Imperial, Warwick or Cranfield

Imperial is a significantly better brand than Warwick.

Another Warwick die hard...
Warwick is a 50 year old university that has only been recognized recently. CUG is mostly based on student satisfaction (at the undergrad level!) and does not reflect career opportunities at all. On the academic quality, the last REF, Imperial is ranked 2, Warwick is ranked 8. And let's not talk about international rankings, in which Warwick falls far behind.
In short, Warwick and Cranfield can be put in the same group, but they are hardly comparable to Imperial in terms of reputation.

Another Warwick die hard...
Warwick is a 50 year old university that has only been recognized recently. CUG is mostly based on student satisfaction (at the undergrad level!) and does not reflect career opportunities at all. On the academic quality, the last REF, Imperial is ranked 2, Warwick is ranked 8. And let's not talk about international rankings, in which Warwick falls far behind.
In short, Warwick and Cranfield can be put in the same group, but they are hardly comparable to Imperial in terms of reputation.

thank you all for your opinions.
meanwhile, I declined MBS and received the offer from Imperial, and based on other recommendations I have narrowed down my choice to Imperial or Warwick.

In fact, I find the Imperial programme more specific than Warwick.
However, if i decided for warwick, would it put the top consulting firms off if i studied the msc business consulting rather than a strategy or economics course?

and in terms of my plan to work abroad (not in UK) and doing an MBA in the US in a few years time, would Imperial or Warwick be the better brand worldwide?

hope some of you can elaborate abit more. thanks a lot.

I disagree. If you look at CUG it's only one place above Warwick. It is obviously better than Warwick, but saying it's significantly better is a hyperbolic statement. If you look at the Linkedin rankings, (which is the most reliable as it's based on the strongest investment bankers, accountants etc, and what alumni they are), Warwick shares the top 5 with Imperial. Imperial is sometimes above Warwick, Warwick is sometimes above Imperial. I think that what I get from your point is: Imperial has a bigger worldwide name, as it should have, it's in Central London.

However, I'm an undergrad so I can't give a full, extensive rebuttle. I think the most reliable ranking one should check, for such a masters, should be the LinkedIn ones.

Imperial is better than Warwick no doubt about that! (Especially in maths, I'd like to add). Love how the Warwick die-hards try and argue that a 50 year old uni is better than Imperial, and sometimes oxbridge....seriously. But it provides me with a good laugh

You're correct, Warwick isn't superior to Imperial. As someone who graduated from Warwick, I would not make such a claim. However, for some undergraduate fields (kindly take note that I said, undergraduate), I would politely argue that Warwick can head-to-head with Imperial. For example, Warwick mathematics department is easily as competitive as Imperials', if not even more so. In addition to that, some of the things relevant to graduate education may not interest the undergraduate students.

For example, I personally would prefer to go to a university that has a very high graduation rate (which Warwick can boast to have numbers more impressive than Imperial's), so that my chances of earning a degree from that university would be very high. It would avoid me from dropping out of the programme and allowing me to leave university with a degree on time.

I would personally also prefer to attend a university that has a very caring environment. At Warwick, the undergrad students are well taken cared of. They have tutors in a small group or one-on-one, depending on the major. They have easy access to their profs for consultations and guidance. They have a learning grid open 24/7, modern sports facilities, a huge and very well-kept campus, a large student union, an active & involved student body, and a relatively affordable student housing. For many undergrad students, those factors are important. And, it was for those reasons why I turned down LSE for Warwick, which turned out to be a "blessing in disguise". My Warwick undergrad lead me to earn an MBA from one of the top 10 graduate business schools in the US.

Warwick is as much as respected as Imperial to the view of the top employers in the banking and financial world. Warwick is also as respected as Imperial, if not even more so, tot he view and sight of the top business schools in the US. For example, two of the current HBS students are from Warwick undergrad. In my class at Booth, for instance, there were 2 other guys from Warwick aside from myself, but no one was from Imperial. Oxbridge and LSE were represented, as well. Cambridge alone had 5 in our class.
So, clearly, it will not put you in a disadvantage position if you have a Warwick degree tucked under your belt. If anything, it will provide you with many advantages especially if your intended career is in line with the business community.