There is some serious misinformation in this thread, especially coming from cutmeloose. Understandable since they are an immature LSE first-year student.I work for a magic circle firm and I can tell you that King's is one of our 'target schools', to use the American phrase. International rankings count much more than national, because our work and our clients are multinational, so bear that in mind. King's ranked 19th this year, and typically is in the low 20s in the global rankings. That is higher than Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth, and on par with UPen (18th). It is also miles ahead of Durham and Warwick. LSE (35th) is a special case because of its longstanding links to IB and bulge bracket finance and law. As a consequence it is still regarded as slightly better than King's, partly also because LSE students tend to be more commercially-minded — a euphemism for 'care about money'. LSE is also particularly strong for law. From a recruitment perspective though, almost 60% of our intake is Oxbridge. LSE/UCL/KCL and Warwick/Durham get a look in only if you have a top first throughout your grades. I didn't go to King's but I know bright people who did, and plenty of Oxbridge grads who can't tell their head from their arse. Your grades are what matter, and your knowledge about our business. My understanding is that US firms will look even more closely at global rankings. The most prestigious ones, like the ones that specialise in private equity, have an intake that is often 100% Oxbridge.