Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    TSR, where individuals fight over the pros and cons of universities that they have no chance of getting in to anyway.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LutherVan)
    You must be naive if you think Warwick compares to LSE, talkless of Oxford.

    So the hiring of one solitary institution in one solitary year is the basis on which you came to a conclusion that Warwick is on par with Oxford? :rolleyes:

    Prospects are similar my backside.

    Warwick is not on par with Oxford in overall prospect.

    Warwick is not on par with LSE in overall prospect.

    Warwick is not on par with Oxford in banking and finance prospect.

    Warwick is not on par with LSE in banking and finance prospect.

    Warwick is on slightly above UCL in banking and finance prospect.

    Oxbridge, LSE and Imperial give the 2 a decent gap, not only in banking and finance prospects, but in overall prospects. Stop dreaming!!! LSE is far better, not to even talk of Oxford.
    Very interesting post. Care to provide a proof?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LutherVan)
    Stop being silly!!!

    Is that how poor mental reasoning and calculations are at Poor-man's Imperial?

    You do the maths. If 20 students out of 8800 are hired from one university and 21 students out of 21500 are hired at another, which is more popular? Do you want an Imperial guy to answer for you?

    Even in the outer circle, there is still a hierarchy, and LSE is the top there. Surely you will not say imperial is on par with Oxbridge because FT says it is in the inner circle?

    Even Strand Polytechnic that your insecure self try to put down has a far better reputation and is seen as more prestigious internationally.
    But even this reasoning is flawed.

    Warwick is a multi-faculty university offering programs across all major specialties -- from medicine and law to molecular biology and physics. Warwick has a large student undergrad population in the colleges of humanities, arts and languages. At Warwick you'll meet students majoring in Drama or Dance or Fine Arts. You don't expect those people to join banking and finance, do you?

    LSE is a specialised institution focusing mainly in social sciences, economics and finance. So, the majority of students/graduates at LSE seek employment in banking and finance, whilst at Warwick, several students/graduates seek job positions relevant to their undergraduate training.

    Now, to make this fair, let's compute the number of applicants (from both schools) and the number of those applicants admitted in banking and finance. I don't have any statistics for it now, but I think that Warwick would fair quite well with LSE in that respect. Even Imperial would fair quite well with LSE or Oxbridge, as Imperial, like Warwick, does have a very good reputation in maths and stats, something that banks love for their employees to have excelled in.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I forgot to include LSE in the target unis bracket. Sorry.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LutherVan)
    Stop being silly!!!

    Is that how poor mental reasoning and calculations are at Poor-man's Imperial?

    You do the maths. If 20 students out of 8800 are hired from one university and 21 students out of 21500 are hired at another, which is more popular? Do you want an Imperial guy to answer for you?
    well that would be nice, but given this thoughtless post I assume you are not an imperial candidate. or else you would realise that out of those 12700 students that Warwick has more the majority of them will be arts students that are hardly motivated nor well suited to banking and finance. And that Imperial's location means students are much more exposed to the industry.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by asdfg0987)
    TSR, where individuals fight over the pros and cons of universities that they have no chance of getting in to anyway.
    i lol'd
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr. Roxas)
    But even this reasoning is flawed.

    Warwick is a multi-faculty university offering programs across all major specialties -- from medicine and law to molecular biology and physics. Warwick has a large student undergrad population in the colleges of humanities, arts and languages. At Warwick you'll meet students majoring in Drama or Dance or Fine Arts. You don't expect those people to join banking and finance, do you?

    LSE is a specialised institution focusing mainly in social sciences, economics and finance. So, the majority of students/graduates at LSE seek employment in banking and finance, whilst at Warwick, several students/graduates seek job positions relevant to their undergraduate training.

    Now, to make this fair, let's compute the number of applicants (from both schools) and the number of those applicants admitted in banking and finance. I don't have any statistics for it now, but I think that Warwick would fair quite well with LSE in that respect. Even Imperial would fair quite well with LSE or Oxbridge, as Imperial, like Warwick, does have a very good reputation in maths and stats, something that banks love for their employees to have excelled in.

    (Original post by danny111)
    well that would be nice, but given this thoughtless post I assume you are not an imperial candidate. or else you would realise that out of those 12700 students that Warwick has more the majority of them will be arts students that are hardly motivated nor well suited to banking and finance. And that Imperial's location means students are much more exposed to the industry.
    I just think all these are excuses.

    LSE offers a lot of social sciences courses that are not suited for high finance. So does Oxford.

