[econunihelp]

so far this has been a very useful thread but the decision isn't any easier lol. It is very difficult to find good stats such as number of people getting a spring week from different unis. League tables, uni website stats are too broad and always catered to make their courses look good. From the thread it seems to me notts is good, warwick is a lot better prestigewise but given enough work breaking into a top finance job isn't impossible at notts

[funkydee]

(Original post by FDR)
Not only is it out of date, but it is an average, rather than a median (which any good statistician knows is a better measure as it can't be skewed by minorities ) If one person happens to be lucky and land a huge, £150k+ salary (unlikely, but not impossible), then that's completely messed up the stats.

hmm if its evenly distributed

haha but yeah there will be one lucky guy who skews it. 150K may exaggerate it BUT i'd imagine there could be a 50K difference between the lowest and highest econ grad at the top unis

[FDR]

(Original post by Tsunami2011)
Of course they are just numbers, but it does show how many people get a foot into the industry from each university. These figures show that more people from Warwick get into the industry, and that was basically the whole point of the thread, since someone claimed that Warwick and Nottingham are equal in the eyes of IBs. I doubt universities like Nottingham and Durham have substantially less applicants to the banks in comparison to UCL and Warwick yet the figures are vastly different. Imperial is more prestigious, but it specialises in science, hence why not as many students from Imperial will be interested in going to IB in comparision to Warwick and UCL. More people from UCL and Warwick are likely to apply, hence a higher success rate.

I think I've been unfairly misinterpreted here.

Firstly, not once did I claim that Warwick and Nottingham are equal. What I did say was that the graduate prospects in IB for Nottingham economics graduates is comparable to the prospects in IB for Warwick economics graduates, a statement which hasn't been proven to be incorrect so far.

Secondly, the whole point of the thread was/is essentially, how will going to Nottingham rather than Warwick affect the OP's graduate prospects, a question which I attempted to answer, but which was interpreted somehow as "Nottingham is better than Warwick".

[Tsunami2011]

(Original post by FDR)
I think I've been unfairly misinterpreted here.

Firstly, not once did I claim that Warwick and Nottingham are equal. What I did say was that the graduate prospects in IB for Nottingham economics graduates is comparable to the prospects in IB for Warwick economics graduates, a statement which hasn't been proven to be incorrect so far.

Secondly, the whole point of the thread was/is essentially, how will going to Nottingham rather than Warwick affect the OP's graduate prospects, a question which I attempted to answer, but which was interpreted somehow as "Nottingham is better than Warwick".

Well, you can listen to the many myths that can be found on TSR, (one of which is the existence of 'target unis') or you can look at the facts and the figures. If Warwick is a target, yet Nottingham isn't, then why are they visited by pretty much all the same employers? Did they get lost on their way to Warwick and end up at Nottingham? If Warwick is a target and Notts isn't, then why do a similar proportion of grads from both end up working in finance, on similar salaries?

The way I read this suggested that you were denying that Warwick is more targeted by the big banks and financial services..Just seemed like the post was suggesting that they are equal.

[FDR]

(Original post by Tsunami2011)
The way I read this suggested that you were denying that Warwick is more targeted by the big banks and financial services..Just seemed like the post was suggesting that they are equal.

OK, the paragraph you quoted was worded badly. But in context, it was in reply to a poster suggesting that Warwick is a target university, and Nottingham isn't, despite the fact they are visited by similar firms. More frustratingly, they based this on the HFS, which places Warwick #3, and Nottingham #6, which is data for the whole university and not just for the economics department, and hardly follows the inference that Nottingham isn't targeted by employers but Warwick is, despite the fact that I had provided reliable data for economics graduates.

And even in that paragraph, I used the term 'similar', which follows from my claim that their economics departments are comparable, as I had in my past posts. Also, all posts were in context of Nottingham and Warwick economics students and graduates rather than universities as a whole, something I should have made clearer.

[Txi]

(Original post by FDR)
All the data I've used comes from Unistats - http://unistats.direct.gov.uk/




I'm sure you're right, but you have to remember, this is a forum, so not everything should be taken to be true.



I don't dispute that, nor have I ever. What I do dispute, using the information available to me, is that the difference between the two isn't mammoth, but that the difference is small. I don't have anything against Warwick (other than it's resemblance to a centerparcs), but I do have a problem with people telling me something is true, based only on hearsay or opinion, rather than on the numbers.

IT IS true.

Major IBs don't waste their time - Targets are real.

Just cause your uni is not listed doesn't make it false.

I have been to a few target presentations though not at my place (BHam), and there is a BIG difference between that and your regular job fair which is what all outside the top 6 will get.

This Doesn't BAR you from entering IB but it makes it more difficult.

[Focus08]

(Original post by econunihelp)
so far this has been a very useful thread but the decision isn't any easier lol. It is very difficult to find good stats such as number of people getting a spring week from different unis.

