A newest list of target schools for IB

This.

Though to be fair UCL wasn't that well represented in my experience so far.. ACs /SWs. Just go to a university out of those 6 or something else in the top 10 and I'm sure you'll be fine OP. Then again your university isn't everything. It takes up 2/3 lines of your CV so whilst you certainly need to attend somewhere decent, you also need work experience, exposure to the industry, a genuine desire to work in IB and understanding of what it's about. Sure it's fine to come on here and say 'I want to do Investment Banking' but you need to think about the division.. the skills required for that division, how you can prove to a bored HR member that you deserve to be in the FO. A girl on my SW went to Loughborough - a university that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere here, because she had good WE, really knew her stuff and actually followed through on the blase line on her CV saying that she read the WSJ and the Economist regularly. But although that top 6 list is good, I know a lot of people up here (St Andrews) with offers for full time placement. Sure it's a semi-target but it just proves if you work hard, know your stuff and get some exposure, most universities in the top 10 will give you a fairly decent chance.

This.

Though to be fair UCL wasn't that well represented in my experience so far.. ACs /SWs. Just go to a university out of those 6 or something else in the top 10 and I'm sure you'll be fine OP. Then again your university isn't everything. It takes up 2/3 lines of your CV so whilst you certainly need to attend somewhere decent, you also need work experience, exposure to the industry, a genuine desire to work in IB and understanding of what it's about. Sure it's fine to come on here and say 'I want to do Investment Banking' but you need to think about the division.. the skills required for that division, how you can prove to a bored HR member that you deserve to be in the FO. A girl on my SW went to Loughborough - a university that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere here, because she had good WE, really knew her stuff and actually followed through on the blase line on her CV saying that she read the WSJ and the Economist regularly. But although that top 6 list is good, I know a lot of people up here (St Andrews) with offers for full time placement. Sure it's a semi-target but it just proves if you work hard, know your stuff and get some exposure, most universities in the top 10 will give you a fairly decent chance.

I'd go further. Outside the top 6 just mentioned, the difference between the rest (top 20) have a neglible impact on your chances. For example it isn't really going to matter where you go if your choices are, say, Manchester, Bristol or Birmingham. What you do with your time there will matter significantly more.

Wrong choice of uni's there since Bristol will give you significantly better odds than the other two

Says who? And 'hear say' from the infinite number of keyboard jockeys on this forum doesn't count. FYI went to Bristol and have family/friends at the other two. Have not noticed a significant difference between the success of myself and my peers from Bristol and the success of those at the other two in terms of obtaining internships/graduate roles. Anecdotal evidence, but solid nonetheless.

the #1 University in the UK targeted by employers. ?

What kind of employers ? Tescos, iceland, marks and sparx ?

Certainly no top 10 IB wll target Manc.

the #1 University in the UK targeted by employers. ?

What kind of employers ? Tescos, iceland, marks and sparx ?

Certainly no top 10 IB wll target Manc.

FYI
http://www.careers.manchester.ac.uk/media/services/careersandemployabilitydivision/careersservice/recruiters/fairs/financefair2012/Finance-2011_Exhibitor-List.pdf

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8635891/Top-students-concentrated-in-just-12-elite-universities.html

Haha!

I'm ignoring you matey.

You can do what you like.

But that will not change fact that UoM was founded as a university in 1888 not 1824.

Why does UoM's logo have a 64 year discrepancy ? Can the marketing dept. not count ?

And it also will not change the fact that it outside the top 25 in local ranks.

End of.

Lol. What are you, 17? The rankings are unreliable. I'm telling you as a graduate, who has been to nearly a dozen assessment centres that the difference between most universities outside the top 6 is marginal. All these rankings only serve to inflate the egos of those who attend the unis but they have no real bearing on reality or one's leverage within the job market.

Especially when you consider the inconsistencies between league tables.

Bristol is ranked between 10th and 25th in the same year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bristol#League_tables

Lol. What are you, 17? The rankings are unreliable. I'm telling you as a graduate, who has been to nearly a dozen assessment centres that the difference between most universities outside the top 6 is marginal. All these rankings only serve to inflate the egos of those who attend the unis but they have no real bearing on reality or one's leverage within the job market.

Especially when you consider the inconsistencies between league tables.

Bristol is ranked between 10th and 25th in the same year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bristol#League_tables

Main ranking tool - UCAS tariff point average, gives a reasonable idea of competitiveness, which is a good measure to know the overall level of the students/university.

No It is not, it does not account for size or offshore campuses.

The mean of a very large sample size will be much less effected by outlying scores, the opposite applies to a smaller sample.

Thus UoM's entry are inflated to simply by it being the largest Uni by student numbers in UK.

Basic stats.

Actually, I'm not defending Manchester, so your above opposition seems a bit awkward. E.g. http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings?o=Entry arranged by tariff points, don't see Manchester being totally out of order and the list seems like a fairly reasonable representation of the 'top' institutions with a few odd inflated ranks. But the overall top 10-20 picture is fairly right, at least in my opinion.

Main ranking tool - UCAS tariff point average, gives a reasonable idea of competitiveness, which is a good measure to know the overall level of the students/university.

Competitiveness of uni/course doesn't necessarily correlate with quality, it just means it's popular. When I was applying to uni it was easier to get into certain subjects, like History or Engineering at places like Warwick/UCL than it was to get into Economics at some mid tier Russell Groups.

For example my offer from Bristol (2007) for Economics was AAA, while my friend received an offer from LSE of ABB-AAB for Accouting & Finance and yet based on his uni his chances of getting into IB were much higher than mine.

Competitiveness of uni/course doesn't necessarily correlate with quality, it just means it's popular. When I was applying to uni it was easier to get into certain subjects, like History or Engineering at places like Warwick/UCL than it was to get into Economics at some mid tier Russell Groups.

For example my offer from Bristol (2007) for Economics was AAA, while my friend received an offer from LSE of ABB-AAB for Accouting & Finance and yet based on his uni his chances of getting into IB were much higher than mine.