[floatingpoint]

del

[Econla]

If you want a good job go for LSE.

If you want a good job plus intellectual enrichment go for Cam.

There it is my 2 cents

[Lalafell]

Depends on your interest really. I think you can proceed to MPhil if you can obtain 65+. Not sure about the exact progression mark tough.

If you are an EU student, you may know that you will be able to spend the money for LSE MSc Finance for the entire Diploma plus half of the MPhil.

[Econla]

(Original post by floatingpoint)
Hi guys,

I'm new to the forum, just wonder if you could opine on something I'm not quite sure about...Basically I got an offer from LSE for MSc Finance and one from Cambridge for Dip in Economics hoping to continue for an Mphil. I know they're pretty different subjects but to me it feels quite hard to make a decision. I've listed the pros and cons but still don't really know which one i should go for...

LSE:
Pros:
The school has good reputation and job prospect, esp for IBs
No moving required (I live in London)
takes only 1 year to complete
Cons:
The course material is less interesting than economics, and less quantitative than I'd like it to be for a finance course


Cambridge
Pros:
a subject I'm more interested in
Also, reputation - hey it's Cambridge
very lovely city
Cons:
takes 2 years to get an Mphil
the entry to mphil course is not guaranteed
would have to move...

A bit abt myself, I graduated a couple of years ago here with a first BEng and joined a BB's as a tech graduate. Having worked for a while i felt this is probably not what i want to do in long term manner (endless, endless project management and surprisingly, not so much quantitative/technical skills required) so am looking for a study break and a shift in career direction. I'm not entirely sure what I want to do coming out of the master degree yet, but at the moment having read a few economics books the quantitative and behaviour topics interest me a lot. That said, a lot of people at work told me with an MSc from LSE you can't go too wrong in the city. So I'm really unsure! Thanks!

Maybe would you like to se the Msc Finance and Economics in LSE. Some of economics and the rest is in quantitative finance, or maybe Imperial.

[Lalafell]

Yes... if you go for Cam you will need to pay £12k(?) + £20k for Diploma+ MPhil, and another 20K for living... so a total you will need topay over 50k if you go for Cam...

[Econla]

(Original post by Lalafell)
Depends on your interest really. I think you can proceed to MPhil if you can obtain 65+. Not sure about the exact progression mark tough.

If you are an EU student, you may know that you will be able to spend the money for LSE MSc Finance for the entire Diploma plus half of the MPhil.

Lalafell.......Are you following me???? ....let me speak with the lady please....

[Lalafell]

(Original post by Econla)
Lalafell.......Are you following me???? ....let me speak with the lady please....

O_o are you a narcissist? why do you think I am following you? I just log in and I saw a post about Econ then I replied...

[Lalafell]

(Original post by Econla)
Lalafell.......Are you following me???? ....let me speak with the lady please....

did not you seeing I am replying to what the lady quoted my statement?

[floatingpoint]

(Original post by Lalafell)
Yes... if you go for Cam you will need to pay £12k(?) + £20k for Diploma+ MPhil, and another 20K for living... so a total you will need topay over 50k if you go for Cam...

yeah, while LSE will cost 26K + living costs in LDN. it's 10k cheaper but then I can't work out in my head if I want to get a finance degree, change jobs in the city or actually take this opportunity to go on and learn a new subject properly.

[Lalafell]

(Original post by floatingpoint)
yeah, while LSE will cost 26K + living costs in LDN. it's 10k cheaper but then I can't work out in my head if I want to get a finance degree, change jobs in the city or actually take this opportunity to go on and learn a new subject properly.

I assume you are not so concerned with finance then you just go for whatever you want. If I were you, I would go for Cam as I don't quite like LSE. Where did you do your undergrad? UCL or Imperial?

[Econla]

Well as some someone said it depends on what you want to learn and your long-term future prospect too.

A msc in finance is very effective for a financial industry job, but a msc in economics as you say, opens doors in more industry than just the financial one.

To put it in some way, an economist can do finance but a finance person can't do economics. I hope you understand what I meant.

