Sure, I agree that your chances to get into VC / PE are higher coming out of MC than from getting an engineering job out of school. Don't get me wrong, there are many examples of folks who have gotten into VC from MC. I just believe that: (a) its a very very small % of MCers who get into VC directly from MC (b) an MC job does not really prepare you very well to be in VC when compared to having been an entrepreneur / operator (c) a lot of ex-MCers hit the ceiling soon if and when they manage to get into VC directly. Likely start as associates and get tapped out at the Principal level. There are very few (as a %) VC General Partners who did nothing else in their lives but MC My personal opinion is that if VC is your ultimate goal then spend 3 yrs or 4 yrs max in MC. Get a gig in the industry after that and rise there the hard way. Then join a smaller company and hopefully be a part of a successful exit. Then get into VC. My views are based on having worked in MC (DEFINITELY not the company you are joining - so you can guess) and now current working in an industry which attracts the largest (or maybe 2nd largest depending on where you get data from!) venture financing and being intimately networked with VCs in the sector. That's good advice. I was planning on exiting MC in my early 30s (I'll be 28 very soon). I have a solid technical background and I figure MC will give me a lot of business experience, so I should hopefully be in good shape afterwards. And, I didn't mean to rag on McK. The interview process with both were great, but the one I picked seemed like a better fit for my personality. I won't join until I wind down my Ph.D., so I won't have any stories for a few months.