Business School Stereotypes

What are everyones thoughts on the below? How true are they?

1.) Harvard -
Pros: The best academic brand in the world, people from East Timor will know where you went to school. Graduates are extremely polished and dynamic leaders. its no coincidence that so many politicians these days are HBS grads.
Cons: Students are about as pompous and pretentious as possible. Polish is a fancy way of saying full of st. its no coincidence that so many politicians these days are HBS grads.
Office Space Character: Lumbergh (Peter’s hated boss). He’s a quintessential Harvard grad; in charge and full of platitudes that sound great but on further inspection don’t make any sense. He also drives a nice car and makes a lot of money while being universally loathed. Kind of sums up every HBS grad you’ve ever met, right?
2.) Stanford -
Pros: Small class size and focus on do-gooders leads to an incredible array of backgrounds and accomplishments of students, who thrive in tight knit community. Haven for the really interesting superstars out there. Tremendous brand. Beautiful weather.
Cons: It may be interesting to be classmates with a Buddhist monk-fighter pilot, but its also hard to relate to anyone (”So, did that vow of peace make it hard to take out bogeys?”). For super accomplished business students with the world at their fingertips, it sure doesn’t seem like any of them actually like business.
Office Space Character: Peter (main character). He seems like the most level headed, likable and down to earth of any of the characters, but for all his talents, he ends up as a damn construction worker. He’s also a major league flake, showing up to work only when he feels like it. Can you say entitled?
3.) Wharton -
Pros: Arguably the best technical business education in the world. Great brand name, and the job placements are second only to H/S.
Cons: Not sure if it’s the ultra rigorous curriculum, the competitive culture, or the fact that they have to live in Philly for two years, but Whartonites are paranoid bordering on psychotic. The odds of having a nervous breakdown in your life triple after going here. Double that if you actually ask anyone at Wharton to calculate those odds.
Office Space Character: Tom Smykowski (Co-worker that invents “jumping to conclusions mat”). I’m assuming that Tom was actually an excellent technical employee, but that his constant fear of losing his job made him batsh*t crazy. Most fitting quote “I’m a People Person!!!!!!” when yelling at the consultants.
4.) Northwestern -
Pros: Strong team culture and arguably the best marketing program in the country. Incredibly collaborative for such a large school. Great location next to major financial center (Chicago).
Cons: Very soft curriculum, these guys are poets. I’m pretty sure that Kellogg finance classes are prerecorded cartoons taught by Disney characters. Is it really worth it to pay $10000+ to drink every night? I mean, couldn’t you just do that without the degree?
Office Space Character: Joanna (Peter’s girlfriend). Like Peter, she’s very likable, level headed and likes to get around. Unfortunately she’s also vastly less skilled than many of her fellow characters. Thank God she’s hot.
5.) Chicago -
Pros: Finance education is second only to Wharton globally (and even that’s debatable). Probably the best facilities of all the top business schools. Fantastic job placements and close proximity to Chicago. Academic horsepower of profs is untouchable.
Cons: Socially awkward is an understatement. Unlike Whartonites who are just high strung, Chicago GSBers either never learned or quickly forgot how to communicate with peers. Make sure to wear a face mask if they’re talking to you ’cause spits going to fly.
Office Space Character: Milton (Co-worker that loves red swingline stapler). Milton seems like a nice enough guy, and he might be the smartest guy in the office (he pulls off the grand caper in the end). It’s just that he’s about as charismatic as a toilet bowl. Hire ‘em, just make sure to get GSBers an office in the basement.
6.) Columbia -
Pros: Great location in the middle of global financial center (New York). Most diverse student body in terms of minorities and women. Very strong finance program. New York allows great social and job placement opportunities, and draws worldly, cosmopolitan students.
Cons: Cliquish and commuterish. Columbia is like a high school with super rich kids. High ***hole factor. This isn’t the kind of school where you’ll be going to house parties, its more like the kind of school where you’re expected to order bottle service for twenty guys on a student budget or else be ostracized.
Office Space Character: Bobs (consultants that lay off workers). They seem smart, they have great jobs, but c’mon, these guys are douchebags.
7.) MIT -
Pros: World class entrepreneurship program, and probably the best supply management program in America. Attached to world class research center, and location in Boston is strong. Great job placement, especially in consulting.
Cons: For all their unique academic offerings, the overall school is like 90/10 men/women including undergrads. Takes the term sausage fest to a whole new level. Nerdy culture.
Office Space Character: Michael Bolton (Peter’s co-worker and friend). Michael Bolton desperately wants to be cool, listening to rap music, talking in slang, but lets face it, he’s a dork. He’s also hampered by his dorky namesake, which seems to attract a lot of nerdy people (to his obvious dismay).
8.) Tuck -
Pros: Small class size and tight culture leads to maybe the most enthusiastic students in any school. Great respect from recruiters. Alumni network is arguably the most responsive and helpful of any top school. Strong rigorous program.
