Which universities?

Why not LSE and Oxbridge? Those grades are quite similar to mine - I had an extra A level, but almost identical GCSEs - and I got into both. But presuming you don't want to go for that:

UCL, Warwick, Nottingham, Bristol, Manchester, York, Durham, Southampton, Birmingham, Exeter, Loughborough... lots of good unis for economics. All seem to be hard to get into now though, with many 2nd or 3rd tier universities asking for AAB or higher. Definately worth a shot though.

I believe that you have a chance of getting into LSE. You have 6 slots so you will not lose out a lot by applying to LSE. I see you have some very good prediction grades at A-level so your GCSEs may not be so importnant. Besides I dont think they are bad. You have a chance. Dont listen to people saying you will be "dumped" without 10 A* GCSE. Send them your AS results if you manage to get As at them. They look at the GCSEs because there are thousands of ppl with AAA predictions. When they see your result they will see you are really on road of actually getting them. At the end of the day LSE offer could be like a lottary ticket. You may not win but if you do then ...

Once again, President Ben is exactly right. However UCL do the same with GCSEs, I was told. Hence my straight and very quick rejection from LSE and UCL and my offer from Oxford

UCL are significantly less fussy than LSE. Here, I believe the policy is to chuck anyone with C grades among the first ten GCSEs. Anyone who went to a 'good school' should have no more than a single B.

The 'lowest' GCSE grades of anyone I know at UCL on Economics is 3 A*, 3 A, 4 B. But those were the best GCSE results for any student at that school, ever.

UCL are significantly less fussy than LSE. Here, I believe the policy is to chuck anyone with C grades among the first ten GCSEs. Anyone who went to a 'good school' should have no more than a single B.

The 'lowest' GCSE grades of anyone I know at UCL on Economics is 3 A*, 3 A, 4 B. But those were the best GCSE results for any student at that school, ever.

i for a fact did not go to a good school but i am not thinking of applying for LSE or UCL so i should be ok so what are peoples opinions on oxbridge then if i can do really well and get all A's in my AS levels worth a shot or a waste of an application?

Well, if you don't apply to London, fair enough, but I think you have a reasonable shot at UCL. You have very similar GCSE grades to mine.

I disagree.

UCL have, in the last couple of years, rejected people with 6A* at GCSE. A friend of mine this year was rejected with AAAA (Econ, Maths, Phy, Chem) at A-Level.

I agree with PB that UCL are significantly less fussy than LSE, but it seems that they too are adopting a 'cut off' system - that anyone with less than x number of A* will not make the cut and thus be rejected. Since people seem to have very similar A-Levels (all AAA/AAAA) the real distingushing factor seems to be GCSE grades (or in the case of Cambridge a candidate's UMS scores). As much as people say that personal statements & recommendations matter (which, don't get me wrong, they do!) they are afterall subjective criteria(to what extent do you think you can really tell how much of a passion applicant x has developed for economics and can it be compared it to that of applicant y?). So the deciding factor becomes GCSEs. Obviously a very messy system - you are being judged upon subjects you did a long time ago and probably were not very good at.

The popularity of an institution such as UCL (especially for L100) has grown immensely in the last 2/3 years. This has been reflected not only via the calibre of students they are now admitting (PB can vouch for this one ), or in the number of applications they are receiving, but also in their entry requirements (which, for L100, used to be AAB a few years ago; but has been moved up to AAA). UCL is also in the centre of London and is therefore more appealing (im my opinion) to a foreign student from, say, Hong Kong, who would rather live in London as opposed to Coventry. Foreign competition, therefore, is also stronger at UCL (admittedly a speculative argument, but stil..).

My recommendation would be that you don't apply to UCL for Economics. In the last few years it has been exceptionally competitive and it seems that L100 in years to come will only get more and more competitive. Instead, hedge your bets - apply to either a different institution (Warwick/Notts - both fine choices), or, if you are very keen to go to UCL, then apply for Econ & Stats (assuming you have sufficient motivation and aptitude to study the degree).

Obviously, I'm to get shot down by President Ben - who will point out a glaring contradiction in my argument or point out a simple fact I have failed to take into account - but knowing where you've gone wrong is the fun of it I guess!

I wish you well

Surely that's a horrible idea? There must be tons of great economists out there who never took Further Maths at 'A' levels.

As I said, toying. And I'm sure a lot of unis would like to make Further Maths compulsory for Economics (among other courses)