[tommiller]

Hey, its my first post ever so I hope this works. I have an offer from LSE for a Masters course in Management. However, I am doubting whether LSE actually want me for my academics or just for my money? I have been following the LSE Postgrad thread and the Facebook page, and I hope I am not offending anybody here but the amount of people that have been accepted into LSE in general are a lot. I was expecting a rejection and in fact i was thinking that a lot of other people would be rejected as I had this idea that LSE was ridiculously hard to get into. Please can someone enlighten me about the amount of people applying/intakes as I think that I just got in for the money and not for the actual personal statement/references or my grades. I have read threads that LSE want most students for their money and so it is much easier to get into the postgrad than it is for the undergrad. I am not undermining anyones achievement here of getting into LSE, I am undermining my own as I thought I would never get in, I want to know whether it is actually hard to get into LSE and that I have done okay to get in or whether it is easy to get in and that anyone with a decent academic background can be accepted. I want to go to LSE but this doubt is seriously making me think otherwise, in that I get better value for money somewhere else. Thanks in advance.

[adfdub]

(Original post by tommiller)
Hey, its my first post ever so I hope this works. I have an offer from LSE for a Masters course in Management. However, I am doubting whether LSE actually want me for my academics or just for my money? I have been following the LSE Postgrad thread and the Facebook page, and I hope I am not offending anybody here but the amount of people that have been accepted into LSE in general are a lot. I was expecting a rejection and in fact i was thinking that a lot of other people would be rejected as I had this idea that LSE was ridiculously hard to get into. Please can someone enlighten me about the amount of people applying/intakes as I think that I just got in for the money and not for the actual personal statement/references or my grades. I have read threads that LSE want most students for their money and so it is much easier to get into the postgrad than it is for the undergrad. I am not undermining anyones achievement here of getting into LSE, I am undermining my own as I thought I would never get in, I want to know whether it is actually hard to get into LSE and that I have done okay to get in or whether it is easy to get in and that anyone with a decent academic background can be accepted. I want to go to LSE but this doubt is seriously making me think otherwise, in that I get better value for money somewhere else. Thanks in advance.

I had the same doubt. All my firends applying for postgrads there this year were offered places. However, I had lunch with a colleague the other day who said she got a rejection for a similar management master's to mine, and she seemed to have a better chance than me (posh Grande Ecole education, international internships, very similar current job, several languages). So who knows. But I also think the people on here are likely to be the ones who will get offers, on average, so it's definitely not the whole story.

[sj27]

Well, you also get people saying all coursework masters are just cash cows for universities irrespective of where you go. So if you believe this (why should it be true of LSE but not anywhere else?) you may as well go to one with a better reputation (incidentally have seen a few people on TSR rejected from that degree, but it is clearly not as competitive as some of the programs for which LSE is better-known.

I should add I generally don't agree with those views, and that if you like the uni, like the structure of the degree and think it will help you professionally or personally, then you should do it.

[Pherenike]

I agree with sj27 (apparently I recently gave you rep so can't do it again ).

You do a masters for where it will get you, or for your love of the subject. Even if LSE do just want you for your cash, try your best and get your results and you'll come out with a great degree from a great Uni. Win/win situation?

[Vanbrugh]

Don't forget that those who received offers from a good university are also those most likely to talk about it so don't assume everyone gets an offer. If you look at the course statistics you can see how competitive the courses can be (for the MSc in IR there were 14 applications per plce in 2010).

The money the university brings in from its Master's programmes do end up subsidising the undergraduate and doctorate studies it is true, but this is true of the majority of UK universities (inc. my last one) and I believe that LSE is singled out rather unfairly in this aspect.

I'm sure a Masters from LSE will be advantageous. A university earns a good reputation - it is not bought.

[Spairos]

(Original post by tommiller)
Hey, its my first post ever so I hope this works. I have an offer from LSE for a Masters course in Management. However, I am doubting whether LSE actually want me for my academics or just for my money? I have been following the LSE Postgrad thread and the Facebook page, and I hope I am not offending anybody here but the amount of people that have been accepted into LSE in general are a lot. I was expecting a rejection and in fact i was thinking that a lot of other people would be rejected as I had this idea that LSE was ridiculously hard to get into. Please can someone enlighten me about the amount of people applying/intakes as I think that I just got in for the money and not for the actual personal statement/references or my grades. I have read threads that LSE want most students for their money and so it is much easier to get into the postgrad than it is for the undergrad. I am not undermining anyones achievement here of getting into LSE, I am undermining my own as I thought I would never get in, I want to know whether it is actually hard to get into LSE and that I have done okay to get in or whether it is easy to get in and that anyone with a decent academic background can be accepted. I want to go to LSE but this doubt is seriously making me think otherwise, in that I get better value for money somewhere else. Thanks in advance.

As the rest of the people who posted here said: you are particularly wright about some matters, while for others you are particularly wrong.

But think about it yourself. You applied for that uni. That means that you believed in yourself that it was possible (even if it was only 1%) to get accepted! Thus you wouldn't have applied if you weren't a decent candidate and you cannot reject a university because it actually accepted you!