    Even at imperial, not most Natural Science students like Biologist, Chemist etc want to work in IB or Finance.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LutherVan)
    I just think all these are excuses.

    LSE offers a lot of social sciences courses that are not suited for high finance. So does Oxford.

    Even at imperial, not most Natural Science students like Biologist, Chemist etc want to work in IB or Finance.
    Yea but have you ever been to LSE? If you aren't applying for spring and summer internships you are an outsider. You get caught up in it. It has much more to do with the people than with the university.

    The only credible argument you could have is that at LSE there are more better people (whatever better may mean in this case). But you are not going to get a place because you went to LSE or lose a place because you did not (i.e. went to Warwick instead).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Christ, this is depressing.

    If you're good enough for IB, going to Warwick instead of LSE isn't going to stop you.

    Neither does the entire job market revolve around investment banking, so can people stop equating the two. Hopefully OP you have sent your app off by now because those places are being snapped up.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LutherVan)
    I just think all these are excuses.

    LSE offers a lot of social sciences courses that are not suited for high finance. So does Oxford.

    Even at imperial, not most Natural Science students like Biologist, Chemist etc want to work in IB or Finance.
    Let's post for a while and take your words as valid facts. How do you think Oxford and Cambridge would fair against LSE?

    Warwick - 12,598 undergraduate students
    Cambridge - 12,018 undergraduate students
    Oxford - 11,766 undergraduate students

    LSE - 3,860 undergraduate students
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr. Roxas)
    Let's post for a while and take your words as valid facts. How do you think Oxford and Cambridge would fair against LSE?

    Warwick - 12,598 undergraduate students
    Cambridge - 12,018 undergraduate students
    Oxford - 11,766 undergraduate students

    LSE - 3,860 undergraduate students
    LSE will fair far better, is it not?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LutherVan)
    LSE will fair far better, is it not?
    I guess you're right.

    But would that make LSE superior to Oxford and Cambridge?

    I mean, should one must attend LSE than either Oxford or Cambridge if he wants to join IB after college?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anradu)
    Which university has a better student life, is better for Economics, and whose job prospects are graduating are greater?
    Bristol, for real.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr. Roxas)
    I guess you're right.

    But would that make LSE superior to Oxford and Cambridge?

    I mean, should one must attend LSE than either Oxford or Cambridge if he wants to join IB after college?
    Not necessarily. It just shows how close to Oxbridge and highly regarded LSE is. In Banking and Finance, LSE is virtually on par with Oxford and Cambridge.

    You have to take the figures into perspective. This is just the numbers for [1] ONE investment bank and [2] a non-bulge bracket for that matter. Same can be said for a lot of other non-bulge bracket firms. Here is more evidence that LSE students are more attractive for IB than Warwick students:

    Deutsche Bank
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...=574223&page=2

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...1&postcount=37

    Barcap
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...8&postcount=71


    The more exclusive bulge brackets like Goldman Sachs normally focus mainly on the Top 4:

    http://www.wikijob.co.uk/wiki/goldma...view-questions
    http://www.insidebuzz.co.uk/company/.../getting_hired

    Also, there are volumes of PEs, Hedge funds and smaller finance houses in the industry that have very few internships (maybe max 3, more frequently 1 or 2), that strictly recruit from Oxbridge (some even discriminate based on which college the student attends) and in rare cases recruit from LSE (less than 10%). These ones will make Oxbridge have an edge over LSE.

    Furthermore, there are volumes of Oxbridge students that decide to take other internships like MBB Consulting or Civil Service instead of banking by choice. The MBBs are also very elitist and will strictly recruit 90-95% Oxbridge for interns.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LutherVan)
    Not necessarily. It just shows how close to Oxbridge and highly regarded LSE is. In Banking and Finance, LSE is virtually on par with Oxford and Cambridge.

    You have to take the figures into perspective. This is just the numbers for [1] ONE investment bank and [2] a non-bulge bracket for that matter. Same can be said for a lot of other non-bulge bracket firms. Here is more evidence that LSE students are more attractive for IB than Warwick students:

    Deutsche Bank
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...=574223&page=2

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...1&postcount=37

    Barcap
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...8&postcount=71


    The more exclusive bulge brackets like Goldman Sachs normally focus mainly on the Top 4:

    http://www.wikijob.co.uk/wiki/goldma...view-questions
    http://www.insidebuzz.co.uk/company/.../getting_hired

    Also, there are volumes of PEs, Hedge funds and smaller finance houses in the industry that have very few internships (maybe max 3, more frequently 1 or 2), that strictly recruit from Oxbridge (some even discriminate based on which college the student attends) and in rare cases recruit from LSE (less than 10%). These ones will make Oxbridge have an edge over LSE.