This was halfway through the process last year:

Spring week 2011 stats

University TOTAL
Oxford 60
Warwick 50
Cambridge 48
LSE 48
UCL 29
Imperial 16
Durham 13

There should be more complete stats around, but this gives you a rough indication

[Frenchous]

(Original post by Focus08)
x

72 - Oxford (16.2% of the entire spring intern class so far across all banks)
66 - Cambridge (14.9%)
59 - LSE (13.3%)
57 - Warwick (12.9%)
40 - UCL (9%)
27 - Imperial (6.1%)

These were the final ones from Zweirhander (Warwick student)

[Focus08]

(Original post by Frenchous)
72 - Oxford (16.2% of the entire spring intern class so far across all banks)
66 - Cambridge (14.9%)
59 - LSE (13.3%)
57 - Warwick (12.9%)
40 - UCL (9%)
27 - Imperial (6.1%)

These were the final ones from Zweirhander (Warwick student)

And obviously there is double-counting, so, for example, a person doing 2 spring weeks gets his/her university counted twice, but it's still one person.

M&A? Didn't you say: To me, the most interesting jobs in banking are research and asset management.

IBD is grunt work and bull****ing clients once you get to VP/MD level.

[Frenchous]

(Original post by Focus08)
And obviously there is double-counting, so, for example, a person doing 2 spring weeks gets his/her university counted twice, but it's still one person.

M&A? Didn't you say: To me, the most interesting jobs in banking are research and asset management.

IBD is grunt work and bull****ing clients once you get to VP/MD level.

Yes I still think so but I got in a better bank for M&A than equity research so I decided to go for it and see how I like it.

And yes there is a lot of double counting obviously

[FDR]

(Original post by econunihelp)
its mentioned in the graduate market report 2011 thats why i said it

I know you've probably made up your mind by now, but for what it's worth, in the latest Graduate Market report ,2012, Nottingham ranks above Warwick (4th against 7th).

http://www.highfliers.co.uk/download/GMReport12.pdf

[Tsunami2011]

(Original post by FDR)
I know you've probably made up your mind by now, but for what it's worth, in the latest Graduate Market report ,2012, Nottingham ranks above Warwick (4th against 7th).

http://www.highfliers.co.uk/download/GMReport12.pdf

That table is abit misleading to be fair, Cambridge is second and Oxford is 5th?. From what I hear, at Oxbridge, the careers dept are known for TURNING away big firms who are visiting on numerous occassions, simply because there isn't enough time in the year for them all to visit, or they feel the visit won't be productive, and students have such tight schedules, hence distorted data, while places like Manchester probably aren't going to say no to any big firm which comes calling. was told a similar story at a Warwick visit day, but not sure how true this is to be fair.

As you said before, this

[econunihelp]

i still haven't made a decision yet. I was thinking of going nottingham and maybe doing a masters at a better university but haven't researched any master degree programme.

[econunihelp]

league tables will change every year as nottingham wasn't always 6th in the country but warwick will always be near the top for economics.

[FDR]

(Original post by Tsunami2011)
That table is abit misleading to be fair, Cambridge is second and Oxford is 5th?. From what I hear, at Oxbridge, the careers dept are known for TURNING away big firms who are visiting on numerous occassions, simply because there isn't enough time in the year for them all to visit, or they feel the visit won't be productive, and students have such tight schedules, hence distorted data, while places like Manchester probably aren't going to say no to any big firm which comes calling. was told a similar story at a Warwick visit day, but not sure how true this is to be fair.

As you said before, this

I think Manchester is top, and will consistently be in the top 5 regardless of it's league table position because it's the largest university in the country, based in a UK city that has probably the most significance outside of London.

I don't think the report is of much significance, nor does it reveal much, and I think any university ranked in pretty much the top ten in that report will be visited by similar numbers of employers, with the difference being marginal. I don't think any University, even Oxbridge turns employers away, it's just not good business - these events are optional for students to attend. I just think that the difference between 1-5 could be a few firms.

But I did post the latest one as the OP posted the 2011 one earlier on in the thread, and I imagine it could be useful to the OP in the decision making process, as the 2011 report appeared to be.

[econunihelp]

(Original post by FDR)
I think Manchester is top, and will consistently be in the top 5 regardless of it's league table position because it's the largest university in the country, based in a UK city that has probably the most significance outside of London.

I don't think the report is of much significance, nor does it reveal much, and I think any university ranked in pretty much the top ten in that report will be visited by similar numbers of employers, with the difference being marginal. I don't think any University, even Oxbridge turns employers away, it's just not good business - these events are optional for students to attend. I just think that the difference between 1-5 could be a few firms.

But I did post the latest one as the OP posted the 2011 one earlier on in the thread, and I imagine it could be useful to the OP in the decision making process, as the 2011 report appeared to be.

