Pages

8/15/11

Just wondering what the outlook is for a low/average GPA in this kind of job market as a rising sophomore. I'm networking as hard as I can, but everyone tells me to have straight A's or I won't really have a shot. I'm shooting for IBD but that looks less and less likely each day. Should I give up on IBD out of undergrad, do something else for a while, and then come back to it as an associate?

Comments (994)

8/15/11

its like you said, network like its a full time job and make things happen.

The WSO Advantage - Investment Banking

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation +

IB Interview Prep Pack

30,000+ sold & REAL questions.

Resume Help from Actual IB Pros

Land More IB Interviews.

Find Your Perfect IB Mentor

Realistic IB Mock Interviews.

8/15/11

3.4 is fine man...how many people have you talked to that actually said that?

Inb4 omg you need a 3.8 3.9 (prestige whores)

Just having something that separates you from the rest of the crowd

I banana back

8/15/11

omg you need a 3.8 3.9

  • Bulls make money. Bears make money. Pigs get slaughtered.
  • The harder you work, the luckier you become.
  • I believe in the "Golden Rule": the man with the gold rules.
8/15/11

Maybe its just the guys I talk to. One alumni partner at a NY boutique (who used to work at MS) said my GPA was "way too low" and to "leave it off all together" because he knows people back at MS who won't look at a resume with a sub 3.5 GPA. Two other junior guys at top tier BB (MS/JPM/GS) said my GPA "looked a little low" and since I come from a non-target, he said "the only guys we hire from non-targets look stellar on paper, and that may be hard for you." I know that kind of runs counter to what most people here say, but it kind of bummed me out. Is it worth making trips to New York and stuff, or should I stick to my local banks in Toronto?

8/15/11

Networking can only get you so far. There still has to be a compelling reason to hire you for someone to stick his/her neck out and suggest you for interviews. A 3.4 GPA in business, barring something amazing, is not compelling. A 3.4 GPA in Engineering, on the other hand, would get you in if you applied to the right groups.

I would recommend looking in F500 finance as a backup right now, where I think you're going to be a stronger candidate. Spend two years there, then try to break into research or IBD. Your industry experience will be the compelling reason they're looking for.

8/15/11

This is tough to say without knowing your school. First off, if a 3.5 GPA is the cutoff, then it makes no sense that a 3.4 would be "way too low". Just keep doing what you're doing and add an easy 1-2 credit class in which you know you can get an A to boost it to 3.5.

Again, it's tough to know without knowing your school. If you go to a small, complete non-target, then yes it might be a little hard. If your non-target is a top 50 school that has a huge alumni base, then it will be easier.

8/15/11

@IP: Thanks, thats what I'm looking into as well. Some decent F500 companies recruit at my school so I'll try and network there as well.

Michael Scarn: Its a top school in Canada (Ivey/Queens Commerce/McGill) with a decent alumni base, not stellar but probably one of the best in Canada.

8/15/11

Major is also important. We sometimes cut Math, Physics, and Engineering majors a bit of a break given that they are often curved to a 2.7 avg. GPA rather than ~3.3 average in business/liberal arts at many schools.

Basically, the benchmark for you is a kid from Cornell with a 3.65 GPA in Econ with an OK personality and some extracurriculars. If you're from Illinois and I can make the case that you're smarter/better for the firm that that kid, I'm going to fight to get you an interview. I can still make a strong case if you've got a 3.45 in Mechanical Engineering or Physics and you're 1.5 standard deviations above average, but I can't make it if you've got a 3.4 in Accy/Business where a reasonably smart kid should be able to pull off a 3.6-3.7. Every alumnus will be a little different, but if you're the kind of school where you've got only a handful of alumni who probably aren't MDs, it's more along the lines of us fronting kids who we are reasonably sure are going to kick the Princeton students' butts so we can get more seats allocated to our alumns in the next round of interviews next year.

8/15/11

Yeah, I'm in a generic business major, so I don't really have any curve excuse for my lower marks.

8/15/11

Then you need to get that GPA up ASAP. And ideally, you need something to add a little sparkle of genius to the resume. Are there any profs doing research who like you? Getting your name on a published paper- even in the acknowledgements- is a huge coup for a sophomore. If you're in a top-ten ranked US News program for your major, TAing a course also works. D1 sports would obviously work, same with any well-known national competition.

You need a 3.65+ GPA AND something spectacular going into Junior year to make up for the lack of being from a target school to land most interviews. And then your alumni friends at the firm will need to groom you in interviewing skills.

Hate to say it, but while networking can help, but it generally only makes a difference for candidates just on the cusp- ideally with something really strong on their resume and a 3.5 GPA or for folks with a ho-hum resume, 3.65-3.7 GPA, and a strong passion for a certain desk or line of work. You want to be in a situation where you do not need to network- if you have a 3.65 GPA and play D1 sports, win a national competition, TA a difficult course in a strong program, or help a prof publish a paper, you will find that the companies come to you.

8/15/11

I have a 3.4 too from uiuc. Finance major. Doing internship at mm boutique in nyc. Got it through connections/cold calling. Dont give up! Btw illini is right. Everyone has ridiculous gpas as business majors. But there arent many in I banking from my school

8/15/11

Pm me I know an MD at a boutique that had a very positive experience with a canadian student. Forgot what school. This is in nyc btw

8/15/11
RonaldBacon:

Pm me I know an MD at a boutique that had a very positive experience with a canadian student. Forgot what school. This is in nyc btw

Just sent you a PM

8/15/11

@ IlliniProgrammer

Not to hi-jack the thread.
Does a 3.4 gpa at top 15 school with math & economics major, w/ 3.6 gpa in econ, varsity crew, and financial internships look like to recruiters? Plan is to get gpa up to 3.5 -3.6.

8/15/11
VandyMan:

@ IlliniProgrammer

Not to hi-jack the thread.
Does a 3.4 gpa at top 15 school with math & economics major, w/ 3.6 gpa in econ, varsity crew, and financial internships look like to recruiters? Plan is to get gpa up to 3.5 -3.6.

From Princeton maybe, from Vanderbilt it's a lot more borderline. You'd need something on there like a difficult-to-get-into honors program to be a strong candidate, though it seems likely you'll probably land somewhere.

8/15/11

Don't forget that #15 Finance UIUC is a target for a number of MMs/Boutiques (EG William Blair, RW Baird), so it's possible that helped with the recruiting process. But at most non-target schools, making it into an MM or a BB is as difficult as making it into GS or JPM from UIUC. No on-campus recruiting. Only a handful of alumns who are often trying to make sure the kids they do help will blow the Princeton candidates out of the water. Then you have clueless folks at the career center who can't really prepare you for these interviews. And finally, when you get to the interview, 3 out of your 5 interviewers will come in assuming that unless they played lacrosse against your school, you probably aren't as smart as the Princeton kid they just interviewed, and you will need to prove them embarassingly wrong in 30 minutes.

8/15/11
IlliniProgrammer:

Don't forget that #15 Finance UIUC is a target for a number of MMs/Boutiques (EG William Blair, RW Baird), so it's possible that helped with the recruiting process. But at most non-target schools, making it into an MM or a BB is as difficult as making it into GS or JPM from UIUC. No on-campus recruiting. Only a handful of alumns who are often trying to make sure the kids they do help will blow the Princeton candidates out of the water. Then you have clueless folks at the career center who can't really prepare you for these interviews. And finally, when you get to the interview, 3 out of your 5 interviewers will come in assuming that unless they played lacrosse against your school, you probably aren't as smart as the Princeton kid they just interviewed, and you will need to prove them embarassingly wrong in 30 minutes.

Agreed, our career center is completely useless when it comes to preparing students for IBD interviews. The only thing I can recommend is to find other students/friends that are interested in IBD and prepare with each other. Ask for help/insight and do mock interviews. And keep a positive attitude during those interviews. Be someone who they are interested in talking to.

8/15/11

I see it a little differently. I don't know about Illinois, but I go to a similar midwestern school, and all of the major MMs and 4-5 BBs come on campus and do OCR. From there, all you have to do is distinguish yourself from the pack of other students at your school. If you get past that round, GPA and school don't really matter. Of course, if you are at a place that doesn't get many firms doing OCR or doesn't have many alumni in good places, then it is a different story.

8/15/11

You're a rising sopmhore, stop stressing so much. You have time to bring your GPA up. For all the people telling you that you can't get into IBD, tell em to fuck off. You can do anything you truly want to do. You just have to be more dedicated than anyone around around. I'm talking about some supersayan shit here. If you have the right attitude/work ethic you WILL land in IBD.

Step your game up...

"Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a Champion" - Muhammad Ali

8/15/11

sorry uh, I'm actually a rising JUNIOR, got confused with the american system. Thanks for the help though.

  •  8/15/11

Entire average.

In the USA there is no distinction between graduating GPA and cumulative GPA.

8/15/11

so does this mean that if you messed up one of your years of undergrad, that there is basically no way to raise your GPA? for example my first year i slacked and got a 2.8 then the rest of the years i'm getting 3.7. no matter what my graduating GPA is only a 3.4 then? is there any other way to raise it?? man theres gotta be a way!!

8/15/11

U are F***ked theres no pity for people that slack. If ur a sophomore transfer out and reset ur GPA.
It's a dawg eat dawg world.

It's a dawg eat dawg world.

  •  8/15/11

Kind of a hard reply.

Try to get an interview and you can always explain why you got a bad GPA when you first started college and then point to the GPA trend since then.

8/15/11

I agree

8/15/11

I'm guessing there has to be another way. Grades aren't truly reflective of a person's ability and intellect. They just indicate how hard a person chose to work towards learning the material from the school books (that he/she will never be looking at again).

I know that majority of the people who slack off don't have the best shot at a foot in the door, but doesn't mean one should not pursue the career they don't want to.

8/15/11

It's not exactly ability and intellect they are looking for. It's how hard people try is what they are looking for. Obviously recruiters assume you can learn how to do something if you can get a 3.7+ GPA and you have enough intelligence to do well in courses. Theres no other way.

It's a dawg eat dawg world.

It's a dawg eat dawg world.

8/15/11

Well, in that case the last year or last two year's GPA would be considerd by them if a person has out performed in their last year. Good GPA in last year is a simple proof of the fact that the person can outperform and, thus, they have the ability to do the work.

8/15/11

Hey, whatever makes you feel better. I doubt when the HR or recruiter looks at 300 or whatever endless amount of resumes will consider the applicant with 2 semesters of excellent GPA, versus an applicant with ALL semesters of excellent GPA. This is considering that EC's and work experience equal. The problem is that work experience will probably not be equal. In most cases, the person with the higher GPA throughout all years found more internships at prestigious firms than the one that couldn't even break a 3.0.