    Furthermore, there are volumes of Oxbridge students that decide to take other internships like MBB Consulting or Civil Service instead of banking by choice. The MBBs are also very elitist and will strictly recruit 90-95% Oxbridge for interns.

    Hi Luther,

    This is a genuine question, not a piss take. I'm just wondering which university/firm you went to/work for.

    It just seems you have a lot of strong opinions on these subjects. Not that thats a bad thing, but you seem to be bulldozing through any subject when people mention any university other than oxbridge/LSE. Did you go to any of these? And in fact, did you go to Warwick to have such negative (and when I mean negative, I mean relatively) views about the place?

    You seem to rate so highly UCL in other posts, but Warwick in each occasion has had more FO positions in these banks you've listed than UCL.

    I think you probably realised the fact that the DB numbers you posted are both for 2008, and no one is questioning LSE appeal to the finance industry.

    Also, where do you get off not referring to UBS as a BB Bank?? Okay, it isnt Goldman, but in trading terms, or any other for that matter, it in the bracket of DB and BarCap if not higher. So i dont get you calling UBS not BB, it seems very ignorant and arrogant of you to think that no matter what your position or education is.

    I’m not criticising you, and I value anybody’s opinion, but you come across as very aggressive and get very defensive with each post you make. I would just like to know I can listen to your opinions instead of thinking how arrogant you come across.
    Anyway, hope to hear back from ya, like I said, i’m not looking for an academic debate, just to know the man behind the mask ?
    Peace out.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    From everything that I've heard, I would say Bristol but maybe that's because everything I've heard about Bristol has been from students who left my school last year, and apparently Bristol has very good student life.

    If Warwick is better for a career, then maybe that swings the balance in the favour of Warwick.

    I've applied to both uni's so this is of great interest to me as well.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peaches182)
    Hi Luther,

    This is a genuine question, not a piss take. I'm just wondering which university/firm you went to/work for.

    It just seems you have a lot of strong opinions on these subjects. Not that thats a bad thing, but you seem to be bulldozing through any subject when people mention any university other than oxbridge/LSE. Did you go to any of these? And in fact, did you go to Warwick to have such negative (and when I mean negative, I mean relatively) views about the place?

    You seem to rate so highly UCL in other posts, but Warwick in each occasion has had more FO positions in these banks you've listed than UCL.

    I think you probably realised the fact that the DB numbers you posted are both for 2008, and no one is questioning LSE appeal to the finance industry.

    Also, where do you get off not referring to UBS as a BB Bank?? Okay, it isnt Goldman, but in trading terms, or any other for that matter, it in the bracket of DB and BarCap if not higher. So i dont get you calling UBS not BB, it seems very ignorant and arrogant of you to think that no matter what your position or education is.

    I’m not criticising you, and I value anybody’s opinion, but you come across as very aggressive and get very defensive with each post you make. I would just like to know I can listen to your opinions instead of thinking how arrogant you come across.
    Anyway, hope to hear back from ya, like I said, i’m not looking for an academic debate, just to know the man behind the mask ?
    Peace out.
    Hi Peaches,

    I am quite surprised you state that I come across as aggressive and arrogant, maybe defensive is justified but the other 2 is a shock.

    I am sorry if I come across that way, I don't really intend to. My sincere apologies.

    I have a lot of respect for UCL and Warwick. In my humble opinions, they are top universities, only that some TSRers need to really know where these universities sit in industry perception and reputation and avoid misleading young teenagers on choice of university by having unjustified bravado and claiming untruths.

    I strongly believe UCL is the undisputed and irrefutable 5th best university in the country and Warwick is the 6th best university(no worst than 8th if not 5th) in the UK. My reservations is when you see the likes of INTJ with his inferiority complex going about TSR and trying to talk down to other TSR forumites telling them their university is rubbish (worse still, it appears a top university like KCL is the victim of such attacks) or delusionally proclaiming UCL is in the same class as Oxford and LSE. In the real world that matters, UCL is not seen as a brain-box uni. See thread no 70002 on this leading consultancy forum:

    http://forum.top-consultant.com/UK/list.aspx

    You will see a first class UCL degree holder being advised to obtain a Masters in a (as it was put) top university like Oxbridge, LSE and LBS.

    That is just an example of opinions amongst the people people hiring in elite careers. League tables are not as dominant in industry like TSRers use it, it is more about the historic reputation and it will be unfortunate if some few arrogant TSRers go about and mislead talented students trying to make a choice or depress students at other universities for fun.