Cons: Very conformist culture, and really limited social options. These guys seem so enthusiastic about their school that I’m almost certain that all students are given ecstasy at orientation. Listen, if two years in the middle of Nowhere, New Hampshire were to constitute the best two years of my life, I would kill myself.
Office Space Character: Brian (Works with Joannas at Chotchkies, wears 37 pieces of flair). Brian is well meaning and LOVES his job. Never mind that he’s a waiter at a glorified TGIF, he still loves it with all his heart. They say ignorance is bliss, in which case, maybe Tuckies have the secret after all. That or, like Brian, they’re borderline retarded.
9.) Michigan -
Pros: Maybe the most hands-on practical curriculum of all the top schools. New facilities coming up in 2009. Largest alumni network of any business school. State school, so the 2nd year is cheaper.
Cons: Location proximity leaves something to be desired (Detroit? Why not put it next to Beirut). The overall atmosphere here is very fratty and college like. Every single UMich student and alumni I’ve spoken to say the highlight of their experience was tailgating and watching football. EVERYONE. Not that football isn’t awesome, but no one else had any other experience that was noteworthy? They probably forgot the rest after beerbonging Jagermeister.
Office Space Character: Lawrence (Peter’s next door neighbor and friend). Lawrence is a good guy. He’s loyal, and salt of the earth. He also has a few rough edges, and would use 1 million dollars to be intimate with two other women. Have a great time with old Lawrence. Just don’t be surprised if all you end up with is a job he hooked you up with at the local quarry.
10.) Haas -
Pros: Great location in the bay, and strong ties to Silicon Valley. Great weather. Small class size and tight culture. Berkeley has very strong international brand name.
Cons: Weak ties to financial sector, and east coast in general. The culture here is definitely about as PC as it gets. This seems like the type of school where you’d need to get a permission slip before you held a woman’s hand on campus.
Office Space Character: Stan (Joanna’s manager at Chotchkies). Stan wants Joanna to do more than the bare minimum. After all, people can get an MBA anywhere, but they come to Chotckies/Haas for the atmosphere! Don’t you want to do more than the bare minimum? Then put on your flair, burn some bras and save a whale you selfish jerk.
11.) Duke -
Pros: Maybe the best health care management program in the country. Great brand name, especially in the south. Strong team culture.
Cons: Relatively young MBA program, so alumni network is small. As such, the brand cache just isn’t there yet. People that come here seem very cookie cutter to me, not in a bad way, just very comfortable and relatively unambitious.
Office Space Character: Samir (Peter’s co-worker and friend). Samir is a nice guy, very practical and unassuming. You get the feeling that he’s happy as long as he has a job in hand. Won’t make waves, won’t screw up, and won’t take any risks. But he’s a happy guy, and will have a house with 2.2 kids and a dog in a suburb somewhere (probably Durham).
12.) Darden -
Pros: Strong Case method program and rigorous curriculum is universally respected. Alumni network is very strong and active with current students.
Cons: Middle of nowhere. Intellectual horsepower not as strong at a lot of the other top schools.
Office Space Character: Anne (Peter’s ex-girlfriend who was cheating on him). Anne just seemed really high maintenance and uptight. You try doing twenty cases a week for a year and see what happens to you. Just don’t be surprised if it’s a bigger bi
h than you imagined.
13.) NYU -
Pros: Great location within spitting distance of Wall Street. Strong finance curriculum, and media program.
Cons: Location in downtown Manhattan make this the ultimate commuter school. Weird inferiority complex with Columbia. If you don’t go into finance or media, good luck.
Office Space Character: Other Lumbergh (ex-co-worker of Peter, Joanna’s ex-boyfriend). From all accounts, the other Lumbergh was a likable guy who was good at his job and got a great job offer to move on somewhere else. We just never actually saw him. Kind of like your NYU classmates.
14.) UCLA -
Pros: LA! Sun, beach, beautiful glamorous people everywhere! Strong ties to Southern California business and great real estate program.
Cons: LA. UV rays, crowded beaches and shallow, materialistic people everywhere. You get the feeling that UCLA students are there just to spend two years in SoCal rather than to get jobs. As such, this place draws vapid, materialistic people. But damn they’re hot!
Office Space Character: Drew (Peter’s co-worker, describes the famous “O-face”). Drew’s a fun-loving guy that people like. He’s also the kind of guy that would tell anyone who was willing to listen graphic descriptions of all his sexual exploits. I liked Drew when I was 19. When I’m 26..?
15.) Cornell -
Pros: Maybe the best Hospitality management program in the country. Ivy league brand name, and strong ties to some top consumer management companies. Small tight knit culture.
Cons: In the middle of nowhere, and it’s definitely a cut below a lot of the top tier programs. I mean, hospitality management? Seriously?
Office Space Character: Peggy (Lumbergh’s secretary). She’s kind of in hospitality: “Initech, can I put you on hold? Thank you! Initech, can I put you on hold? Thank you! Initech, can I put you on hold? Thank you! .”
16.) Yale -
Pros: World class brand name. Arguably the best social enterprise program in the country. Relatively strong job placement for the rank.
Cons: Newer program means little real rep with employers or alumni to lean on.
Office Space character: Dr. Swanson (Peter’s psychologist/hypnotist). The Dr. has a very strong reputation, and he makes Peter go from depressed to happy (what a do-gooder!). But when it comes to the rankings, he just falls over dead.