It's a dawg eat dawg world.

It's a dawg eat dawg world.

8/15/11

You also have to consider the difficulty of the school, major, etc.

I'm sure Goldman values the 3.5 Math major at MIT more than the 3.7 government major at Penn State.

8/15/11

what about B-Schools? I know that GPA is a great consderation for admission but again, the same questions, will it be difficult given the poor performance for one year but excellent performance in all the others? [yes i know this should be in the B-School thread but since i already started a thread here :)]

8/15/11

Well GPA isn't quite as important for B-Schools as work experience (correct me if im wrong) and GMAT. I still think GPA will always be viewed as what it is throughout your four years. Atleast before you actually interview with them of course.
It's a dawg eat dawg world.

It's a dawg eat dawg world.

8/15/11

yes, the whole GPA issue can't be oversimplified. the 3.5 GPA is a good pyschological cutoff. but if you are at a non target school it better be a lot higher, and if you are at one of the top 5 schools in the nation where 50-70 kids go into ibanking a year, the scale and expectations definately slide down

8/15/11

How important is GPA for a lateral hire? Is it necessary?

8/15/11

It's still an small indicator of your intelligence and/or work ethic. But if you have been working in investment banking already, your deal experience, knowledge, and soft skills should put you on par with just about everyone else. That being said, all things being equal, GPA might be considered. Most people without a spectacular GPA that I know making a lateral move didn't even put it on their resume.

8/15/11

Thanks for your help!

8/15/11

Hey GameTheory,

You mentioned that you know people who didn't have a spectacular GPA still make it to I-Banking. I'm just wondering, what route did they take to go to I-Banking. Since having a bad GPA closes direct entry doors.

P.S. do you like Game Theory?

8/15/11

By "spectacular" GPA I meant, 3.7+, just to clarify. You still need, at a bare minimum, probably a 3.2 or 3.3 to get into IB (assuming you're from a target, have excellent extra currics, etc.). I've seen kids that have lower GPA's get in from good contacts.

When I was addressing this question it was for a "lateral hire" situation, meaning a 1st year analyst switching banks. So I'm assuming they had a decent GPA. Most times it was a middle market analyst moving to a bulge bracket or a Tier II bank moving to a Tier I.

As far as pathways into investment banking with a "bad" GPA (not sure what your definition of "bad" is, but mine is under 3.2), the best chance you have is getting as relevant experience as you can (transaction advisory services at a Big 4, maybe a small unknown boutique), finding a good contact at a bank and lateralling from there. Or the best bet is just to get good work experience, get into a top tier business school, and come in as an associate.

8/15/11

Even within Ivies there are differences. Princeton, for example, has grade capping and its A- is worth 3.7 as opposed to a 4 in most schools. Wonder how may HRs know this!

  •  8/15/11

In every school an A- is 3.67, B + is a 3.33 and so on, I didn't know ivies are special... wow aren't they lucky...

  •  8/15/11

what exactly does cutoff mean? Does it mean if you meet the cutoff gpa, you will get an interview or just your resume will get looked at for the possibility of an interview?

8/15/11

Means they will consider it for interview.
It's a dawg eat dawg world.

It's a dawg eat dawg world.

8/15/11

GPA's can always be mitigated, don't overlook synergies you have with firms for future progression. a lot of 4.0's are packing after maturing analyst roles.

8/15/11

Stop wasting space

8/15/11

i assume you have a 4.0...and out of work

8/15/11

rpm4:
yes, the whole GPA issue can't be oversimplified. the 3.5 GPA is a good pyschological cutoff. but if you are at a non target school it better be a lot higher, and if you are at one of the top 5 schools in the nation where 50-70 kids go into ibanking a year, the scale and expectations definately slide down

retard
8/15/11

Even within the same school, there are sometimes substantial differences for different major. The career services would make such data eaily available to prospective employers. Will they have time to look at them?

  •  8/15/11

My University has 7 Colleges and A- is an A- and is 3.67 in any major from electric engineering to women studies. But every employer knows that a 3.0 in electric engineering is not equal to a 3.0 in communications.

8/15/11

Not all schools have + - grading. So A-, A, A+ are all equal to 4.

8/15/11

A 3.4 will still likely get you many interviews. Make sure to make it a talking point that you had one bad year early in your college career and since have done much better.

8/15/11

Ok Thanks all for the great information, BUT what should i list on my resume or application because although my average GPA for the last 3 years is good but if i include my first crappy year my average drops. I need to first GET an interview before i can even explain why my cumulative sucks and so on. I understand that applications for BSchool will allow me to do so in my essays and such but how can i explain this to Ibanking firms. Should i put "last 3 year average was 3.7" plus "cumulative GPA is blah" ?

Thanks in advance for the advice.

8/15/11

Entire GPA. However play up grades in finance and accounting courses (or economics if you are liberal arts) if they are impressive.

8/15/11

i just needed to post to get a banana

dance monkey dance!!!!

8/15/11

As with anything it is safe to assume that GPA is one of the major parts of an application that any recruiter is going to examine. But as has been previously said, it does not always tell the whole story.

If you screwed up in your first year, oh well. If you have the determination and drive necessary to succeed in this business, you will get a job and you will succeed, regardless of your GPA.

Bill

8/15/11

Thanks for all the help! One more question, on all the top BSchools like LSB, INSEAD and Chicago, they always say that they look at ALL criteria; that a bad GPA or low gmat score does not eliminate your chances while a high GPA and High GMAT does not garantee entrance; they want to look at your "story" and "wow" factor.

Is this really true? or is it just a ploy to get more ppl to apply and they can make more money from application fees.

I always see their profiles of some art director who got in or some history major who got in but i'm just wondering if this is just a "everyone has a chance" scheme? and those are actually the only 2 ppl that made it in with while the other 800 people who got accepted are all Finance, Engineer SUPER high GPA GMAT lots of expereince guys??

sorry for hte long post and thanks in advance!!

8/15/11

Some liberal arts schools (Wesleyan, Claremont McKenna to name two) DO have finance and accounting classes (usually under economics).

"We are lawyers! We sue people! Occasionally, we get aggressive and garnish wages, but WE DO NOT ABDUCT!" -Boston Legal-

8/15/11

I am junior, finance major at University of Florida. My GPA is 3.82, what are my chances of landing a summer intenship in I Banking at a top bank. Thanks in advanced.

8/15/11

"thanks in advanced"

ah, UF. you dont deserve to get into IB. us ivy kids give up a lot to pursue this career. fuck a UF twat who doesnt know how to write getting in.

8/15/11

Danny T Bush:
"thanks in advanced"

ah, UF. you dont deserve to get into IB. us ivy kids give up a lot to pursue this career. fuck a UF twat who doesnt know how to write getting in.

this attitude is going to get you so far brah... you don't even know... you lift?

8/15/11

Damn Danny you are so frustrated, lol.Probably because you ain't getting any pussy at you Ivy league school, lol. Come by Florida I'll help you get laid fuck face.

8/15/11

Please, I have no problem with you Ivy and prospective bankers have feelings of superiority. However please at least have some respect for others. Just because you are on top of the world doesn't mean you should treat others as your serfs. go eat some fresh vegetables and cut back on testosterone.

8/15/11
chevalier:

Please, I have no problem with you Ivy and prospective bankers have feelings of superiority. However please at least have some respect for others. Just because you are on top of the world doesn't mean you should treat others as your serfs. go eat some fresh vegetables and cut back on testosterone.

i may up the test to 750mgs/week from 500. add some nandrolone phenylpropionate and im good.

8/15/11

careful, that would make your balls even smaller than they already are

8/15/11

um... i think ur wrong there buddy.

8/15/11

I worked at a mega-fund (BX/KKR/Carlyle)--we interviewed a 2.7 cumm GPA out of Princeton... why? Because the head of the group pushed the resume forward. My 2 cents: meet people, network (and realize the person you reached out to is smarter than you).. This concoction mixed with social acumen usually yields good things.

The WSO Advantage - Investment Banking

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation +

IB Interview Prep Pack

30,000+ sold & REAL questions.

Resume Help from Actual IB Pros

Land More IB Interviews.

Find Your Perfect IB Mentor

Realistic IB Mock Interviews.

8/15/11

At my school it was still a pretty much 3.5 even though it said 3.0.

8/15/11

May I ask what school?

8/15/11

If you're serious and not as stupid as you came off in that thread you started, then no, you are not fucked:

a) put your physics GPA on the resume if it is higher.

b) network with alumni, because otherwise you might not get an interview.

8/15/11

Your GPA is way way too low. You need to bring it up to 3.4-3.5 in order to give you a shot at getting interviews next year. If you have connections to the finance industry, try to get some kind of related internship this summer.

8/15/11

You need to raise it to at least a 3.2 or so. I am an engineering and econ double major with a 3.3, landed only 1 interview this year with a BB but luckily got the internship offer.

i think you can do it, too. Although you go to a really good school and studying a hard major, you still need to have a better grade than 3.0 and have to go to presentations and network as much as possible if you are serious about this.

8/15/11

YOUR GPA IS NOT TOO LOW. THE OTHER PEOPLE SAYING THAT DONT GO TO STANFORD/HARVARD/YALE/PRINCETON, PERIOD. JUST PUT YOUR IN-MAJOR GPA OR NO GPA AT ALL ON YOUR RESUME.

8/15/11

NYCHoops is dead wrong.

A 3.0 is probably bottom 15%

8/15/11

i guess i need to bring up my gpa

8/15/11

Isn't the avg GPA at Stanford like a 3.8 or something ridiculous? I heard that you can drop classes a day before the exam and not have anything show up on your record...

8/15/11

Okay, since you seem to be serious, a few pieces of advice. Take it for what it's worth:

1) Find out what the hell investment banking is. No, it is not the same as working as a stockbroker at Ameritrade or Scottrade.

2) Find out what an analyst does before deciding that the career track is "cool".

3) I have no idea if a 3.0 is high or low for your major at Stanford, but without knowing much else, I am pretty sure unless the interviewer knows how hard the curve is in your specific major, they will screen out a 3.0. Find others from Stanford who have gone into IB, and present your situation to them. Perhaps others on here who majored in a hard science can give you better advice on this part.

4) Improve your writing skills. If you screw up your grammar in a cover letter, or any other communication with people in IB, they will screen you out. When in doubt, have native english speakers proofread your writing.

