in these terms. What I think is being left out here that would reduce her “multiplier” is the amount of benefits (time off, holidays, medical) that she would also receive.

Either way, if her multiplier is 7 that is unbelievable. In my company, our corporate goal is for production employees to have a multiplier of 3. Obviously, high performing employees will have a higher multiplier, which for us has to come via overtime since we are competitive within our industry by generally having lower hourly rates than the competition.

By: klughing

klughing — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:28:19 +0000

Bradford: I still think 94K is a lot at 23. I wish i can do that . Care to teach me how?

By: Carl Eisler

Carl Eisler — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:28:55 +0000

Who cares?

By: Bradford

Bradford — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 02:04:04 +0000

Ramit: I think we’re more shocked that a 25 y/o is earning 100-120k a year. Granted, I’m 23 and making about 94k, but I work as a IT/PM consultant in Seattle…so it isn’t *that* much

By: cackle

cackle — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 20:58:38 +0000

the difference is $240/hr or approx 340/hr was it really that simple or did i miss something