Nevertheless you should decide between your offers but not because of this factor, but others more important ones. For the records I also had to decline LSE's offer. (However I still don't know which one to accept, since I was accepted by Oxbridge, Imperial, Warwick, LSE, UCL, Nottingham, Lancaster, Sheffield, Leeds, Essex)

[tommiller]

hey guys thanks for the replies, yeah i guess i do believe in the fact that i did have a small chance, and about the win/win situation, it makes sense, having a decent degree from a world class university. Spairos you say I have to decide between my offers, the thing is LSE is the only offer that I have, I only applied to two places, LSE and UCL. I received an interview from UCL but didn't bother with it as it was the exam period during the week they gave me the interview for. That's the only thing with my situation, its either to go LSE, spend a lot of money, get a degree whilst at the same time applying for jobs in this current climate plus taking on debt such as the professional career development loan, or save all the hassle and money, and keep applying for jobs in this current economic climate. I guess what i'm asking is, what would you guys do in my situation. Another thing, why did you decline the offer Spairos?

P.S. i agree with Vanbrugh in that a reputation is earned, not bought - that definitely has made me focus more on why LSE and not the money aspect, thanks

[janjanmmm]

(Original post by tommiller)
Please can someone enlighten me about the amount of people applying/intakes as I think that I just got in for the money and not for the actual personal statement/references or my grades.

For Masters in Management
Intake/applications in 2010:
104/593

http://www2.lse.ac.uk/study/graduate...anagement.aspx

Generally speaking it is competitive. Not crazy competitive, like some other programs (Finance, Economics), but reasonably so.

Many lower rank universities do not publish any statistics. It usually means that they admit close to 100%. Now, these would be your "cash cow" programmes.

[Spairos]

(Original post by tommiller)
hey guys thanks for the replies, yeah i guess i do believe in the fact that i did have a small chance, and about the win/win situation, it makes sense, having a decent degree from a world class university. Spairos you say I have to decide between my offers, the thing is LSE is the only offer that I have, I only applied to two places, LSE and UCL. I received an interview from UCL but didn't bother with it as it was the exam period during the week they gave me the interview for. That's the only thing with my situation, its either to go LSE, spend a lot of money, get a degree whilst at the same time applying for jobs in this current climate plus taking on debt such as the professional career development loan, or save all the hassle and money, and keep applying for jobs in this current economic climate. I guess what i'm asking is, what would you guys do in my situation. Another thing, why did you decline the offer Spairos?

P.S. i agree with Vanbrugh in that a reputation is earned, not bought - that definitely has made me focus more on why LSE and not the money aspect, thanks

I understand. We could tell you what we would do in your situation, but we are not you (and we don't know 100% of yourself, behavour, life dreams etc) so our own best decision doesn't mean that suits you best.

I decline the LSE's offer because I had been offered many full scholarships by the rest of the universities and I thkn I ll choose the one that offers me the most. Also, my course at LSE wasn't in the top 5 high ranked among the last RAE uni marks. In addition it was only for 9 months but I would like a longer course. Last but not least, even if I could afford them, the fees were way to high, while other unis offer me full scholarships. Maybe I would have gone for UCL, but I am not you. Also take in mind about a possible gap year.

[Akkuz]

A master's from LSE will pay off.

[Econla]

(Original post by tommiller)
Hey, its my first post ever so I hope this works. I have an offer from LSE for a Masters course in Management. However, I am doubting whether LSE actually want me for my academics or just for my money? I have been following the LSE Postgrad thread and the Facebook page, and I hope I am not offending anybody here but the amount of people that have been accepted into LSE in general are a lot. I was expecting a rejection and in fact i was thinking that a lot of other people would be rejected as I had this idea that LSE was ridiculously hard to get into. Please can someone enlighten me about the amount of people applying/intakes as I think that I just got in for the money and not for the actual personal statement/references or my grades. I have read threads that LSE want most students for their money and so it is much easier to get into the postgrad than it is for the undergrad. I am not undermining anyones achievement here of getting into LSE, I am undermining my own as I thought I would never get in, I want to know whether it is actually hard to get into LSE and that I have done okay to get in or whether it is easy to get in and that anyone with a decent academic background can be accepted. I want to go to LSE but this doubt is seriously making me think otherwise, in that I get better value for money somewhere else. Thanks in advance.

My friend, it's just a business like any other business. Master and even undergraduate programmes are the cash machines of universities. Think about how this "Ivy" universities have won their reputation; research, publications, etc. From where do they get this?: Phd programmes.
Yes, they want your money. They don't wonder if you could be the next Porter or Nash, but they do wonder this for Phd applicants.
Since the demand for masters is larger than the supply, they first raise their fees and then apply some "special filter" to decide who could consume its product. If you are an international applicant and the programme has higher fees for internationals, then obviously you had an edge over similar home candidates. The university has an incentive there.
You are buying a product and had the fortune to be selected to consume it.
Now, you have to ask yourself, this sacrifice in terms of time, money, cost-opportunity, will lead you to future cash flows to at least recover what you invested, through a period of.....lets say 3 years after graduation?, assuming a 1 year programme. That's the question. You can learn by yourself in your house if you're interested just in learning and you will save a lot, but a lot of money. Now if you're looking to improve your career prospect in any way, you should buy that learning from a recognized institution, such as LSE.
Don't bother trying to figure it out if they were selective in their admission process, the admission commitee is composed by people, and people is far from being perfect; they are biased, sometimes lazy, etc, etc. Just answer the question above.
Now, on the other hand if you're just looking to increase your self-steem by knowing that you were admitted to one of the toughest programme one can be admitted to, then try a Phd and reject the offer, but save the offer letter to read it once in a while in your leisure time.
My advice is if you're interested in management or a related career and want to leverage your career prospect, then go to LSE. Pay them and then, after you graduate, collect your rewards, which in the case of LSE should be good enough.