8/15/11

that is the high school GPA it takes to get in here. (ridiculous so many valeditorians and stuff), but ave. GPA in physics i know is not high.

You can not drop any class about three weeks after the start of the quarter and you can only Withdraw from a class with a big fat W shown on your transcript.

8/15/11

then I back off my first comment.

It totally came across as trying to make fun of banking (which is also fine, but you won't get any help that way).

I'm sure Stanford should have a lot of people for you talk to in order to find out more about the industry and what it takes.

Also, the vault.com guides are invaluable for general industry understanding and more detailed information as you get farther along.

Hey, if it's not too late change to an easier major.

In any case, it's still early so you have time to bring your GPA up.

8/15/11

Definitely don't change your major. You won't be able to bring your GPA up to 3.5+ in less than a year, and then you won't get many interviews with a low 3ish GPA plus a liberal arts major like economics.

What's your physics GPA? I would put that and your cumulative on your resume - banks will assume your cumulative is below 3.0 if it's not on your resume. I'm not sure what grade inflation is like at Stanford, but here at UPenn a 3.0 in a hard science like physics is okay..probably not good enough to land banking interviews at most places but you might get a few interviews with the likes of BofA, Jefferies, etc. and a random BB interview or two if you have an otherwise good resume. I'd try and raise your GPA to a 3.2 or a 3.3 if possible...that'd help a lot, and I bet you'd get interviews with BBs given your tough double major. I know an engineering double major with a 3.2 at my school who got a bulge bracket banking job.

I think you have a good shot if you work hard now and raise the GPA a bit. I wouldn't listen to a bunch of the people on here..they go to state schools or crappy little liberal arts colleges that no one has heard of. A 3.0 at Stanford majoring in physics is likely much harder to get than a 3.6 at some random state or liberal arts school majoring in economics.

8/15/11
dav3100:

Definitely don't change your major. You won't be able to bring your GPA up to 3.5+ in less than a year, and then you won't get many interviews with a low 3ish GPA plus a liberal arts major like economics.

What's your physics GPA? I would put that and your cumulative on your resume - banks will assume your cumulative is below 3.0 if it's not on your resume. I'm not sure what grade inflation is like at Stanford, but here at UPenn a 3.0 in a hard science like physics is okay..probably not good enough to land banking interviews at most places but you might get a few interviews with the likes of BofA, Jefferies, etc. and a random BB interview or two if you have an otherwise good resume. I'd try and raise your GPA to a 3.2 or a 3.3 if possible...that'd help a lot, and I bet you'd get interviews with BBs given your tough double major. I know an engineering double major with a 3.2 at my school who got a bulge bracket banking job.

I think you have a good shot if you work hard now and raise the GPA a bit. I wouldn't listen to a bunch of the people on here..they go to state schools or crappy little liberal arts colleges that no one has heard of. A 3.0 at Stanford majoring in physics is likely much harder to get than a 3.6 at some random state or liberal arts school majoring in economics.

But dont undermine an Economics minor. So what happened to u chevalier??

If you ain't gettin money dat mean you done somethin wrong.

" If you have built castles in the
air , your work need not be lost;
that is where they should be .
Now put the foundations under
them." - Henry David Thoreau

8/15/11
dav3100:

probably not good enough to land banking interviews at most places but you might get a few interviews with the likes of BofA, Jefferies, etc. and a random BB interview or two if you have an otherwise good resume.

I like how you make it seem like Jefferies and BofA are easy to get interviews or offers for that matter. And not sure if its just your wording but BofA is a bulge.

OP, just put major GPA and network. Its possible, but its up to you. If you put the proper work in you can and will succeed. If you disregard people's suggestions and go apply online everywhere you will most likely fail.

Frank Sinatra - "Alcohol may be man's worst enemy, but the bible says love your enemy."

8/15/11

3.0 is quite a bit on the low side. The issue is though, that IB doesn't really require intelligence, just a profoundly good work ethic. As such, the ability to slog through with a good GPA (even in an easy major) is preferable to a low(ish) GPA in a hard major. I interned in a BB S&T division junior year and found an MIT sub 3.0 physics major in Interest Rate derivatives (the equivalent of that at MIT, since MIT offers grades out of 5).
I think that you might have more success in S&T than in IB with that.

Full Disclosure: Former Trader/HFT/3.6 Stanford CS.

8/15/11

First, unless you have a genuine interest in finance I don't suggest you go down this route. Do some research and read about what bankers do.

Second, your GPA is low but, there are ways around it considering you're from a target.

Third, this goes back to the first point. Besides your GPA, you also need applicable work exp and activities-which would demonstrate your passion for the field.

8/15/11

IvySachs:

First, unless you have a genuine interest in finance I don't suggest you go down this route. Do some research and read about what bankers do.

Second, your GPA is low but, there are ways around it considering you're from a target.

Third, this goes back to the first point. Besides your GPA, you also need applicable work exp and activities-which would demonstrate your passion for the field.

thread is 6 years old...

8/15/11

Oh my necrobump....wheres that attention to detail, guys?

8/15/11

How is this representative at all?

8/15/11

your sample size is too small.
all that really matters is u have a 3.3+ with internship experience

8/15/11
bmwhype:

your sample size is too small.
all that really matters is u have a 3.3+ with internship experience

3.3? Maybe if you're a physics major or something, but 3.3, even with internship experience, is not a safe bet if you want to get picked for an interview out of all the other smart kids who dropped resumes.

8/15/11
zala rules:
bmwhype:

your sample size is too small.
all that really matters is u have a 3.3+ with internship experience

3.3? Maybe if you're a physics major or something, but 3.3, even with internship experience, is not a safe bet if you want to get picked for an interview out of all the other smart kids who dropped resumes.

well i said that assuming that these are just operations analysts or whatever non-valuable positions that are not ibanking analyst positions. i know ppl from schools that are not even on the US News list who will be incoming analysts at BBs.

8/15/11
bmwhype:

well i said that assuming that these are just operations analysts or whatever non-valuable positions that are not ibanking analyst positions. i know ppl from schools that are not even on the US News list who will be incoming analysts at BBs.

Operations?? hahaha

8/15/11
zala rules:
bmwhype:

well i said that assuming that these are just operations analysts or whatever non-valuable positions that are not ibanking analyst positions. i know ppl from schools that are not even on the US News list who will be incoming analysts at BBs.

Operations?? hahaha

yes. not all positions at BB are ibanking/PE

8/15/11

This is interesting. The only problem is that you mentioned "what GPA you NEED," not what GPA most of the kids who get through have. It's hard to say who on that list got in through connections and who just dropped a resume and got selected for interviews.

8/15/11

Assuming you are from a target.

8/15/11

The moral of the story here is that GPA needs to be solid, but beyond a certain point - there is an X factor that leads to an offer.

PLEASE DONT CHANGE EXCEL SHORTCUTS!!!

8/15/11

Miss Ind, all your schools are targets except for Maryland, Tufts, UIUC and Rutgers.

Tufts students are generally quite bright. Perhaps not at the Ivy league level, but they definitely are as smart as just about all non-Ivy target schools.

You should do a gpa list of absolute non-target schools. Schools ranked in the 50s-70s in U.S. News.

Let's check the gpas for those schools and compare them to the gpas for the targets.

8/15/11

Rule of thumb for GPAs should prob be the same as the cover letter:

A good cover won't guarantee an interview, a bad one will ding you.

8/15/11

Note the high GPAs from HYP. A 3.4 from H is harder to get than a 4.0 from a state university, so the competition from the top schools is actually much stiffer than from a "target" but "non-elite" school.

8/15/11
idkoop:

Note the high GPAs from HYP. A 3.4 from H is harder to get than a 4.0 from a state university, so the competition from the top schools is actually much stiffer than from a "target" but "non-elite" school.

hahahaha really??? I have several friends that attend harvard, and they all claim they give out A's like candy. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the people there aren't smart because they obviously are, but getting a great GPA there is def easier than it is at some non-targets.

8/15/11

considering the avg SAT (old scale) at HYPS is in the low 1500s, id roughly associate a 3.4 at HYPS (median gpa) with such a gpa. Avg. SAT at NYU or CMU is like, what, a 1300, and at a state u. like UCLA or Texas, a 1200?. Harvard has a considerably smarter student body, and I'd consider a 3.0 from there much better than a 4.0 from a state Univ where most students are from the 25th-75th percentile of that state's public high schools, i.e. idiots.

8/15/11
idkoop:

Note the high GPAs from HYP. A 3.4 from H is harder to get than a 4.0 from a state university, so the competition from the top schools is actually much stiffer than from a "target" but "non-elite" school.

I'm gonna call bullshit on that. I know someone who went to an Ivy that told me you have to try and not get an A. Sure, it may be harder to get a 3.4 at the HYPs of the world, but only compared to community colleges and some smaller state schools.

8/15/11

if ur gonna be anecdotal and argue from one data point, then all the guys from my HS that went to state u. with their 1200s are kicking it up there with near 4.0s in prestigious majors like nutrition and "international finance" and can't get into dental school (b/c of low DATs) or are working at a small biz, while the guys that went to Ivy schools and the like with 1500s have much lower gpa's (but still get into top med schools with top MCAT scores and ibanks with majors like history and applied math).

8/15/11

What's the point? You have a small sample size from one resume book.

University of Chicago is not represented? I find that hard to believe. People are getting hung up on numbers.

8/15/11

I wouldn't expect U Chicago to be represented, since the sample was of analysts.

It is a small sample, but it think it does a pretty decent job showing the range of GPA's you need.

3.3+ is not "all you need." If you have a 3.3 you better have something else on your resume that really stands out.

8/15/11

And where would you expect Chicago to be represented?

8/15/11

You're being anecdotal as well. You can't just throw some generality out there that classes are harder at HYP and therefore its harder to get a higher GPA. Unless you've seen the curricula for classes of comparable majors between HYP and the state schools you are thinking of, then you can't make such a comparison. That's no different than my "one data point." Besides, you make it sound like only the smartest people get in to HYP. Money has just as much to do with it as academics. I'm not saying that ALL state schools are superior or even equal to HYP, I just take offense that you seem to think that any and all state schools are inferior.