 

Another set of stereotypes from Alex Chu, who posts here sometimes as MBAApply:

HBS is like the British luxury car of varying quality - Bentley, Aston Martin, MG, Rolls-Royce. They are Establishment, tophats and all. Some drivers are able to break the "unapproachable" mold and will take their cars for a bit of a joyride, but some are trapped in the pomp and circumstance of their cars.

Stanford is like the Italian sports car - Lamborghinis, Ferraris, Alfa Romeos, Maseratis. They are bold, distinctive, and anti-authoritarian. They aren't the most reliable cars, but they sure look good, and they are the ultimate joyride car, risks be damned.

Wharton are like the German sports cars - Porsche and AMG-Benz. They combine the quality/reliability of German engineering that the British and Italian sports cars don't have, with the cachet that rivals only the British and Italian luxury cars. However, they don't quite have the same cachet of the British and Italian luxury cars, even though many drivers would still kill for a Porsche 911 turbo or AMG.

Chicago GSB is like a Volvo - the quality, performance and reliability is probably as good as any luxury automaker, but it doesn't do as good of a job at marketing itself. It has a reputation for being a bit staid, boxy, boring. But it's like a tank - impenetrable to any kind of criticism because its owners will try really hard to explain why its car is as good as any German car out there.

Kellogg is like a Volkswagen - they aren't the most reliable cars, but they are sure fun cars to drive. They also have a very young, hip and aspirational image - but one that is within reach of many people. They are very good at promoting and managing its reputation as a “cool and hip” car to drive.

Sloan is like an Audi - more people have them than you'd expect, and for a German car, they are a bit younger and hipper. Particularly it's S-series. They are mentioned alongside the other great auto manufacturers, but still fly under the radar in most discussions.

Columbia is like a BMW - an amazing machine that combines performance, quality and cachet, but it also attracts a disproportionate number of aggro drivers who believe they own the road, and act accordingly (blasting their music for everyone to see, cutting people off in traffic, honking their horns, etc.).

Tuck is like a Saab. It's quirky, relatively small in number, but has a fiercely loyal following of aficionados. Not many people know the car, but those that do rave about it.

 

GO BLUE!

------

"its the running joke now, we now have fair trade with china so they send us poisoned sea food and we send them fraudulent securities."

------ "its the running joke now, we now have fair trade with china so they send us poisoned sea food and we send them fraudulent securities."
 

Lets see what kind of shit people come out with. Mine is solely based on European experiences.

Hedge funder: How long before he ends up in prison? Still, BAWSE.

Private equity guy: See's value in shit and turns it to gold. Baller. Can't wait to explain to friends at a social gathering what he does.