I was wondering if you know if there's a graduate destination page for nottingham because there is one for warwick so you get a clear idea of their employment prospects

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/s...gems/external/

[Respect3595]

Shottingham

[Industrious Orca]

Tsunami has basically told it how it is and i agree with all he's said apart from one thing. The difference between Warwick and Nottingham is BIGGER than the difference between Oxford/Cambridge and Warwick; based purely on FO at a BB. There are some firms where Oxford and Cambridge make up most of their graduate intakes eg: McKinsey, BCG, Bain, Jupiter etc. For these firms Oxford and Cambridge are way ahead of Imperial/LSE/UCL/Warwick. The higher intakes at graduate level within the FO of the BBs means that they will open their targets outside of Oxford and Cambridge etc, so Imperial, LSE, UCL and Warwick are included and targeted for the FO of the bank. Nottingham isn't targeted for the FO so the gap between Warwick and Nottingham is bigger than between Oxford/Cambridge and Warwick.

The reason you have banks like Goldman Sachs and J.P.Morgan at universities like Bournemouth, Manchester, Newcastle etc is because the banks have more than one division to fill. They have the divisions within the MO and BO to fill, as well as those within the FO, so they will target universities outside of the top 6 for the roles in the MO and the BO, and of course to get those few exceptional Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol etc graduates for the front office. But as i say, the FO is mainly filled by the top 6.

As for economics graduates being more targeted for the FO of BBs than say, chemistry graduates, it's wrong. The banks target specific universities rather than courses within universities. If OP wants to go into the FO of a bulge bracket bank, then he is much better off at Warwick, simple as that. The economics graduate salaries for Nottingham and Warwick are no good for working out which is more targeted, as the graduates don't all go into investment banking.

OP. Honestly; the best thing you can do is have a real good think about your future career. If you think there is even the slither of chance that you may want to pursue a career in the FO of an investment bank, then you would be better at Warwick than at Nottingham. If you don't think you want to go for those positions, then go to Nottingham. For most other graduate jobs, further study etc, getting a first from Nottingham would put you round about a first from Warwick anyway - say if you wanted to do a masters at LSE or go for a job in economics as opposed to finance.

[curiousquest]

(Original post by econunihelp)
Hey this is my first post and I have searched through a lot of the threads here but haven't found all the info i was looking for so started a new thread. I have offers from warwick, bham, nottingham and bath. My main two choice are notts and warwick but can't decide between these two. I have ruled out bham and bath

I love notts, the campus, the uni, the student life, location and the course is very respected. I like uni of warwick itself with great facilities but hate the isolated location. I do know coventry, leamington and bham aren't faraway but location is an important factor in my eyes. the course is so highly regarded among employers and warwick econ grads can compete for the top jobs.

Will me going to nottingham affect my chances for the top jobs in finance? (lets say i get a first from both)
Is warwick too good an opportunity to miss?
I'm mainly looking for the difference in graduate prospects of both unis for all types of jobs that an economics degree lead to

thank you very much in advance x

Bear in mind whatever stats you read is all about events that have occurred in the PAST!

Since you have yet to even start your degree, there will be at least three to four years, more possibly if you choose to do postgraduate studies, before you enter the job market. Who knows what things will be like then!

I don't think it's even possible to do some Time Series Forecasting for this type of problem so if need be, just toss a coin and then do your best!

[econunihelp]

(Original post by Industrious Orca)
Tsunami has basically told it how it is and i agree with all he's said apart from one thing. The difference between Warwick and Nottingham is BIGGER than the difference between Oxford/Cambridge and Warwick; based purely on FO at a BB. There are some firms where Oxford and Cambridge make up most of their graduate intakes eg: McKinsey, BCG, Bain, Jupiter etc. For these firms Oxford and Cambridge are way ahead of Imperial/LSE/UCL/Warwick. The higher intakes at graduate level within the FO of the BBs means that they will open their targets outside of Oxford and Cambridge etc, so Imperial, LSE, UCL and Warwick are included and targeted for the FO of the bank. Nottingham isn't targeted for the FO so the gap between Warwick and Nottingham is bigger than between Oxford/Cambridge and Warwick.

The reason you have banks like Goldman Sachs and J.P.Morgan at universities like Bournemouth, Manchester, Newcastle etc is because the banks have more than one division to fill. They have the divisions within the MO and BO to fill, as well as those within the FO, so they will target universities outside of the top 6 for the roles in the MO and the BO, and of course to get those few exceptional Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol etc graduates for the front office. But as i say, the FO is mainly filled by the top 6.

As for economics graduates being more targeted for the FO of BBs than say, chemistry graduates, it's wrong. The banks target specific universities rather than courses within universities. If OP wants to go into the FO of a bulge bracket bank, then he is much better off at Warwick, simple as that. The economics graduate salaries for Nottingham and Warwick are no good for working out which is more targeted, as the graduates don't all go into investment banking.

OP. Honestly; the best thing you can do is have a real good think about your future career. If you think there is even the slither of chance that you may want to pursue a career in the FO of an investment bank, then you would be better at Warwick than at Nottingham. If you don't think you want to go for those positions, then go to Nottingham. For most other graduate jobs, further study etc, getting a first from Nottingham would put you round about a first from Warwick anyway - say if you wanted to do a masters at LSE or go for a job in economics as opposed to finance.

if the last part of what you said is true would it be worthwhile for me to get a first from nottingham and then apply for a masters at a higher institution? will i be able to go jobs similar to front office ib?