8/15/11

I already gave you the comparison between the top Ivies, where the SAT average is >>> than the SAT avg of a state u. Sure, the median GPA may be slightly higher (3.4 at HYP), but that's compensation for the tougher student body. You can't give a 1500-quality student flat B's just to make a curve look the same as a state u. I'd actually argue its not high enough to compensate for the smarter student body. That higher intelligence is reflected in graduate tests -> the avg MCAT and LSAT at HYP is ~34 and ~166, respectively, much higher than the mean at ANY state u.

to conclude; all state schools are inferior to HYP and the equiv. the bottom 10% at HYP are still >>> than the top 10% at a state u. the state u's are clearly inferior, and it is much easier for an intelligent person to stand out there. whether that "standing-out" translates into admissions into a top med or law program, or ibank, is debatable, BC these places are clearly familiar with the quality of these schools and what a GPA really means from HYP versus state u.

also, $$$ doesn't mean shit. its all meritocratic now and the admissions culture frowns upon what you're thinking of., in fact, the poorer students at HYP in my experience are often the dumber ones, b/c they get the affirmative action preference or athletic team boosts. the kids whose parents are smart as hell and became ibank MDs or top surgeons or lawyers or professors, tend not to fall far from the tree.

8/15/11

That is a fact. Do not try to deny it. The dumbest kid at HYP has a well above average SAT score at any state school. There is seriously no comparison, and I would argue that I'm actually being lenient - probably more like 2.5 HYP = 4.0 state school.

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:

That is a fact. Do not try to deny it. The dumbest kid at HYP has a well above average SAT score at any state school. There is seriously no comparison, and I would argue that I'm actually being lenient - probably more like 2.5 HYP = 4.0 state school.

George Bush

8/15/11

I attend one of HYP. One of my friends here is on the football team and clearly not here for academics. He actually failed out for a semester because he got two F's. He took classes over the summer at UNC, a top-notch state school, and had a 4.0. State schools are a joke, cause this kid is seriously probably the dumbest kid at my school.

8/15/11

Look, I just know that I'm an engineering major at a public engineering school and I don't have the kind of GPA that seems to be fairly easy to attain at schools like HYP. Just look around on this board. Everyone throws around their 3.7s and 3.8s like its nothing. You can't sit there and tell me that its easier for me to get a 4.0 at my school than someone doing some bullshit major at HYP. Like I said before, there are obviously state schools that are much easier than HYP. However, it is unfair to lump every public school into the same basket.

8/15/11

u ain't comparing apples to oranges man. just b/c ur an engineer and u might be able to do some multivar and run some matlab doesn't mean you can write power essays for a hist or english class, or that you can crank through a ochem pset. ur engineering gpa can't be compared to a humanities gpa at HYP, but it can be compared to a engineering GPA at MIT. make your own conclusions from that.

this is not to say humanities GPAs at ivies aren't inflated; they probly are relative to social sci and nat. sci GPAs.

8/15/11

Besides, you make it sound like only the smartest people get in to HYP. Money has just as much to do with it as academics.

This is a hilarious statement considering the following fact:

"...parents in families with incomes of less than $60,000 will no longer be expected to contribute any money to the cost of attending Harvard for their children, including room and board. Families with incomes in the $60,000 to $80,000 range contribute an amount of only a few thousand dollars a year."

Source: Wikipedia

8/15/11

yes it helps to have a really high gpa, i am proof that it's not necessary to land a solid gig...

me: finance major w/ 3.2 gpa from target public (think UMich, UVA, Berkeley)

Lehman intern and will return this summer for fulltime.

I took advantage of what my university had to offer... i.e. women and booze

granted i got my shit done, i still was able to enjoy the only four years i will be able to slack off

8/15/11

MIT? All their classes are pass/fail their freshman year. Pussies.

Anyways, I know that the majority of state schools are not that good. I don't respect kids from places like UGA. But to say that "all state schools are inferior to HYP and the equiv. the bottom 10% at HYP are still >>> than the top 10% at a state u." is bullshit and its a generality. The top 10% at Georgia Tech easily have SATs that are just as good as any Ivy Leaguer. I just don't agree with the disrespect for a school simply because it receives funding from a state government. And again, since none of you seem to be able to read what I've been saying, I have no doubt that MANY, if not the MAJORITY of state schools are full of dumbfuck kids who still get 4.0s. I just resent the fact that my school is being lumped into that category when it is clearly not the case.

8/15/11

You're an idiot. You couldn't get into a top school and you know it. You'd probably have about a 2.0 at MIT.

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:

You're an idiot. You couldn't get into a top school and you know it. You'd probably have about a 2.0 at MIT.

LOL so true

8/15/11

"the bottom 10% at HYP are still >>> than the top 10% at a state u."

this is so far off it's laughable. the top 10% at some state schools are right on par with the top ivy students.

8/15/11
bigdirs:

"the bottom 10% at HYP are still >>> than the top 10% at a state u."

this is so far off it's laughable. the top 10% at some state schools are right on par with the top ivy students.

exactly

8/15/11

A lot of HYP people are nothing more than prestige whore who think that they are better than everyone else. The schools are great but there are a lot of other schools that graduate top notch candidates for these positions.

Maybe the GPA criteria, perceived or otherwise, are set so high to allow for the ease in attaining good grades at HYP. Maybe the person with a 3.3 will not get hired from HYP because of adjustments for grade inflation.

I suspect some of the same HYP people subscribe to the theory of Goldman or Bust, discounting the fact that there are many fine opportunities at other IB's.

8/15/11

corpfin is monkey work d00d, essentially glorified accounting with the macros pre-manufactured. there are a lot of people capable of doing the work. now quant s/t, and quant asset management are diff stories, and the ivies+MIT, etc, do graduate the people best prepared for those jobs. For evidence, refer to Goldman asset management. Their research and trading team for their flagship Global Alpha fund is entirely HYPWS (one guy from BYU, but he's a Mormon so that's good cause). this team is considered the elite -all the top HFs hire out of it, its led by Bob Litterman, etc. They stopped bothering to even hire from other schools b/c the people they intervewed just weren't as competent. Same goes for most of the elite HFs doing exotics and quant work. the difference in education is clear: even for a basic finance class, Harvard's basic "finance" course teaches fixed income, derivatives, portfolio theory, etc, in a single semester. It's intense, and does it at at a deep level (i.e. from state preference theory, doesn't waste time teaching bond math and assumes u know or pick it up, etc). State univ., and hell, even Wharton, splits that shit up into several classes and teaches the applied stuff. I would take someone who scored in the bottom of that class over the top person in some bs finance course at state u, i.e. this guy over the summer who was doing a thesis on hedge fund returns and asked me if he should consider "risk". :-D

hence, bottom 10% at HYP >>>>> top 10% at any state u. who knows, maybe its different in bizzaro world.

now to return to corpfin, the reason banks look mainly to ivies for people is b/c these people can not only do the process work, they can probably also do it faster and more efficiently, and are also the "right people" for the job. if you don't know what that means, then im sorry, you probly don't belong in high finance.

i don't know what u mean by GS or bust, plenty of ivy people at all the banks.

8/15/11

ivies are grade inflated, law schools have an index for gpa as a means of equalizing them accross schools, i know that ivies are kept at an almost constant, where as ucla gpas are increased

  • justanotherbanker
  •  8/15/11

... nor does it change anything for anyone. To all the people who are so convinced that their 3.XX GPA at wherever is going to work for them -- GREAT -- if you're convinced, you don't need to convince everyone else on this board.

In the end, if you believe that your resume (including GPA) proves beyond a reasonable doubt that you are relatively intelligent and capable of busting your ass and making sacrifices to perform... then what is the point of bickering over the merits of the HYPS bottom 10% vs. the state school top 10%? These arguments are adding zero value to Anyone's career search.

Every time a quality poster like Mis Ind puts up useful data, 7 out of 10 responses are full of useless sh*t-slinging.

  • justanotherbanker
  •  8/15/11

idkoop, that was a good post. Especially about doing work quickly and efficiently.

8/15/11

OK, this is from direct experience. I attend MIT. In high school I took calculus, differential equations, problems & stats and physics I & II at a prominent engineering university. The above math courses were all honors. Seriously, my attendance rate was less than 35%, and I was at the top of my math classes getting A's.

At MIT, I decided to take all the math classes over in order to have a high GPA. I STRUGGLED to get "B's", and studied harder than I ever have. MIT's material started where the other university's math courses ended. My SAT I Math is an 800, as is my SAT IIBC.

I had a course last semester (I am an undergrad) that two Harvard MBA students were taking. (MIT and Harvard have reciprocal agreements for students to take classes.) Both Harvard MBA's dropped the course because right before midterm, they had C's going. Granted, the course was more quanitative than qualitative; however, no one, who does not attend MIT, has an idea of what it takes to get an A in a math or science course at the 'tute.

8/15/11

Confirms what a joke "prominent state-school engineering universities" are.

8/15/11

MIT is intense. I'd hire a 2.8 there over a 3.8 in the same major at a "prominent state-school engineering university" unless it was berkeley.

8/15/11

The only reason I might not have a 2.0 at MIT is because I hate engineering. If I could start college over, I would not have done it, but I didnt figure that out until about 2 years in, but such is life. And fuck "prominent state-school engineering" being a joke. GT is ranked higher than most privates, so suck it. Thats exactly what I'm talking about. People that go to privates such as HYP think they are God's gift to this earth. I guarantee you that if more people from Georgia Tech actually wanted to go into finance, we could easily become a target school. The problem is that we are so focused on engineering and technology, that I-Banks only come here for our CS people. Come take a semester at GT. None of you, except maybe fellow engineers could hack it. All of you finance and history majors can go to hell. Those are not hard majors, no matter what you say. MIT may be intense, but it certainly isnt in the first year, as it is pass/fail. Your first year at GT is when you take all the weed out classes. Its obvious that my points are falling on deaf ears though, so why even try. Ivy leaguers all think they were born with a better pot to piss in, and that's something that will apparently never change.

8/15/11

The majority of the people I have met from MIT are quite humble. They definitely respect GT as a school.

8/15/11

Thank you very much jtmarlin. I just get sick of private school types downplaying the rigor of the couresload at GT simply because it is a public school. I of course still think MIT is a great school, but I just don't like the idea of a public school such as GT being discounted as easy, when its obviously not.

8/15/11

I went to a very respectable academic school. For reference, my sophomore year roommate got into Harvard and the other one got into MIT. Kids here have gotten into just about any good school you can think of (HYPS, any Ivy). I myself got into UCB, UCLA, Dartmouth and Princeton.

Every summer we used to take courses at our local state institution. Being from California I took courses at UCB and got a 4.0 (while getting wasted and high every night). My cumulative GPA at my (private) full-time school was a 3.4 while busting my ass and working ridiculous hours every week with ECs, etc.