CEO: The one guy who liked what he was doing. Loves to put a positive spin on every earnings report even with that 2bn impairment in Spain..."we're cutting dead weight." Sure buddy.

Prop trader: Real trader. Clowns on market markers. Baller. Probably sick at maths and Asian.

the Analyst: Thinks he's shit hot. His two bedroom apartment in Shoreditch probably seems like a haven for pussy. It's not. Finances his baller life with prestige and dreams of knocking one out in the bathroom of a MF one day.

The MD: Maybe he'll be CEO some day. He either loves his job or flunked buy side interviews. Next most acquainted thing to a client's ass than underwear.

the associate: Lucifer to the analysts. Could potentially be MD one day or just didn't have any luck with the buy side...or women. Idea of being shit hot and prestige has faded by now.

 

Hedge funder: actually has skin in the game vs sell-side guys - consumes enough alcohol on a daily basis to put Charlie Sheen to shame; averages 4 hrs sleep, lives and breathes companies

Private equity guy: staffer for ibankers - prestige level allows use of "shadow equity", soft credit, carry as part of all-in comp

CEO: WASP

Prop trader: contrary to day "traders" who post their daily gains (conveniently omitting losses) on facebook, math geeks who are 96.3% Asian; smells oddly of mothballs and social isolation

the Analyst: WASP wannabe w/ minimum 30% salary exaggeration and a mountain of insecurities; thinks 100+ hrs are badge of honor

The MD: insecurities directly proportional to BS levels/destruction of analysts' already nonexistent work/life balance; insecurities likely stem from ridicule from buyside

the associate: ASSociate

speed boost blaze
 

Hedge funder: Either a slimy sales person who (wants you to think he) knows everyone or a math geek who wants to pretend he knows everyone.

Private equity guy: Math geek with a personality, obsessed with work.

CEO: Less slimy version of hedge fund sales guy... actually does know everyone, but doesn't care.

Prop trader: Math geek who thinks the markets are the world's best video game.

the Analyst: Extremely hardworking kid, really just wants to learn the biz. Would be constantly disappointed at how no one outside Wall Street understands what he does, if he had time for a life.

The MD: Either a demon spawn who yells and demeans everyone or the nicest most articulate person you have ever spoken to... either way absolutely useless with minor basic tasks.

the associate: Constantly hiding fear of never making VP. Really wants to go to buy-side, but since I am highly rated and well regarded by my team I don't want to miss out on the killer bonus I am going to get.

Doog37
 
Doog37:

Hedge funder: Either a slimy sales person who (wants you to think he) knows everyone or a math geek who wants to pretend he knows everyone.

Private equity guy: Math geek with a personality, obsessed with work.

CEO: Less slimy version of hedge fund sales guy... actually does know everyone, but doesn't care.

Prop trader: Math geek who thinks the markets are the world's best video game.

the Analyst: Extremely hardworking kid, really just wants to learn the biz. Would be constantly disappointed at how no one outside Wall Street understands what he does, if he had time for a life.

The MD: Either a demon spawn who yells and demeans everyone or the nicest most articulate person you have ever spoken to... either way absolutely useless with minor basic tasks.

the associate: Constantly hiding fear of never making VP. Really wants to go to buy-side, but since I am highly rated and well regarded by my team I don't want to miss out on the killer bonus I am going to get.

The prop trader stereotype is hilarious. Well said, well said indeed.

 

Hedge funder: Evil short sellers.

Private equity guy: A high fee paying client.

CEO: Well balanced, well adjusted people who are smarter and better connected than almost everyone. The model to which others should aspire.

Prop trader: Couldn't make it to BB.

the Analyst: Young people that nobody thinks about.

The MD: At the level where they're consistently a money maker for the firm or are on their way out.

the associate: See 'the Analyst'.

 
DickFuld:

CEO: Well balanced, well adjusted people who are smarter and better connected than almost everyone. The model to which others should aspire.

Except when they are mad.

