The Student Room Group

MSc Finance at LSE

Hi, I know the applications have closed for this year but I'm considering applying next year..

Was wondering what their entry requirements are, I have a 2:1 (or will have soon) in Finance, Accounting and Management from Nottingham, I know they only specify a 2:1 but my average will be 61/62ish and I don't know if they require 65+ etc. I do though have 1sts in all of my Finance modules (international finance, financial markets, corporate finance etc) as well as 1sts in econometrics modules..

What are my chances of getting in with that degree record? Obviously it's a prestigious school, but the only reason I didn't get higher in my degree is that I found most of my modules really dull, but I really enjoyed the finance ones and got 1sts in them.

Also would I be right in thinking that an MSc in Finance from LSE would significantly improve my chances of getting into IB over my FAM degree from Nottingham?
Reply 1
Nobody on here can tell you your chances. If they say they want 2.1. then you satisfy that entry requiremen, but obviously you will be at a disadvantage against others that have a higher average. You're best off emailing admissions with your question and seeing what they say really :smile:
Reply 2
JamieP
Hi, I know the applications have closed for this year but I'm considering applying next year..

Was wondering what their entry requirements are, I have a 2:1 (or will have soon) in Finance, Accounting and Management from Nottingham, I know they only specify a 2:1 but my average will be 61/62ish and I don't know if they require 65+ etc. I do though have 1sts in all of my Finance modules (international finance, financial markets, corporate finance etc) as well as 1sts in econometrics modules..

What are my chances of getting in with that degree record? Obviously it's a prestigious school, but the only reason I didn't get higher in my degree is that I found most of my modules really dull, but I really enjoyed the finance ones and got 1sts in them.

Also would I be right in thinking that an MSc in Finance from LSE would significantly improve my chances of getting into IB over my FAM degree from Nottingham?


I have no problem with you asking the question, last year people were more helpful on the subject, but I think things have gotten quiet as most of the posters were interested in last cycle.

I can't say for sure what your odds are, but from what I remember, your numbers were competitive with others who got in last year. Two things that last cycle showed, were 1) apply early for the best chance, and 2) LSE takes a damn long time getting back to you.

You looking into any other programs? LBS Mif, Oxf MFE, Cam MSc/MPhil Fin?
Reply 3
Applying early does not necessarily improve your chances. At the LSE, the admission committees look for people that clearly match their criteria. If you fit their bill, it doesn't matter whether you apply in November or April. You might be put on a waiting list even though they haven't filled up all places.

The LSE does not take long to get back to you. Last year, I had received my offer after about two weeks. This year, it took three -- on a course with a larger number of applicants. Yet, I received an email as soon as they had reached their decision.
Reply 4
KingLeary
Applying early does not necessarily improve your chances. At the LSE, the admission committees look for people that clearly match their criteria. If you fit your bill, it doesn't matter whether you apply in November or April. You might be put on a waiting list even though they haven't filled up all places.

The LSE does not take long to get back to you. Last year, I had received my offer after about two weeks. This year, it took three -- on a course with a larger number of applicants. Yet, I received an email as soon as they had reached their decision.


I respectfully disagree. It took them well past the 8 weeks they indicate the time frame is, and I didn't get an acceptance from them for approximately 4 mos, no waitlist or anything, just lost in a black hole for that period. By the time they had finally accepted me, I had been accepted at LBS, decided to attend, paid my fee, and started making plans. I was utterly disappointed by LSE's awfully slow turnaround, and I got the impression, anecdotally that LSE is known for slow turnaround, although there are certainly exceptions. LSE is a fantastic program, and anyone should and would be proud to attend there, but their admissions process was disappointing.

As to improving your chances by applying early, I too respectfully disagree. Just because one is waitlisted when there are still spots available does not mean that the criteria or scrutiny does not become more intense as the number of available spots diminish. Most all admissions offices at any school for any program, generally become more demanding the later in the process. While they don't generally let in underqualified people, it is widely accepted that most admissions offices may be more apt to let in a borderline applicant early, than they would later as the competition becomes more keen for the remaining spots.

Regardless, it always is in an applicants best interest to apply as early as they can, unless they can materially improve their application with more time.
Reply 5
Shwill

As to improving your chances by applying early, I too respectfully disagree. Just because one is waitlisted when there are still spots available does not mean that the criteria or scrutiny does not become more intense as the number of available spots diminish. Most all admissions offices at any school for any program, generally become more demanding the later in the process. While they don't generally let in underqualified people, it is widely accepted that most admissions offices may be more apt to let in a borderline applicant early, than they would later as the competition becomes more keen for the remaining spots.


Apparently now its anecdote vs anecdote. The PhD programmes I had considered for a while -- all US schools -- have a procedure where they consider all applications once the deadline has passed. Universities with rolling admission usually gather a number of applications and make their pick.

I do not quite buy your logic that the competition becomes more intense the later you apply. What if a 'borderline candidate' applies early and ends up being compared with a dozen applications that are clearly superior but happened to reach the admission officers' desk by the same time? I think that there is certainly no point in rushing one's application. I would rather suggest that people take their time, write a decent proposal or statement and get some good references. I 'd venture that if you are really good then you'll get in. Good universities like the LSE are usually not in a rush to fill their places. They can afford to take their time. (If you have followed their "availability of programmes" page, you might have noticed that virtually no programme was listed as "limited availability" as late as May.) Other universities might have a different M.O., though.
Reply 6
KingLeary
Apparently now its anecdote vs anecdote. The PhD programmes I had considered for a while -- all US schools -- have a procedure where they consider all applications once the deadline has passed. Universities with rolling admission usually gather a number of applications and make their pick.

I do not quite buy your logic that the competition becomes more intense the later you apply. What if a 'borderline candidate' applies early and ends up being compared with a dozen applications that are clearly superior but happened to reach the admission officers' desk by the same time? I think that there is certainly no point in rushing one's application. I would rather suggest that people take their time, write a decent proposal or statement and get some good references. I 'd venture that if you are really good then you'll get in. Good universities like the LSE are usually not in a rush to fill their places. They can afford to take their time. (If you have followed their "availability of programmes" page, you might have noticed that virtually no programme was listed as "limited availability" as late as May.) Other universities might have a different M.O., though.


I think King Leary makes good points, and I encourage the poster to consider all viewpoints, but I have to again disagree somewhat. As of this point many of the economic and finance related graduate programs are closed or of limited availability. Early applications might not matter for programs that remain open later into the process, but the full-time finance program was one of the first to close.

My point is this, the standards for admission are probably reasonably consistent until the program gets to limited availability. At this point, there are only a handful of spots and typically more than a handful of applications. Superstar applicants will find a way in, so I would agree that the very best applicants to a program will always be able to get in, up until the close of applications. On the otherhand, probably only the superstars will get in at the very end, whereas, non-superstar, but still quite capable applicants will have success earlier on.

I agree with King Leary that if more time would materially benefit your application, apply later, but if you are able to put together an application of equal quality by beginning preparation earlier and submitting earlier, you only benefit yourself. Not only do you hear back sooner, but you also possibly benefit your chances. Unless you can definitely improve your application by waiting longer, why take the chance. Also, with programs like the full-time finance program which closes early, there is even more reason to submit early so as to make sure that you get the best consideration.

Hope our debate is helpful to those reading it.

Latest

Trending

Trending