My point is this: all the state school kids who think they are hot shit b/c they got a 4.0 are kidding themselves. Financial aid + student loans are meritocratic enough nowadays where anyone who is good enough to go to HYPS is going to go there. Everyone I know from home who went to UCB, didn't get into Stanford or any Ivies. If you think going to Georgia Tech and getting a 4.0 makes you a smart guy, think again. IBs and consulting firms are looking for straight intelligence which is going to come through regardless of your GPA.

The "private school types" aren't some rich snobby pricks anymore, those days are long gone. The private school types now are the brightest and the best. Being from a household which earned < 50k a year and being in a highly desired position, I will unabashedly say that the best and brightest will still go to the name-brands (i.e. the Ivies and the equivalent). If you state kids want to argue that the top 10% of your school is equal... fuck that, you would've gotten into HYPS/Ivy if you were good enough.

8/15/11

Being from a household which earned less than 50k a year and being in a highly desired position, I will unabashedly say that the best and brightest will still go to the name-brands (i.e. the Ivies and the equivalent). If you state kids want to argue that the top 10% of your school is equal... fuck that, you would've gotten into HYPS/Ivy if you were good enough.

8/15/11

-

8/15/11

It has nothing to do with being good enough though. My family isn't rich, and I had the opportunity to take advantage or a state-sponsored scholarship (HOPE) that pays for all my tuition as long as I maintain a 3.0. Therefore, it would not make much sense for me to go private or out of state when I could still get a great education for only the cost of room, board, and books. Where I'm at now, I do wish I had even considered the expensive privates and Ivy League schools. However, at the time, I was convinced I wanted to do engineering. You people are talking like I applied to HYP etc. and didnt get in. That was definitely not the case. All I know is that GT is harder than you seem to think it is. Really, I'm sure any engineering program is. But Ivy League schools are not the end-all for higher education. GT is ranked 6th overall for engineering schools and 8th as a public. To me, that is not that shabby. For you privates on your high horses, such rankings may not mean much. I really don't even know why I'm still arguing with all of you. Its obvious that none of you have one iota of respect for a state school, no matter what kind of overall prestige it carries.

8/15/11
fraser24gt:

It has nothing to do with being good enough though. My family isn't rich, and I had the opportunity to take advantage or a state-sponsored scholarship (HOPE) that pays for all my tuition as long as I maintain a 3.0. Therefore, it would not make much sense for me to go private or out of state when I could still get a great education for only the cost of room, board, and books. Where I'm at now, I do wish I had even considered the expensive privates and Ivy League schools. However, at the time, I was convinced I wanted to do engineering. You people are talking like I applied to HYP etc. and didnt get in. That was definitely not the case. All I know is that GT is harder than you seem to think it is. Really, I'm sure any engineering program is. But Ivy League schools are not the end-all for higher education. GT is ranked 6th overall for engineering schools and 8th as a public. To me, that is not that shabby. For you privates on your high horses, such rankings may not mean much. I really don't even know why I'm still arguing with all of you. Its obvious that none of you have one iota of respect for a state school, no matter what kind of overall prestige it carries.

No state school carries any amount of prestige - let's get that thought out of the way right now. And as was said previously dude, financial aid these days makes it such that money is not an issue at HYP etc. The best students go there regardless of financial status. In other words, you would never get in. The bottom 5% at HYP would have a 4.0 at pretty much any state school in the country. And shut up about your fucking engineering. Noone made you major in it, so stop fucking complaining to everyone. Do your shit and stop being such a pussy.

8/15/11

i honestly feel sorry for all the douchebags who swear a 3.6+ is the only way to get into ibanking.

yes, there is no doubt that having a 3.6+ is a good edge, but know that gpa is only one factor contributing to whether or not you are selected for interviews and positions.

honestly, i could easily have obtained a 3.7 gpa, but i chose to have fun, socialize, drink, meet girls, fuck, and the like.

in all honesty, i will probably be the one who, in the face of every 3.8+ HYP, will succeed not only because i know how the real world works, but because i can go out with clients, drinks, and, yes, get laid.

so, to put this utterly idiotic myth into extinction. NO, you do not have to have a 3.6 to get to a solid bank. work hard, get your shit done, meet the right people, study what needs to be learned and LIVE... get some goddamn real world experience that you can bring to a bank and actually take with you.

we are all smart, ambitious, motivated, etc... but at the end of the day who will succeed? the smart, ambitious kid who jacks off to a 3.6 and never had time to get laid, or the smart, ambitious kid who took the time to learn from life and enjoy its experiences while taking in the skills that will eventually prove beneficial.

i stress this again. WE ARE ALL INTELLIGENT. yet if you were a client, would you rather get drunk with a fucking nerd who knows his shit, or would you rather get drunk with a chill kid who also knows his shit?

at the end of the day, i would rather be the cool kid who ends up in the same spot.

granted, i am drunk and its 5:22 am... yet i still believe my point is well worth stressing

8/15/11
trueballer:

i honestly feel sorry for all the douchebags who swear a 3.6+ is the only way to get into ibanking.

yes, there is no doubt that having a 3.6+ is a good edge, but know that gpa is only one factor contributing to whether or not you are selected for interviews and positions.

honestly, i could easily have obtained a 3.7 gpa, but i chose to have fun, socialize, drink, meet girls, fuck, and the like.

in all honesty, i will probably be the one who, in the face of every 3.8+ HYP, will succeed not only because i know how the real world works, but because i can go out with clients, drinks, and, yes, get laid.

so, to put this utterly idiotic myth into extinction. NO, you do not have to have a 3.6 to get to a solid bank. work hard, get your shit done, meet the right people, study what needs to be learned and LIVE... get some goddamn real world experience that you can bring to a bank and actually take with you.

we are all smart, ambitious, motivated, etc... but at the end of the day who will succeed? the smart, ambitious kid who jacks off to a 3.6 and never had time to get laid, or the smart, ambitious kid who took the time to learn from life and enjoy its experiences while taking in the skills that will eventually prove beneficial.

i stress this again. WE ARE ALL INTELLIGENT. yet if you were a client, would you rather get drunk with a fucking nerd who knows his shit, or would you rather get drunk with a chill kid who also knows his shit?

at the end of the day, i would rather be the cool kid who ends up in the same spot.

granted, i am drunk and its 5:22 am... yet i still believe my point is well worth stressing

Are you fucking kidding? You think a client gives a shit how cool you think you are? You're some punk kid to him, a year out of college. Get a grip dude.

No wonder we have to kill off so many of you losers in recruiting.

8/15/11
trueballer:

i honestly feel sorry for all the douchebags who swear a 3.6+ is the only way to get into ibanking.

yes, there is no doubt that having a 3.6+ is a good edge, but know that gpa is only one factor contributing to whether or not you are selected for interviews and positions.

honestly, i could easily have obtained a 3.7 gpa, but i chose to have fun, socialize, drink, meet girls, fuck, and the like.

in all honesty, i will probably be the one who, in the face of every 3.8+ HYP, will succeed not only because i know how the real world works, but because i can go out with clients, drinks, and, yes, get laid.

so, to put this utterly idiotic myth into extinction. NO, you do not have to have a 3.6 to get to a solid bank. work hard, get your shit done, meet the right people, study what needs to be learned and LIVE... get some goddamn real world experience that you can bring to a bank and actually take with you.

we are all smart, ambitious, motivated, etc... but at the end of the day who will succeed? the smart, ambitious kid who jacks off to a 3.6 and never had time to get laid, or the smart, ambitious kid who took the time to learn from life and enjoy its experiences while taking in the skills that will eventually prove beneficial.

i stress this again. WE ARE ALL INTELLIGENT. yet if you were a client, would you rather get drunk with a fucking nerd who knows his shit, or would you rather get drunk with a chill kid who also knows his shit?

at the end of the day, i would rather be the cool kid who ends up in the same spot.

granted, i am drunk and its 5:22 am... yet i still believe my point is well worth stressing

Gee I have a 3.7+ at a top 5 school, and I get wasted probably about three nights a week and fuck a chick at least once a week. You ever think maybe the truly successful people are those that can be drunk all the time and still pull of a 3.7 at a top school? You're a giant douche who clearly isnt that smart if you cant get a 3.6 at whatever crappy second-tier school you go to. The fact that you get drunk does not make you cool either - what are we in , like fucking 10th grade? Grow up.

8/15/11
Mis Ind:

Harvard: 3.4
Stern: 3.4
Dartmouth: 3.2

How'd these guys slip through? Must be kids of MDs and Vice Chairmen.

8/15/11
<a href=http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/finance-dictionary/... rel=nofollow>BB</a>.MnA.Analyst:
Mis Ind:

Harvard: 3.4
Stern: 3.4
Dartmouth: 3.2

How'd these guys slip through? Must be kids of MDs and Vice Chairmen.

even a bigger tool..

8/15/11

Just a personal opinion: I set aside every resume that crosses my desk from Georgia Tech with a 3.5 or higher. I call the guy and make sure he's not a total dweeb, which he rarely is. Then I do everything in my power to get him in for an interview. Three of my most intelligent and capable male friends ruined their academic careers by attempting GT. I'm not aware of any tech school in the country with such brutal wash-out courses. And, as has already been pointed out, there are many reasons for attending GT rather than an Ivy. Hell, I could have much more easily and cheaply attended Harvard than the school I ended up going to, because Harvard has a specific interest in kids with my quals. But I had some unfinished business at home that trumped even school.

For me, personally (not as a representative of Wall Street in general) Georgia Tech 3.5 = Harvard 3.7. GT is a harsh, competitive, real-world school that turns out competent, hungry candidates with no sense of entitlement. That's the guy I want to be working next to at 3 AM.

8/15/11

I think the sense of entitlement is a key point, here. This is just anecdotal evidence, but it seems like more HYP types (excluding MIT/CalTech) don't take work seriously enough because they believe it's their right to be there.

I can take working for assholes, but I can't stand working WITH assholes.

Mis Ind:

For me, personally (not as a representative of Wall Street in general) Georgia Tech 3.5 = Harvard 3.7. GT is a harsh, competitive, real-world school that turns out competent, hungry candidates with no sense of entitlement. That's the guy I want to be working next to at 3 AM.

8/15/11
Mis Ind:

For me, personally (not as a representative of Wall Street in general) Georgia Tech 3.5 = Harvard 3.7. GT is a harsh, competitive, real-world school that turns out competent, hungry candidates with no sense of entitlement. That's the guy I want to be working next to at 3 AM.