[quote=Matrick][in reply to Tony Snark"]Why aren't you blogging for WSO and become the date doctor for WSO? There seems to be demand. [/quote] [quote=BatMasterson][in reply to Tony Snark's dating tip] Sensible advice.[/quote]
 

Hedge funder: The ultimate badass who really doesn't give a flying fck what peasants think about them

Private equity guy: Rich mofo who doesn't have the market skillz to work for a HF and instead works endless hours to compensate

CEO: Delusionsed, tan, comfortably rich

Prop trader: Used to be young clowns making hugeeee $, now quiet asianz getting a hard-on when their backtest shows something positive

the Analyst: Fresh out of the womb, still pretty disillusioned to what's going on around him. Scared rabbit just trying not to get eaten everyday

The MD: Sad, pathetic old man who was never intelligent enough to understand the whole life/work balance

the associate: Most disillusioned tard monkey on the desk. Think the promotion they got was hot and their bigger bonus is the sht, but doesn't realize nobody cares or even likes them

 

In China:

Hedge funder: works to death and makes money, relationship first

Private equity guy: works to death and makes lots of money, relationship first

CEO: relationship

Prop trader:

the Analyst: works to death

The MD: relationship, no other discernible skill

the Associate:

 

@"Neovius", that poster looks funny. Can you post a link for a SB?

[quote=Matrick][in reply to Tony Snark"]Why aren't you blogging for WSO and become the date doctor for WSO? There seems to be demand. [/quote] [quote=BatMasterson][in reply to Tony Snark's dating tip] Sensible advice.[/quote]
 

250k, nice that's internist money without the dirty hands.

[quote=Matrick][in reply to Tony Snark"]Why aren't you blogging for WSO and become the date doctor for WSO? There seems to be demand. [/quote] [quote=BatMasterson][in reply to Tony Snark's dating tip] Sensible advice.[/quote]
 

Hedge Funder: Telemarketer level 5 Private Equity guy: Changing the world... one boring ass company at a time CEO: Old Spice commercial Prop trader: Macaulay Culkin The Analyst: Fodder The MD: Ron Jeremy The Associate: Fodder with a golden star?

 

I walk into the bank and the tellers know my name and account number. They shower me with stickers and lollipops. I use a small bank with three tellers.

heister: Look at all these wannabe richies hating on an expensive salad. https://arthuxtable.com/
 

I have no desire to go to Sloan, but I think the b-school students are quite different from the general MIT kids you'll see... generally speaking, MIT students lack social skills but most of the people I know that go/went to Sloan are very, very sociable

 

On top of that - I hate to burst your bubble. A significant part of the good-looking girls are married or in a committed relationship. The Married But Available stereotype represents a very small number of the total b-school class, and you can ask yourself whether these are the kind of girls you want to hook up with ...

Really, do not go to b-school for hook-ups.

 

I love how this thread goes from stereotypes to dating/hook-up culture.

Interestingly enough, I saw a CBS Follies video about "MBA - Married but Available". I didn't know it was a real thing but lo and behold, I guess it is.

For some reason, I thought the increase in women attending MBA programs would lead to a better dating environment/dynamic in b-school.

I heard from a current (JD/MBA) student at Northwestern that most men in the MBA program over there are taken, whereas the women aren't. She gave me the impression that it's a fun time for guys. Is this representative across most M7 schools or is Kellogg an anomaly?

Thanks for the words of wisdom, Liam.

 

[quote="undefined"]

On top of that - I hate to burst your bubble. A significant part of the good-looking girls are married or in a committed relationship. The Married But Available stereotype represents a very small number of the total b-school class, and you can ask yourself whether these are the kind of girls you want to hook up with ...

Really, do not go to b-school for hook-ups.

[/]

B-School is a bad dating environment. It's also incredibly hard to date outside of b-school. Try bringing an outsider to any business school social event (including hanging at the bar with two friends) and watch their eyes glaze over as everyone talks about b-school all night.

 

most programs are 2/3 male, 1/3 female so it's not a great ratio for guys to begin with...

from my experience, almost all the girls worth dating came into the program taken and at matriculation, there was probably no more than a handful of available single girls I would have dated. Those single girls almost all found a significant other within the first semester (plus loads of people broke up with their pre-MBA significant other, but almost all broke up to get together with a classmate). There were a couple girls actively dating / seeking a husband but they were not really that attractive so most hookup activity was with people outside of school (ie. undergrads). Anyway, that's just my experience, but the hooking up scene was 10x better when I was in undergrad than in b-school.

 

Going back to the OP's points:

Kellogg has better PE placements than Booth. For some reason, Booth is weak in PE, but both pale in comparison to HSW, which dominate post-MBA PE.

