I have often questioned this. My impression is that it would look pretty bad if the sup is early in their career. But then again I see youngish supervisors put no effort in their supervision therefore increasing chances of no completion.

It depends on the reputation of the supervisor, whether you are a funded or self-funded student etc.

If the supervisor has had quite a few successful PhD students and is well known in their field, they wouldn't want their reputation tarnished. The university would want to know why the student didn't complete etc.

If the student is funded by a funding council, maybe this would affect future sums of money awarded to the supervisor's research. If industry is involved, this would look bad on the research group.

True, lots of variables there.... I'm just thinking supervisors own work as in publications, grants, fellowships etc would I guess be higher priority for their future success than supervising a PhD student through to the completion. I don't know. There are just so many sups that couldn't care less...

I think your right, in some ways, it's like a symbiotic partnership. You want a supervisor that's well known in the field so that means more chances of making good contacts. One that has had many happy phd students (completed) means they should be a good, supportive supervisor. You hopefully want to publish and attend and present at conferences.

Your supervisor wants a good student that wont show them up. It's also like when parent's say, my son/daughter is doing such and such. They will want to make sure you get some publications which means more for them. Any presentations you do at conferences, again their name is mentioned and the research group is promoted.

When supervisor's can't be bothered, like you say, it makes no sense. They are trying to ruin this two-way beneficial relationship.

I'm obviously looking at it on the good side because I have positive experiences. My main supervisor is well known in the field and that works really well for me when I attend conferences etc.

They also try and promote my work by suggesting conferences where I can present.

However I think most of the time I get on with it with minimal fuss because I don't have any issues. Obviously this is not always the case and I do need extra support at times.

Maybe younger/newer supervisors don't realise the benefits of having PhD students? Maybe they think its just one of those things they can do. I think the best supervisors are ones that realise and understand that there are benefits for both parties.