At 3 am, I want to be working next to the girl who is posting on ibankingoasis.com instead of actually working.

8/15/11
Mis Ind:

Just a personal opinion: I set aside every resume that crosses my desk from Georgia Tech with a 3.5 or higher. I call the guy and make sure he's not a total dweeb, which he rarely is. Then I do everything in my power to get him in for an interview. Three of my most intelligent and capable male friends ruined their academic careers by attempting GT. I'm not aware of any tech school in the country with such brutal wash-out courses. And, as has already been pointed out, there are many reasons for attending GT rather than an Ivy. Hell, I could have much more easily and cheaply attended Harvard than the school I ended up going to, because Harvard has a specific interest in kids with my quals. But I had some unfinished business at home that trumped even school.

For me, personally (not as a representative of Wall Street in general) Georgia Tech 3.5 = Harvard 3.7. GT is a harsh, competitive, real-world school that turns out competent, hungry candidates with no sense of entitlement. That's the guy I want to be working next to at 3 AM.

ms ind, your previous posts claimed you need a 3.8+ to get into banking. please dont give this crap about how you look at 3.5 from GT.

8/15/11

Hahha worst comment ever. Does not surprise me that someone who went to a shitty school herself would defend another shitty school. 3.0 HYP engineering = 4.0 Georgia Tech engineering. There's not even a comparison.

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:

Hahha worst comment ever. Does not surprise me that someone who went to a shitty school herself would defend another shitty school. 3.0 HYP engineering = 4.0 Georgia Tech engineering. There's not even a comparison.

Are you fucking kidding me? Nobody goes to Harvard/Yale/Princeton to do engineering. The guys I knew were either Indian and Chinese kids getting 4.0s and kicking the shit out of dumb American kids getting 2.5s and wondering what the fuck happened.

All the smart US engineering kids went to real engineering schools. The 3.0 kids in engineering at at Yale were (i) outclassed and (ii) fucking morons.

8/15/11

One of my friends had a full-ride to MIT and his next choices were CalTech and GT.

8/15/11

Say what you like, my friend -- it's the people who are digging through resumes and bringing in candidates that will make the call. Some of them will prefer HYPS graduates, and some -- like me -- will prefer seasoned graduates from engineering schools.

8/15/11

Just take a look at the top 5 PHD programs for both math and physics. From US News Reports 2007:

Mathematics
1. MIT
2. Tie: Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, Berkeley

Physics
1. Tie: MIT, Stanford
3. Cal Tech
4. Tie: Harvard, Princeton, Berkeley

I don't see a whole lot of state schools on there. Fact is, the best students want to learn from the best professors, and the best professors are at Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT etc. Certainly not Georgia Tech. You guys have Calvin Johnson - be happy he'll be a top 5 draft pick and stop trying to claim you're a decent school.

8/15/11

You're a first year analyst. You are not making the final call on any hiring decision.

8/15/11

There are gonna be a bunch of elitist people who look down on your degree. Whether or not you could've gotten into HYP isn't really the point - the point is that people will see Georgia Tech and assume you fucked around in high school and couldn't go to a decent school. I know I would. Better get used to it now.

8/15/11

Yes, it is Wall Street. Pretty soon, you won't be judged on where you went to school, but on your P&L. Get used to that.

8/15/11

Midwest, of course I don't make final calls. No single person ever does. What I do is help determine who gets considered and who doesn't. In our little committee, one person's voice often determines whether someone gets cut or brought up for an interview. And once you're actually in an interview, it's even ground between targets and non-targets. At least here.

8/15/11

I run my own PE firm in twenty years, it's gonna consist of entirely HYP, Stanford, and Wharton. Fuck, the secretary's are gonna have to have at least an Ivy degree. Everyone else need not apply.

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:

I run my own PE firm in twenty years, it's gonna consist of entirely HYP, Stanford, and Wharton. Fuck, the secretary's are gonna have to have at least an Ivy degree. Everyone else need not apply.

Will the secretary's have good English?

8/15/11
advdvnvp:
midwestisthebest:

I run my own PE firm in twenty years, it's gonna consist of entirely HYP, Stanford, and Wharton. Fuck, the secretary's are gonna have to have at least an Ivy degree. Everyone else need not apply.

Will the secretary's have good English?

Don't really care, as long as they give good head. It's a message board, noone's trying to be grammatically correct.

8/15/11

Mis Ind, just stop replying. It's obvious he's a troll--no one could be this moronic.

8/15/11

Eh. He's also -- again, like Student22 -- a concentrated caricature of many of the most shallow and limited views of some people on this board. Interesting, isn't it, how rational viewpoints taken to the furthest possible extreme become highly irrational? Something to think about.

It's also a good illustration of elitism and entitlement -- which I believe may be the theme of this particular thread.

I highly doubt Wall Street will let us forget that it is, first and foremost, a meritocracy. Merit, no matter where it comes from, is rewarded. Indolence, no matter how exalted, is passed over.

8/15/11
Mis Ind:

I highly doubt Wall Street will let us forget that it is, first and foremost, a meritocracy. Merit, no matter where it comes from, is rewarded. Indolence, no matter how exalted, is passed over.

AHAHAHAHA

8/15/11
Mis Ind:

I highly doubt Wall Street will let us forget that it is, first and foremost, a meritocracy. Merit, no matter where it comes from, is rewarded. Indolence, no matter how exalted, is passed over.

Finally you've said something rational Mis Ind. Some non-targets will manage to get into a BB as analysts because they have 4.0s competing against incestuous hicks (Big Ten schools) or racist hate-mongers (SEC schools). These non-targets w/4.0s are generally the people who tried hard in high school, but just weren't that bright and could only get B's when they were competing with kids who went to HYP etc. All the HYP kids get siphoned off and so when these not-very-bright but hard-working kids go to Georgia Tech, they can easily get a 4.0. Once they get into a bank though, they're competing with the same HYP kids who dominating them in high school, and there's no reason to expect that to change. That's why you see a bunch of non-targets in entry level positions, but higher-up finance positions are completely dominated by the Ivies and Stanfords of the world. The cream always rises to the top, and your inflated non-target GPAs mean nothing inside a bank. I mean seriously, is there one famous/successful Georgia Tech alum in finance?

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:

I mean seriously, is there one famous/successful Georgia Tech alum in finance?

How about Roe Stamps, one of the founders of Summit Partners? Is that good enough? Maybe Brook Byers of Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers is more "successful"? Maybe former CEO of American Express Jim Robinson of "Barbarians at the Gate" fame. Don't act like no one has gone on from Tech to be successful in finance. We've also had alums become C-level execs of companies like Wal-Mart, AT&T, Earthlink, etc.

8/15/11
fraser24gt:
midwestisthebest:

I mean seriously, is there one famous/successful Georgia Tech alum in finance?

How about Roe Stamps, one of the founders of Summit Partners? Is that good enough? Maybe Brook Byers of Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers is more "successful"? Maybe former CEO of American Express Jim Robinson of "Barbarians at the Gate" fame. Don't act like no one has gone on from Tech to be successful in finance. We've also had alums become C-level execs of companies like Wal-Mart, AT&T, Earthlink, etc.

Wow that's quite an impressive list (sarcasm). Should we perhaps list successful alums from Harvard or Princeton? Probably wouldn't be able to name every finance exec from those two schools in an hour.

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:
fraser24gt:
midwestisthebest:

I mean seriously, is there one famous/successful Georgia Tech alum in finance?

How about Roe Stamps, one of the founders of Summit Partners? Is that good enough? Maybe Brook Byers of Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers is more "successful"? Maybe former CEO of American Express Jim Robinson of "Barbarians at the Gate" fame. Don't act like no one has gone on from Tech to be successful in finance. We've also had alums become C-level execs of companies like Wal-Mart, AT&T, Earthlink, etc.

Wow that's quite an impressive list (sarcasm). Should we perhaps list successful alums from Harvard or Princeton? Probably wouldn't be able to name every finance exec from those two schools in an hour.

I figured you would say something like that. But according to you, GT is just a lowly state school that doesn't produce anyone capable of competing with people of HYP caliber. So how is it that a school that doesn't specialize in business and is not known for business is able to produce a list at all? Well, I can't waste my time trying to convince your sorry ass anymore because I actually have studying to do, unlike wherever you go to school (which you never did have the balls to disclose). Peace.

8/15/11

For all the people who are saying that they could have gone to HYPS/MIT/etc. but stayed in-state for personal or financial reasons (I still think the financial one is bogus), yes YOU may have been smart enough to have gone there, but by and large your state school is going to be full of the HYPS rejects. To argue otherwise is clearly delusional. I don't think anyone can deny that the kids at HYPS on average are WAY above the average product of any state school other than UCB and apparently GT.

Even "elite" public schools like Michigan have a whole horde of mediocre kids with 1250 SATs who graduated in the top 10% of their HS class. If you take someone with average intelligence and a shitload of dogged determination in HS work they will get into whatever state school they are applying to. Again, there is obviously a population of smart, talented kids at these places and I am sure that they will do well in whatever they do but my personal opinion is that HYPS&co. is still head and shoulders above.

For clarification, the reason I think the financial reason is bogus nowadays is because any elite private school is need-blind and even if you have to take out student-loans, it is totally worth it. You only do your undergrad once and the opportunities you get from going to a school like Harvard more than make up for any short-term financial problems.

8/15/11

Well, I'm glad to see that the likes of jtmarlin, Mis Ind, and BBMnA kind of understand the points I'm trying to get across here. Also, I agree with you jt about midwest. There is no point in continuing with him.

Well, I don't think the financial reason is bogus boozer. I will come out of GT debt free with a degree that will give me the possibility to do many things. Besides, I figure if the shit hits the fan, and something happens to me like happened at Citi, I can always just switch over to something in the engineering field. Given, GT is not a straight shot into IB like HYP might be, but to me its a fairly decent trade off. I do agree with you though that there are people with average intelligence that can just work their ass off and do as well as someone who is smarter than them. But why would that necessarily be a fault? Sure, you want intelligent people working for/with you, but you also want a person that is going to bust their ass like there's no tomorrow.

8/15/11

It certainly is a huge relief to not have any student loans to pay off when you graduate but my personal opinion is I would MUCH rather graduate from Harvard with 100k in student loans than GT/no debt. I obviously understand why you disagree but to me the tradeoff is definitely worth it. Like I said before, you only do undergrad once and yeah OK Harvard is full of rich pricks, country club assholes, etc. etc. but at the same time the world we all aspire to, HIGHLY values that name brand.