Booth's quantitative reputation comes from its renowned finance faculty, which is second to none. It also offers more quantitative courses than any b-school I can think of. But if you look at job placement, it's not like Booth MBAs are skating into quant hedge funds. Those jobs are primarily for the Phd's and masters students in STEM/finance/econ.

Columbia has been primarily known as a finance school, but its strength in consulting and marketing has been underestimated. And lately it's been beefing up on tech/startup as well.

 

That's what I've found. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been hearing that Wharton has kind of dropped half a step behind H/S (not just in Post-MBA PE placement -- I'm talking big picture). Would you agree w/ that?

Very interesting to hear re: Columbia. I'm aware of their strength in Finance but didn't know they were also very strong in Marketing and Consulting.

+1 SB

 
undefined:

That's what I've found. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been hearing that Wharton has kind of dropped half a step behind H/S (not just in Post-MBA PE placement -- I'm talking big picture). Would you agree w/ that?

Very interesting to hear re: Columbia. I'm aware of their strength in Finance but didn't know they were also very strong in Marketing and Consulting.

+1 SB

That's been my observation. I decided not to go the MBA route (got on a better path than I could ever have and via very unreplicable circumstances), but as I've remained in touch with my former colleagues from the 'elite' banking groups who did choose the standard top BB/EB > MF PE > MBA route, I was surprised to hear how many were strictly considering HBS or GSB. Even guys from Wharton undergrad were pretty clear that they didn't want to go back for the MBA. Granted, this is a pretty lofty crowd (GS TMT to Carlyle, BX M&A to Warburg, etc.), but I was still surprised.
Columbia has been primarily known as a finance school, but its strength in consulting and marketing has been underestimated. And lately it's been beefing up on tech/startup as well.
That's because tech in New York as a whole has risen in the past decade. A rising tide lifts all boats. More applicants with a tech background means more matriculating students coming from tech. More self-made millionaires who've exited their own companies and now want to give back by teaching means more professors in entrepreneurship, marketing, management, and technology operations. More general awareness of the career opportunities in tech means more applicants interested in the credential as a means to switch into tech. More student interest in tech means more administrative attention to programming, professional development, and education focused on tech.

GSB clearly leads for VC. HBS has poured resources in the past 6-8 years to build up its entrepreneurship everything. You see more GSB grads (proportionally) going into VC roles, but in terms of who's getting funded as entrepreneurs, HBS has been on a tear in the past few years. CBS seems to be working to advance in this.

I am permanently behind on PMs, it's not personal.
 
undefined:

That's what I've found. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been hearing that Wharton has kind of dropped half a step behind H/S (not just in Post-MBA PE placement -- I'm talking big picture). Would you agree w/ that?

Very interesting to hear re: Columbia. I'm aware of their strength in Finance but didn't know they were also very strong in Marketing and Consulting.

+1 SB

APAE did an excellent job responding to this point, so I don't have that much more to add.

But yes, I think the gap between HBS/GSB and Wharton has widened while the gap between Wharton and the other M7 programs has narrowed. At a first glance, the decline of finance seems to be responsible for this, but I don't think that's the primary factor since as others have noted, it's not like Wharton is a slouch in other areas. I actually think what's going on here is the ridiculous increase in MBA tuition and fees, combined with lot of top consulting and financial firms resorting to promoting talented analysts within (MBB is doing this aggressively, as are some PE firms, and now Goldman; this trend will only accelerate) as opposed to kicking them out for b-school. This means that the opportunity cost to top young professionals for doing a 2-year full-time MBA is astronomically high. Let's say you're one of the people that APAE is talking about. You graduate from a top target at 22, work at say GS TMT for 2 years and then Blackstone PE. At 26-27 you are making $250K+ including bonus and on an upward trajectory. You know that with your credentials, admission to HSW is a near certainty. Even if Blackstone doesn't keep you around, you also know that you will have no problem going to another top PE firm, a hedge fund, or even biz dev/corp strategy at a tech firm. What people are forgetting here is not just the financial opportunity cost but a knowledge/network one. By being in school full-time for 2 years, you will lose an edge in terms of your knowledge and skillset, and lot of firms are aware of this. I know for a fact that myself and a lot of my finance buddies realized that we weren't as sharp after 2 years of drinking, partying, and fucking around. 2 years is not a trivial amount of time, especially at our age when every year matters.

