[wazzup]

(Original post by Kollarrunt)
at all?
Then why do the IB's want economics. If it is so unrelated, then all courses should be equally valued, just that some uni's reps are higher...

because it is a very tough course and shows that you have good maths skills.

[shady lane]

(Original post by Kollarrunt)
at all?
Then why do the IB's want economics. If it is so unrelated, then all courses should be equally valued, just that some uni's reps are higher...

There's a post I made about a week ago, with comments from another forum where loads of people in IB (including someone from HR) said that economics is totally irrelevant and that the university you went to matters more than the subject. For trading, it's a bit different, but for IBD and sales my friends who are currently working have confirmed this. And also the fact that my desk's incoming analyst class has 3 of 6 people not having studied economics or anything quantitative.

[tenjon]

Michael Lewis reckoned banks like economics degrees because they are a test of mental stamina; they are so boring that they say something about your resilience and work ethic if you manage to get through one well.

[Barzini]

(Original post by Kollarrunt)
at all?
Then why do the IB's want economics. If it is so unrelated, then all courses should be equally valued, just that some uni's reps are higher...

Economics gives a holisitic picture of economics on both a global and industry/firm level, whilst applying a great deal of maths. Knowledge in these areas are quite desirable in IB, however its not a prerequisite. A French major might more often than not be placed on a French desk instead of a Derivatives one in front office. A Maths major might the derivatives while an economist might get M&A, IBD, S/T, Research or whatever...but im still not saying that a French major cannot get into S/T, but its just that their quant knowledge is not that great. A pure maths major might find it easier to get into structured products than a foreign sales desk if they dont have the language skills for the division. Economists just happen to be endowed with a course that automatically provide them with some transferrable skills within IB - again not saying that other course majors cannot have the same set of skills and be equally flexible.

[Kollarrunt]

(Original post by Barzini)
Economics gives a holisitic picture of economics on both a global and industry/firm level, whilst applying a great deal of maths. Knowledge in these areas are quite desirable in IB, however its not a prerequisite. A French major might more often than not be placed on a French desk instead of a Derivatives one in front office. A Maths major might the derivatives while an economist might get M&A, IBD, S/T, Research or whatever...but im still not saying that a French major cannot get into S/T, but its just that their quant knowledge is not that great. A pure maths major might find it easier to get into structured products than a foreign sales desk if they dont have the language skills for the division. Economists just happen to be endowed with a course that automatically provide them with some transferrable skills within IB - again not saying that other course majors cannot have the same set of skills and be equally flexible.

Alright, but where would you say that a PPE degree from, hmm, lets say the top 10 unis (that have that course) would stand?

[Strictly Business]

^ I think thats already been discussed in this thread.

[Kollarrunt]

(Original post by ..Inphinite..)
^ I think thats already been discussed in this thread.

Yup I understood that when I just looked through the thread a few minutes ago.

[Ourkid]

Personally, your situation is specialised, and is highly dependant upon the individual schools policy. Therefore, it would probably be best to contact the appropriate admissions tutors at said universities to find out their opinion on your situation.

Anything you get here will be pure speculation, but most probably a tirade of hate and abuse unless something has changed in the last few months

Good luck

Ourkid

[ba_ba1]

(Original post by ak0005)
Hi everyone, im new to tsr so sorry if im in the wrong thread etc. I want to do IB after university. Applied to top unis for economics but was rejected by all bar ******y brookes. I guess its no wonder as i have all Cs and a B in german at gcse. However, I have AABc at A/S and am predicted and will get AAB at A2 : Economics A Russian A Biology A Maths c
Since a degree from brookes is highly unlikely to lead to anything good, let alone in IB, ive decided to pass on that one, summon my mental powers and do a one year A-level course in a strangely expensive but very successful tutorial college in the following subjects: History Maths Chemistry English. I know that minus the slacking and plus one2one tuition and intensive spoon feeding, I am capable of getting all As, which would give me a ridiculous 7 A-levels 6 of which should be A grades. Another factor is that i will be a mature student on entry- just! (21), which in theory should make things easier. My question is: in terms of this hypothetical scenario how likely am i to get offers from LSE, UCL....etc with AAB and another AAAA predicted but with ****** GCSE's?

Thank you for any helpful comments/advice!

LSE - not a chance
UCL - highly unlikely

[supernova2]

just give it a year out and improve your A level maths grade and do something else useful on a gap year. Then apply to AAB courses and low AAA courses. For example if you want to do Economics then go for Nottingham, York, Manchester, Bath, Durham and Warwick or something.