I think the more important point is where you go to business school nowadays. After looking at the bios for a lot of PE people, most of them did undergrad at HYPS, graduated phi beta kappa, but EVERY single one of them went to HBS or SBS (or at the least ChicagoBS).

Finally your point about the average intelligence/great work ethic person- well yeah, good for them if they work hard but for the extremely competitive jobs in IBD, PE, HF, VC, consulting, and any other high-octance career track, everyone is very intelligent and very hard-working (some outliers). My point is that the mediocre state school student who got in by being average intelligence but good work ethic, is going to get crushed if they try and play in that field.

8/15/11

I guess nobody here prescribes to the belief, that intelligence can also be gained over time.

No of course people like midwest, were chosen by god at birth to lead the financial world.

fraser why do even care to impress this kid?

8/15/11
adehbone:

I guess nobody here prescribes to the belief, that intelligence can also be gained over time.

No of course people like midwest, were chosen by god at birth to lead the financial world.

fraser why do even care to impress this kid?

You're a retard if you think intelligence can be gained over time. Knowledge can be gained over time, or experience, but certainly not intelligence, which you're born with. I.e. you might have more knowledge than me of how it feels to go to a second rate school (I've never done that so wouldn't know), but that doesn't change the fact that I'm more intelligent than you.

8/15/11

Yes, and I know several more successful GT people working in the trenches with me and the HYPS kids. There are plenty of successful GT people up here in all levels of the industry.

8/15/11

And it's also not IBD. All of the data I posted were from IBD analysts. Not debt, not equities, and certainly not trading.

8/15/11

i don't think anyone's debating whether kids at HYPS are better and more intelligent than kids at state schools ON AVERAGE. the debate was whether the bottom 10% of HYPS were better than the top 10% at state schools. that is an absolutely ludicrous statement, as the top 10% at Michigan, UVA, UCB etc are WAY above the average at HYPS.

8/15/11
bigdirs:

i don't think anyone's debating whether kids at HYPS are better and more intelligent than kids at state schools ON AVERAGE. the debate was whether the bottom 10% of HYPS were better than the top 10% at state schools. that is an absolutely ludicrous statement, as the top 10% at Michigan, UVA, UCB etc are WAY above the average at HYPS.

Dude top 10% at those school are not even close to above average at HYPS. My best friend from high school and my youth went to Vanderbilt (would you agree that that's a comparable school to the ones you list above?), and graduated Phi Beta Kappa, i.e. top 10% of his class. Given that I grew up with him and attended school with him for about ten years, I think I'm pretty aware of his capabilities. If he had attended my school (HYPS), he would've been in the lowest quarter of the class GPA-wise for sure. He might do better than some of the athletes or minorities or whatever in the bottom ten percent, but no way in hell would he be above average. I'd say maybe the top 1-2% of those schools would be above average at HYPS.

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:
bigdirs:

i don't think anyone's debating whether kids at HYPS are better and more intelligent than kids at state schools ON AVERAGE. the debate was whether the bottom 10% of HYPS were better than the top 10% at state schools. that is an absolutely ludicrous statement, as the top 10% at Michigan, UVA, UCB etc are WAY above the average at HYPS.

Dude top 10% at those school are not even close to above average at HYPS. My best friend from high school and my youth went to Vanderbilt (would you agree that that's a comparable school to the ones you list above?), and graduated Phi Beta Kappa, i.e. top 10% of his class. Given that I grew up with him and attended school with him for about ten years, I think I'm pretty aware of his capabilities. If he had attended my school (HYPS), he would've been in the lowest quarter of the class GPA-wise for sure. He might do better than some of the athletes or minorities or whatever in the bottom ten percent, but no way in hell would he be above average. I'd say maybe the top 1-2% of those schools would be above average at HYPS.

I'm sorry, you're just wrong. your one random, weak example isn't proof of anything. you obviously aren't at all familiar with the caliber of the top students at the best state schools (and not just 1-2% either), or you're just delusional.

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:
bigdirs:

i don't think anyone's debating whether kids at HYPS are better and more intelligent than kids at state schools ON AVERAGE. the debate was whether the bottom 10% of HYPS were better than the top 10% at state schools. that is an absolutely ludicrous statement, as the top 10% at Michigan, UVA, UCB etc are WAY above the average at HYPS.

Dude top 10% at those school are not even close to above average at HYPS. My best friend from high school and my youth went to Vanderbilt (would you agree that that's a comparable school to the ones you list above?), and graduated Phi Beta Kappa, i.e. top 10% of his class. Given that I grew up with him and attended school with him for about ten years, I think I'm pretty aware of his capabilities. If he had attended my school (HYPS), he would've been in the lowest quarter of the class GPA-wise for sure. He might do better than some of the athletes or minorities or whatever in the bottom ten percent, but no way in hell would he be above average. I'd say maybe the top 1-2% of those schools would be above average at HYPS.

Well, I agree with Midwest here. I'm at Wharton and our bottom 1-2% of an incoming class (so HS GPA and SAT score) are absolutely retarded by ivy standards (800-900 SAT scores) - but these kids are minorities that Penn needed to bring it's black quota up to the 10% we have every year. The people at the bottom 10% level aren't that retarded...they are usually people with lower HS GPAs (B average) but still decent SAT scores. The top 10% at MOST state schools are subpar. The top 1-2% at state schools (the kids on full scholarships in the honors programs) are usually pretty bright. But top 10% is not true..I know quite a few people from my hometown in the honors program at one of our state colleges and they're retards.

That being said, I think Georgia Tech is an exception. It's not on Berkeley's level, but it's certainly not Rutgers. I would venture to say top 5% of GTech is quite smart and could have gone ivy. Although they didn't go ivy..which I think reflects on their EQ (although not IQ)...you have to be "smart" enough to take on debt and get the ivy degree because you understand (even at age 18) how important it is in the long run. Heck, I'd take on a full $160k in debt to go to Penn instead of having to go to any state school except probably Berkeley. While I wasn't in that position thankfully as my parents could afford it, over 60% of people here at Penn are on financial aid. So, that means those kids were socially/intellectually/practically or whatever smart enough at age 18 to choose an ivy versus a scholarship at a state school. And I think that counts for something.

8/15/11

I still don't get why people are feeding that troll.
Just ignore him, and let him study for his AP Calc AB test next week.

8/15/11
thelastdayofschool:

I still don't get why people are feeding that troll.
Just ignore him, and let him study for his AP Calc AB test next week.

agreed

8/15/11

people who don't go to ivy league schools are scum

8/15/11

shrug. end of the day, IBD corpfin is monkey work. what matters is having the "right people" and ivy ug often have these characteristics, in aggregate, so that banks don't have to bother with other schools. anecdotal evidence, look at the fucking video resume competition on vault.com, those kids from barucy and iu just don't come across as very sharp at all. they actually look and sound kinda retarded.

there's always gonna be a glass ceiling for people who don't fit the mold. ivy creds are often a major part of fitting into this mold. black females who went to state u. for ug like ind are gonna hit that ceiling, nerdy asians from HYP are gonna hit that ceiling, and a lot of state-schoolers who hit it lucky for an analyst spot but are still of mediocre intelligence and ability will hit that ceiling.

8/15/11

Well, of course you are assuming the top kids attending state schools plan on going into fields such as banking and consulting, where pedigree matters more.

I would venture to say for students who are looking at careers in medicine, law, politics, and other careers that either require additional expensive education or don't pay that much out of undergrad, the financial equation changes significantly. The 160k of debt vs full scholarship dilemma changes when you are looking at 3-4 more years of 50K a year education or a non-banking earning potential.

8/15/11
xistguru:

Well, of course you are assuming the top kids attending state schools plan on going into fields such as banking and consulting, where pedigree matters more.

I would venture to say for students who are looking at careers in medicine, law, politics, and other careers that either require additional expensive education or don't pay that much out of undergrad, the financial equation changes significantly. The 160k of debt vs full scholarship dilemma changes when you are looking at 3-4 more years of 50K a year education or a non-banking earning potential.

It shouldn't change, in my opinion. The top law and medical schools are filled with people from ivys. Well it's true that these students are generally the smartest and thus have the best LSAT and MCAT scores, it's also true that the law school or medical school gives ivy & equivalent students a GPA boost when considering them vis a vis the rest of the applicants..so a 3.0 at Princeton might equal a 3.9 at a state school. That GPA boost, plus the sheer gain in educational value from taking class / doing groupwork with a bunch of intelligent ivy kids versus subpar state school kids, should be reason enough to go ivy.

I can't even fathom why anyone with an ivy admittance would choose a state school. You won't be left with 160k in debt...most students graduate with less than 20k in debt (and those that are really poor, graduate with very very little in debt..like 8k). A huge chunk of financial aid is given in grants, plus you pay part of your bill back from work study jobs and summer employment. It's quite do-able.

8/15/11
dav3100:
xistguru:

Well, of course you are assuming the top kids attending state schools plan on going into fields such as banking and consulting, where pedigree matters more.

I would venture to say for students who are looking at careers in medicine, law, politics, and other careers that either require additional expensive education or don't pay that much out of undergrad, the financial equation changes significantly. The 160k of debt vs full scholarship dilemma changes when you are looking at 3-4 more years of 50K a year education or a non-banking earning potential.

It shouldn't change, in my opinion. The top law and medical schools are filled with people from ivys. Well it's true that these students are generally the smartest and thus have the best LSAT and MCAT scores, it's also true that the law school or medical school gives ivy & equivalent students a GPA boost when considering them vis a vis the rest of the applicants..so a 3.0 at Princeton might equal a 3.9 at a state school. That GPA boost, plus the sheer gain in educational value from taking class / doing groupwork with a bunch of intelligent ivy kids versus subpar state school kids, should be reason enough to go ivy.

I can't even fathom why anyone with an ivy admittance would choose a state school. You won't be left with 160k in debt...most students graduate with less than 20k in debt (and those that are really poor, graduate with very very little in debt..like 8k). A huge chunk of financial aid is given in grants, plus you pay part of your bill back from work study jobs and summer employment. It's quite do-able.

Personally I'm not very familiar with law or med school admissions, but I heard that MCAT/LSAT scores and essays were the most important things admissions look at.

Not that familiar with financial aid process at ivies, but no-debt vs $20K debt is still a significant number for someone looking at another four years of school or $50k> job.

8/15/11

1) HYPS admissions are tilted geographically. midwest, for all your bolster about intelligence, I'm sure not being in the northeast or the west coast helped you get into your beloved school

2) I had the opportunity a few months ago to have dinner with an MD at a boutique, and he highly stressed GPA...to a point. He basically told us 3.7+ is all we're really talking about here, from a target non-HYPS that is.