    I don't really think I have put Warwick down. I have just said it is not above KCL in Law. Overall, I maintain it is presently more prestigious than KCL especially due to its strengths in Business and Quant like subjects. But being a top university in IB does not necessarily mean a university is much better than others that might be good in other areas (e.g. KCL in Healthcare jobs and UCL is marginally stronger in most other areas than Warwick). They are all in the same bracket with UCL marginally better than Warwick and Warwick marginally better than KCL, Durham, Bristol etc. Warwick is a top university.

    UBS is in the bracket of DB and Barcap but I don't think they are all really BB like GS, ML and MS. It is the same way Oliver Wyman, Monitor, LEK consulting are top consulting firms but are not in the League of MBB.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Most won't get into Bris or Warwick in the first place.
    Of those that do, almost all will (at some point) realise that IB is not what they really want.
    Of those that don't, a tiny handful will actually make it to an IB. From either. Fewer still will last.

    The course and department mean F-all. Especially if you are only looking at it as a stepping stone to a career. Both are just fine.

    Pick the one PLACE you think you will have a better time at. It's ALL that matters. Seriosuly :-)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LutherVan)
    Hi Peaches,

    I am quite surprised you state that I come across as aggressive and arrogant, maybe defensive is justified but the other 2 is a shock.

    I am sorry if I come across that way, I don't really intend to. My sincere apologies.

    I have a lot of respect for UCL and Warwick. In my humble opinions, they are top universities, only that some TSRers need to really know where these universities sit in industry perception and reputation and avoid misleading young teenagers on choice of university by having unjustified bravado and claiming untruths.

    I strongly believe UCL is the undisputed and irrefutable 5th best university in the country and Warwick is the 6th best university(no worst than 8th if not 5th) in the UK. My reservations is when you see the likes of INTJ with his inferiority complex going about TSR and trying to talk down to other TSR forumites telling them their university is rubbish (worse still, it appears a top university like KCL is the victim of such attacks) or delusionally proclaiming UCL is in the same class as Oxford and LSE. In the real world that matters, UCL is not seen as a brain-box uni. See thread no 70002 on this leading consultancy forum:

    http://forum.top-consultant.com/UK/list.aspx

    You will see a first class UCL degree holder being advised to obtain a Masters in a (as it was put) top university like Oxbridge, LSE and LBS.

    That is just an example of opinions amongst the people people hiring in elite careers. League tables are not as dominant in industry like TSRers use it, it is more about the historic reputation and it will be unfortunate if some few arrogant TSRers go about and mislead talented students trying to make a choice or depress students at other universities for fun.

    I don't really think I have put Warwick down. I have just said it is not above KCL in Law. Overall, I maintain it is presently more prestigious than KCL especially due to its strengths in Business and Quant like subjects. But being a top university in IB does not necessarily mean a university is much better than others that might be good in other areas (e.g. KCL in Healthcare jobs and UCL is marginally stronger in most other areas than Warwick). They are all in the same bracket with UCL marginally better than Warwick and Warwick marginally better than KCL, Durham, Bristol etc. Warwick is a top university.

    UBS is in the bracket of DB and Barcap but I don't think they are all really BB like GS, ML and MS. It is the same way Oliver Wyman, Monitor, LEK consulting are top consulting firms but are not in the League of MBB.
    Hey m8,

    No problem. After reading my statement through, it came across as all three of the things I mentioned. I know it wasnt intentional, people just get caught in the heat of the moment. I'm just picking masters courses so I wanted to make an informed opinion on each place.

    My main reason for any masters course I got to will be for its appeal to IB's. Thats not to say I'm not in it for the academic side, cos I'm considering the possibility of a PhD, but what I am saying is that I wouldnt go to a place for e.g. Lancaster, who have a very respected programme, but just seem to lack that overall appeal by the top places.

    Really, nowadays, there arent any BB banks at all. Since JP and MS have become bank holding companies and ML merged with BoA, the true age of IB's that was there pre-crisis is gone. At the same token, GS will be regarded by anyone, but I've seen threads about people talk about how difficult a decision it is to pick between 3 or 4 offers?? What a position to be in, and IB is notorious for people getting headhunted and poached from other firms, so I guess it doesnt really matter so much about the firm.

    Anyways, thanks for getting back to me. I'm glad I've been posting on TSR, its just good to get other opinions.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Bristol!!

    A heavy hitter in the city and excellent job prospects. I would not hesitate between Warwick and Bristol...its def Bristol.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.