Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Ms Finance in the UK

Hi there, I am an undergrad student in london at LMet business school. I am considering the following unis as future Ms in Finance option in this order -
1. LSE,
2. LBS,
3. Warwick,
4. Imperial College
5. Cass
6. Loughborough,
7. Lancaster
8. Exeter
9. St. Andrew's
10. Aston

Can you guy tell me what you think about it, in terms of course ranking and any suggestions about sth else worth considering or sth drop out. I am seeking a diploma to be marketable in the city of London primarily, the US and Asia come secondly. Especially, I would like to see what you think about the second half of the set, how competitive are the diplomas from these schools exactly in London city real world? Cheers!

Reply 1

verticalforce

You can strike LBS out of that list, they require work exp for masters in finance.

In terms of competitiveness, Cam, Ox, LSE, Imperial and Warwick is probably in the first tier.

Reply 2

nakata

verticalforce

You can strike LBS out of that list, they require work exp for masters in finance.

In terms of competitiveness, Cam, Ox, LSE, Imperial and Warwick is probably in the first tier.

Cheers, I hadnt checked that yet on LBS. So, one is out for now :smile:

Reply 3

student_london

It would help if you get a 1st, especially for MSc @ LSE. MSc in Finance @ LSE is very competitive and the fact your undergraduate is not exactly from a stellar school.
But don't give up, no harm in trying. Aim high as they say!
Don't assume that a MSc at any of those schools will give you a free-ticket to a top job in the City. You'll have to do better then that and ensure you have other highlights/achievements in your CV, both academically or job-related.

Reply 4

hoodwink199

Be prepared to get a very strong score in the GMAT if you're serious about LSE.

Reply 5

verticalforce

hoodwink199

Be prepared to get a very strong score in the GMAT if you're serious about LSE.

He doesn't need one as he is studying in a UK university. This is assuming of course the OP is one track for a first.

Still, a good GMAT score wouldn't hurt and is in fact recommended by LSE.

Reply 6

hoodwink199

verticalforce

He doesn't need one as he is studying in a UK university. This is assuming of course the OP is one track for a first.

Still, a good GMAT score wouldn't hurt and is in fact recommended by LSE.

It depends on your definition of need - if he wants to get in then he'll want to have a strong GMAT score. The course is heavily oversubscribed and competitive.

Reply 7

verticalforce

hoodwink199

It depends on your definition of need - if he wants to get in then he'll want to have a strong GMAT score. The course is heavily oversubscribed and competitive.

I've seen a lot of people who get in without GMAT.

Of course they are all from top university with impeccable academic results.

GMAT would not help a poor academic performance in any way whatsoever.

Reply 8

hoodwink199

verticalforce

I've seen a lot of people who get in without GMAT.

Of course they are all from top university with impeccable academic results.

Same observation here.

verticalforce

GMAT would not help a poor academic performance in any way whatsoever.

There's been no suggestion on this or the OP's other threads of poor academic performance - until advised otherwise I'm assuming strong results or else he wouldn't be compiling a list of top schools.

Reply 9

matthias

what do you consider a very strong gmat score?

Reply 10

arctic_toon

to the GMAT "requirement" and "importance" discussion:
I got rejected from the MSc in Finance program at LSE....and i had a 740 (97 percentile) in the GMAT...my undergrad g.p.a was 3.64/4.0 (translates to a high second...just shy of a 1st)

so there you go....a high GMAT score for LSE cannot make up for the fact that you don't have a 1st.