3) Financial reasons are valid. If you come from the northeast, Harvard's under 60k free ride or 60-80k reduced ride is still not necessarily applicable; 100k is middle-class from around these parts, at least near me. I had an offer to go to a state school for free, Cornell for full cost and CMU (not Tepper, IS program)/Stern for about the same. I don't regret not choosing Cornell or the state school. $160k is an obscene amount of debt, and if you can go to a very good school for significantly less, I think that represents a better value proposition than whoring one's self to an Ivy name.

8/15/11

Although I think this entire thread is BS, I thought I'd point something out. In the BME program at UT, the average SAT score for admitted students was a 1450, the average MCAT score was 34 (with numerous students getting 40 and above), and of the few students that took the LSAT, the average was 164. We have numerous students go on to McKinsey, a few at Blackstone, and of course many at Goldman. Of the students that even applied to Ivy league schools (probably around 50%), 90% were accepted to at least one of them. The yield in this program is extremely high-students just don't wanna leave the state.

Among the students that went to high schools like Highland Park, TAMS, Plano etc., not nearly as many of them aspired to go to ivy schools when compared with high schools in the NE.

In my graduating class, we definitely had a good number of students go to HYPS, and MIT. However, most of our top students decide to go to schools like Rice and UT. Most are southerners, and not much about the NE is particularly appealing to them. Like I said before, I had full funding to play football at the likes of HYPS, had a 1520 SAT, and was ranked just outside the top 5% of my class(shows how competitive my school was). However, I wanted to 1) stay in Texas (like most Texans), 2) win a nat'l championship (done), and 3) stay away from particularly pretentious people.

My point is that there are numerous reasons, besides even financial ones, that students don't want to go to schools in the NE. Quality of life is a big deal to most people down here, our families are down here, and the girls are just gorgeous.

Anyway, if I get the typical ignorant response, I won't answer so don't bother. But I'll definitely appreciate any articulate, genuine responses.

8/15/11

BTW, the students here have the least bit of entitlement. They work their asses of without believing that they are owed anything. Hence, they are generally very well liked and received.

8/15/11

People have reasons for choosing the schools they went to...

Lets say some 16 year old underestimates the importance of the SAT, and doesnt score high enough to get into HYPS. Should he/she have to eat crow forever?

You just can't make blanket statements, and that's why there is such an extensive interview process at these BB banks - a high GPA, interest in the field, and intelligence tend to shine through.

PLEASE DONT CHANGE EXCEL SHORTCUTS!!!

8/15/11
monkeypoker:

People have reasons for choosing the schools they went to...

Lets say some 16 year old underestimates the importance of the SAT, and doesnt score high enough to get into HYPS. Should he/she have to eat crow forever?

You just can't make blanket statements, and that's why there is such an extensive interview process at these BB banks - a high GPA, interest in the field, and intelligence tend to shine through.

If you underestimate the importance of the SAT to college admissions, then you're a fucking retard and yes, you should have to eat crow forever. That is not the type of person anyone intelligent wants to be working for. What, are they going to then underestimate the importance of using the right discount rate in their models? Stop with all of this shit. Non-targets are generally at non-targets for a reason: they couldn't get into better schools. There are a few exceptions at each school, but in general you can probably count them on two hands (except maybe a Berkeley). Why can't people just recognize the fact that getting a 4.0 at a non-target or state school is fucking worthless, and pretty much everyone at HYPSW etc. would have a 3.9+ at pretty much any state school (and with putting in probably about half the effort)? It's not hard to do well in classes populated with fucking morons.

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:
monkeypoker:

People have reasons for choosing the schools they went to...

Lets say some 16 year old underestimates the importance of the SAT, and doesnt score high enough to get into HYPS. Should he/she have to eat crow forever?

You just can't make blanket statements, and that's why there is such an extensive interview process at these BB banks - a high GPA, interest in the field, and intelligence tend to shine through.

If you underestimate the importance of the SAT to college admissions, then you're a fucking retard and yes, you should have to eat crow forever. That is not the type of person anyone intelligent wants to be working for. What, are they going to then underestimate the importance of using the right discount rate in their models? Stop with all of this shit. Non-targets are generally at non-targets for a reason: they couldn't get into better schools. There are a few exceptions at each school, but in general you can probably count them on two hands (except maybe a Berkeley). Why can't people just recognize the fact that getting a 4.0 at a non-target or state school is fucking worthless, and pretty much everyone at HYPSW etc. would have a 3.9+ at pretty much any state school (and with putting in probably about half the effort)? It's not hard to do well in classes populated with fucking morons.

ok, I understand your position. But I would like you to address mine...you're telling me that the kids at Texas'(im sure there are other programs at other publics like this as well-I'm just using the evidence that I have in front of me) BME program(with their 1450 SAT scores, 34 MCATs, etc.) would fail miserably at HYPS?

8/15/11
midwestisthebest:
monkeypoker:

People have reasons for choosing the schools they went to...

Lets say some 16 year old underestimates the importance of the SAT, and doesnt score high enough to get into HYPS. Should he/she have to eat crow forever?

You just can't make blanket statements, and that's why there is such an extensive interview process at these BB banks - a high GPA, interest in the field, and intelligence tend to shine through.

If you underestimate the importance of the SAT to college admissions, then you're a fucking retard and yes, you should have to eat crow forever. That is not the type of person anyone intelligent wants to be working for. What, are they going to then underestimate the importance of using the right discount rate in their models? Stop with all of this shit. Non-targets are generally at non-targets for a reason: they couldn't get into better schools. There are a few exceptions at each school, but in general you can probably count them on two hands (except maybe a Berkeley). Why can't people just recognize the fact that getting a 4.0 at a non-target or state school is fucking worthless, and pretty much everyone at HYPSW etc. would have a 3.9+ at pretty much any state school (and with putting in probably about half the effort)? It's not hard to do well in classes populated with fucking morons.

Whatever, we'll see where that arrogance gets you.

PLEASE DONT CHANGE EXCEL SHORTCUTS!!!

8/15/11

I'll say it again: I, personally, feel highly enthusiastic about a 3.5 from Georgia Tech. Would I tell a Georgia Tech person to feel comfortable that he'd get into banking with a 3.5? Of course not; his recruiter probably wouldn't feel the same way. So, the following two points are true:

1: If you have a 3.5 from Georgia Tech, your chances of getting into banking are small.
2: If I see a 3.5 from Georgia Tech, I do whatever I can to bring them in for an interview.

If this is confusing, try drawing a Venn diagram or something.

8/15/11

-

8/15/11

According to the admissions statistics for 2005 on the US News and World Reports website, the total number of students that were going to the Ivy League schools was 13,702 of which 4,190 were attending HYP.

I don't know the figures for total admissions that year but I can't believe that there is HYP and everyone else as far as intelligence is concerned.

There are plenty of students attending state schools who are equal to or better than Ivy's. This argument is a crock.

8/15/11
coltsreign:

According to the admissions statistics for 2005 on the US News and World Reports website, the total number of students that were going to the Ivy League schools was 13,702 of which 4,190 were attending HYP.

I don't know the figures for total admissions that year but I can't believe that there is HYP and everyone else as far as intelligence is concerned.

There are plenty of students attending state schools who are equal to or better than Ivy's. This argument is a crock.

I agree, but I just can't imagine that anyone can be so oblivious to that fact. The ivy kids I've worked with have been humble for the most part. I don't think this board is representative of ivy kids at all (unless this is just them showing their true colors). None that I have met have been THIS pretentious or arrogant. They would get booted in a second on a trading floor.

8/15/11

Can people not see this "midwest" kid is insecure as shit?

Why are you guys still arguing with him, when it's obvious he's some pitiful loser whose only accomplishment in life was being accepted into some ivy-league and getting a 2.5 or something GPA there? That's why you're seeing all this talk about how kids at the bottom 10th %ile at ivies are still better than the top state schoolers.

Again, please stop feeding the troll. At first he was funny, but now it's starting to get kind of boring.

8/15/11

agreed wholeheartedly, although with people like that it tends to be more fun to break their spirits and show them that they will still be eclipsed by others, be it by an intelligent person from a state school (gasp those exist? gasp [note the sarcasm]) or just someone who's managed to network through extraordinary or alum circumstances.

8/15/11

You are right. My "spirits" have been broken and I will soon "be eclipsed by others."

8/15/11

it's interesting to note that the "eclipsed by others" statement implicitly assumes that I am ahead of others (i.e. stateschoolers) at this point. hmmmmmmmmm....

8/15/11
Mis Ind:

Since we've had so much talk about what GPA you need from a target versus a non-target, here are thirty-five random samples from a recent resume book. All of these people are now analysts. This is a random sample; no cherry-picking to try to drive scores up or down. I've rounded to the nearest tenth to prevent easy identification. If you're looking to get in, you might consider this representative of the level of competition. Draw your conclusions as you like.

Columbia: 3.9
Princeton: 3.9
Georgetown: 3.6
Princeton: 3.6
Yale: 3.8
Georgetown: 3.8
UCLA: 3.8
Harvard: 3.7
Rutgers: 4.0
Georgetown: 3.9
Harvard: 3.4
Harvard: 3.7
Boston College: 3.8
U of T at Austin: 3.7
Dartmouth: 3.7
Wharton: 3.5
Duke: 3.7
Cornell: 4.0
UIUC: 3.9
Yale: 3.9
Stern: 3.4
Stern: 3.9
Rutgers: 3.7
Wharton: 3.8
Georgetown: 3.6
Dartmouth: 3.2
Columbia: 3.9
Columbia: 3.7
UVA: 3.7
Tufts: 3.6
UNC: 4.0
Columbia: 3.5
UNC: 3.5
Tufts: 3.4
U. of Maryland: 3.7

Feels high to me, but it could be. My mental benchmarks are lower, and I'm hawkish on candidate GPA.

8/15/11

I think we can all agree that people that are recognized as National Merit Scholars are some of the brightest students. Here is a list for this past years freshman class.

Harvard, with 294;
University of Florida, 257;
University of Texas at Austin, 250;
Washington University in St. Louis, 241;
University of Southern California, 206;
Northwestern, 198;
University of Chicago, 196;
ASU, 188;
Yale, 186;
Princeton and Stanford, 153.

Notice that Arizona State University and Wusl both have more then YPS.

Pages

Add a Comment
WallStreet Prep Master Financial Modeling