[floatingpoint]

---

[Swayum]

I'd definitely take LSE here.

Cambridge's reputation in postgrad economics is declining and it sounds like you're more interested in employment rather than academia + you'd save a year of your life. You may end up hating economics as well, then you might do badly in the diploma, not get into the MPhil and leave without a Masters.

I don't really see the point in studying Masters level Economics if you're aren't interested in it purely academically - there's nothing that you'll learn in the course which will be useful in an applied setting (apart from some econometrics). Go and Google models such as the learning-by-doing growth model, principal agent model, limited participation model, search theory of unemployment - if you think you'll find these models interesting, you can do the Masters for the intellectual benefit, but I think you'll find it difficult to apply any of these models in a real life situation (where real life means in a job at a bank, for instance).

Here is a slide from my 3rd year LSE finance course, I can only image that the Masters gets even more quant:

[Econla]

(Original post by Swayum)
I'd definitely take LSE here.

Cambridge's reputation in postgrad economics is declining and it sounds like you're more interested in employment rather than academia + you'd save a year of your life. You may end up hating economics as well, then you might do badly in the diploma, not get into the MPhil and leave without a Masters.

Here is a slide from my 3rd year LSE finance course, I can only image that the Masters gets even more quant:

Swayum, why are you saying the above about Cambridge, are you talking about the MPhil or overall?

[Swayum]

(Original post by Econla)
Swayum, why are you saying the above about Cambridge, are you talking about the MPhil or overall?

I'm talking about everything except the BA I guess. It's just what I hear from students and professors with an interest in academia.

[Econla]

Wow...strong statement.....so for a Msc in Economics for example would you recommend others instead of MPhil Cambridge?

[Swayum]

(Original post by Econla)
Wow...strong statement.....so for a Msc in Economics for example would you recommend others instead of MPhil Cambridge?

Definitely, Cambridge is very much 2nd tier. Oxford and LSE are probably the best if you don't get onto a PhD straightaway (but the problem with Oxford is that it's a 2 year course). My friend at LSE currently holds offers from LSE, Oxford and Cambridge for Masters in Economics, but he can't decide which to go to (Cambridge is a step down, LSE is expensive + boring after 3 years of already studying here, Oxford is 2 years).

I think if you don't care about further study after the Masters, Cambridge is pretty much on par with LSE and Oxford, but then I'd question why you're even bothering with the Masters in the first place.

[Econla]

(Original post by Swayum)
Definitely, Cambridge is very much 2nd tier. Oxford and LSE are probably the best if you don't get onto a PhD straightaway (but the problem with Oxford is that it's a 2 year course). My friend at LSE currently holds offers from LSE, Oxford and Cambridge for Masters in Economics, but he can't decide which to go to (Cambridge is a step down, LSE is expensive + boring after 3 years of already studying here, Oxford is 2 years).

I think if you don't care about further study after the Masters, Cambridge is pretty much on par with LSE and Oxford, but then I'd question why you're even bothering with the Masters in the first place.

So in your opinion for 1 year programmes would you prefer for example LSE, UCL or even Warwick?

[Swayum]

(Original post by Econla)
So in your opinion for 1 year programmes would you prefer for example LSE, UCL or even Warwick?

I have no idea about UCL or Warwick. The most informed people that I know can be found here: http://www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/ (or here http://www.urch.com/forums/graduate-admissions/ )

[Lalafell]

(Original post by Swayum)
I have no idea about UCL or Warwick. The most informed people that I know can be found here: http://www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/

well, Cambridge's research power was declining. But in the past two years, I have realized that Cambridge is very active in recruiting economists. In contrast, I found that some of LSE's top econ professors (top 5% economits by IDEAs) have left over the past two years, resulting in sharp drop in ranking in the IDEAS from world top 10 to world top 25 (behind Oxford, Cambridge and Warwick). For example, Professor Oliver Linton (world's top 400 by IDEAS if I remember) left LSE and came to Cambridge in 2011.