[D.Hilbert]

(Original post by ak0005)
thanks for the replies everyone! although all of them confuse me apart from ourkid's. ba ba, thank you especially for your detailed, knowledgeable and most helpful of answers.

i dont understand the logic behind "just" taking a year out and applying to AAB courses with AAB/AAA as opposed to applying to AAA ones with AAAAAAB. ba ba's "LSE: no chance" confuses me also.
with the average offer at lse, for example, being AAA for 18yo, and lower for mature students (2 A-levels are given as a requirement officially on the website, brochure etc, for mature students such as myself), surely a 21yo with 6 ****ing As and a B in subjects such as chemistry, maths, economics, history stands a fair chance of being considered?! is there something im missing? please elaborate

I would have thought so too...

[City bound]

(Original post by ak0005)
thanks for the replies everyone! although all of them confuse me apart from ourkid's. ba ba, thank you especially for your detailed, knowledgeable and most helpful of answers.

i dont understand the logic behind "just" taking a year out and applying to AAB courses with AAB/AAA as opposed to applying to AAA ones with AAAAAAB. ba ba's "LSE: no chance" confuses me also.
with the average offer at lse, for example, being AAA for 18yo, and lower for mature students (2 A-levels are given as a requirement officially on the website, brochure etc, for mature students such as myself), surely a 21yo with 6 ****ing As and a B in subjects such as chemistry, maths, economics, history stands a fair chance of being considered?! is there something im missing? please elaborate

You can give LSE a shot by all means, it's only 1 slot on your UCAS after all, but don't get your hopes up. To give you some context, for students going straight from an average 6th form to L100 Economics, at least 3As is a given and they generally filter out anybody who hasn't at least 8A*s at GCSE. In this respect LSE is actually harder to get into than Oxbridge due to the lack of interview.

However, as others have said places like Nottingham, Durham, York (etc) should give you a workable chance of getting an offer for Economics.

Ultimately, the worst they can say is 'no'.

[Lover_21]

ak005 get into LSE and you will be laughing

[big A]

(Original post by shady lane)
If you can explain why you want to get into banking well on the application form, you can definitely get to interview with French from Oxford.

How about Classics from Oxford?

[Kollarrunt]

(Original post by City bound)
You can give LSE a shot by all means, it's only 1 slot on your UCAS after all, but don't get your hopes up. To give you some context, for students going straight from an average 6th form to L100 Economics, at least 3As is a given and they generally filter out anybody who hasn't at least 8A*s at GCSE. In this respect LSE is actually harder to get into than Oxbridge due to the lack of interview.

However, as others have said places like Nottingham, Durham, York (etc) should give you a workable chance of getting an offer for Economics.

Ultimately, the worst they can say is 'no'.

Really? I thought that Oxbridge would be harder to get in to because of the interview. Doesn't the interview step that Oxbridge have just mean an extra step applicants have to go through to be accepted.
For LSE you just have the references, grades and PS, if any of these don't match up you'll be rejected, but for Oxbrigde, you have to have ALL of the factors you need to have for LSE AND you need to nail the interview...

Or?

[fais]

(Original post by Kollarrunt)
Really? I thought that Oxbridge would be harder to get in to because of the interview. Doesn't the interview step that Oxbridge have just mean an extra step applicants have to go through to be accepted.
For LSE you just have the references, grades and PS, if any of these don't match up you'll be rejected, but for Oxbrigde, you have to have ALL of the factors you need to have for LSE AND you need to nail the interview...

Or?

Not necessarily; you can at least fight your corner at the Oxbridge interview and not be autofiltered like you might well be at other universities.

Oxbridge are looking for potential and ability.. grades are just an indicator for this and definitely come second in their admission process.

[Drogue]

(Original post by big A)
How about Classics from Oxford?

I know a couple who have. More than for many subjects, actually. Indeed, one of them got onto Goldman's FICC spring week a couple of years ago, which was quite surprising, considering so few people did.

[City bound]

(Original post by Kollarrunt)
Really? I thought that Oxbridge would be harder to get in to because of the interview. Doesn't the interview step that Oxbridge have just mean an extra step applicants have to go through to be accepted.
For LSE you just have the references, grades and PS, if any of these don't match up you'll be rejected, but for Oxbrigde, you have to have ALL of the factors you need to have for LSE AND you need to nail the interview...

Or?

The interview means that they have more information to work with, which means they can excuse poor GCSEs or a dropped grade or module here and there if one interviews well.

[wazzup]

Oxbridge value grades a lot as well. I know loads of people who mucked up their interviews but got in, because they had almost full marks in three relevant subjects.For LSE you need just gd grades, whereas for oxbridge you need good grades and a relatively gd interview.if you have exceptional grades it helps a lot.

[City bound]

(Original post by wazzup)
Oxbridge value grades a lot as well. I know loads of people who mucked up their interviews but got in, because they had almost full marks in three relevant subjects.For LSE you need just gd grades, whereas for oxbridge you need good grades and a relatively gd interview.if you have exceptional grades it helps a lot.

Which just goes to further prove my point, there's more paths available to the applicant. Only those with superb grades will have a chance at getting into LSE but both those with superb grades and those with good grades + positive interviewable characteristics have a chance at Oxbridge.