More and more jobs, fewer and fewer candidates

Indeed, it is funny and sad to see how H&R afford themselves to comment on professional topics? Personally I do not believe in the efficiency of the "market". Constrained between reputation risk and courage to find real talents they would rather choose to avoid the first one. I felt the mediocrity, by being considered "outside the box" in geographical sense (from Balkan countries), even when applying for "highly-demanded" risk management positions.

Supply and Demand before London gets flooded and is relinquished from its very dark past. Catastrophic VaR 10 horizon watch out for operational risk in the City.

Even if I have real clients and come from corporate finance, I'm considered "outside the box" as a Corporate Sales. My CV just sounds different (but really it's better: I teached my 10 years experienced boss some financial basics he REALLY NEEDED to know to face financial directors! umbelievable and funny).

So my previous experince is goldworth and I know how to deal in this business because I come from this area. But headhunters want "more" experienced people, even if 1 year in corporate finance is worth some years in my new area (you have to add your understanding of derivatives, but reverse is not possible since corporate finance is time consuming).

You will say, ok but they have clients (their bonuses are really big). It is strange but some of those senior people had just names and phone numbers of people they probably met or want to meet.

I think because no one can imagine than a senior sales with 8-10 years experience cannot have any clients at all, these persons manage to be hired. Just "funny" but I saw it.

So are banks really demanding? or they just want CVs with "right" figures and are ready to spend money for deep out the money profiles?

Headunters and regular recruiters are as differenct as water and oil! I once observed a headunter friend remain on the phone for over two hours phoning around Asia-Pacific doing his stuff in order to place someone. Most of us aren't talented enough to recieve that 'can you talk right now' call from a headhunter! We have to make do with the word-searchers!

Headhunters have been called sharks in the past. But sharks are with us for a reason and should be allowed to exist in the great scheme of things.

Ever notice why many recruiter websites have a 'work for us' section? They have amazingly high staff turnover. A new one seems to be born ever month in Tokyo when I was there a couple of years ago.

I never did land a job in a finance house - only a back office/support role that enabled me to learn so much. I trade for myself now so it's OK! It's a pity really as I'm making money - could've been doing that for a client of a bank...if recruiters knew how to pitch my talents to one of their clients.

Just don't give up, guys......

Regarding the spin reference.. it is not spin, though should be put in context. I am a headhunter who has negotiated placements for two global heads of trading (one for structured credit, and the other equity derivatives) and many other experienced traders & quants. If you are in the top 10-20% of candidates on the market (oxbridge/ivy league grad, front office i-banking experience),a good headhunter can get you exposure to the right desks, to a hiring manager they already know - quickly (and you should find 3/4 potential offers easily).

As the process progresses, you benefit from the headhunters relationship with the hiring manager (he can use his influence in your favour), the h.h.'s knowledge of this particular interview process (since he/she often knows the type of questions the manager may ask), and then when it comes to making ridiculously high salary demands the headhunter bears the brunt of the hostility which (usually) arises during the process, and can fight your case by quoting specific examples from the market.

I know that without me, there'd be a few less 250k, 500k, 1mil/$2mil packages in London and New York.

Less exceptional CVs may be better off sent direct.