Consequently, these top performers basically tell themselves "geez, i love my job and making great money, so if i HAVE to do an MBA, it's HBS, GSB, or bust." There used to be a time when Wharton was seriously considered on par with HBS/GSB and many even considered it better for finance. I have talked to a lot of older Wharton alums who actually turned down HBS for finance. But in recent years, HBS has been on a tear, with super wealthy alumni such as Bloomberg, Schwarzman, Ackman, Dalio, Klarman, etc., giving the school money and positive notoriety. Wharton has not had the same level of media publicity and strong alumni production. Then, with the rise of STEM and tech, Stanford University as a whole has benefited enormously, with GSB obviously reaping the benefits. With Columbia, the NYC location has been YUGE. People forget that in the pre-Rudy years, Columbia was seen by many as the worst Ivy League school, a disgrace to the league, and parents dreaded sending their kids there because it was so unsafe and ghetto. Now, Columbia is sexy, glamorous, and its location adds to its mystique (even though morningside heights sucks monkey's balls, but that's a different topic). And as to be expected, CBS has ridden the coattails. When I look at Penn/Wharton, it has not enjoyed this type of systemic lift that other schools have experienced.

Finally, I also think the caliber of MBA students across the board has dropped over the last several years. I noticed this from my own personal observations, but it was confirmed through talks with professors and from talking to friends who also feel the same way. The impression I'm getting is that due to the factors outlined above, lot of top talent is choosing to stay put rather than spending the insane money for an MBA.

 

Yes, the basic gist is that the best candidates seem to be stopping their career for school only if it's H/S. Many are simply not stopping at all; they're pushing for the direct promote, moving somewhere where they don't need the MBA (this is often from MF PE to 'MF' HF), or starting something of their own (i.e. BX REPE to then co-found CADRE).

I have several friends who were accepted to both schools' 2+2 programs who extended the deferral to the max (4 years before matriculation); it was interesting to see several decline the program altogether.

You're right that historically Wharton was the be-all, end-all for finance. I remember some candidates declining Stanford (or more rarely, Harvard) for Wharton so they could get the HF attention they wanted 6-8 years back. I haven't seen it since.

I think it's safe to say the HSW hegemony isn't in danger of being broken up (what other M7 program could be the new third?); it's just that one is a more clearly distant third than ever before.

I am permanently behind on PMs, it's not personal.
 

A good friend of mine is a HBS 2+2 admit, and he told me that a lot of the people in his cohort have either turned down HBS outright or still haven't gone even though they were technically supposed to have started in fall 2014. These people are in very interesting jobs in tech and finance where they actually enjoy what they're doing and can't give up the money and trajectory. To be honest, even though HBS is great, I can't blame them. I actually underestimated the high opportunity cost of b-school when I decided to go.

I've talked to older Wharton alums who graduated before 08, and they said that back when they were there, tons of hedge funds would visit campus to recruit, even hiring people who didn't have "relevant" experience (i.e., BB and PE). Pretty stunning to hear and it made me envious since those good days aren't coming back.

 

Very interesting.

Correct me if I'm wrong -- but I was under the assumption that MBBs right out of undergrad weren't able to be directly promoted, which led a lot of them to go to b-school? Also, a lot of MM PE funds tend to send their Associates back to b-school to get their MBA. I would assume a lot of the talented MBB consultants and MM PE people would come back to top b-schools just as before? So I'd assume there'd still be a ton of incoming talent, just as before?

Also, why do you think Wharton undergrads wouldn't want to go back for their MBA? Was it to leverage another school's network? Or because they didn't view the Wharton MBA as highly as H/S? It's interesting to me that a lot of elite finance people would snub a school like W that has such a deep history in Business & Finance for a school like Stanford -- where I've heard a lot of students become entrepreneurs, are interested in tech, etc. (I'm aware of Sand Hill Road, but still...) is there something I'm missing?

 
undefined:

Very interesting.

Correct me if I'm wrong -- but I was under the assumption that MBBs right out of undergrad weren't able to be directly promoted, which led a lot of them to go to b-school? Also, a lot of MM PE funds tend to send their Associates back to b-school to get their MBA. I would assume a lot of the talented MBB consultants and MM PE people would come back to top b-schools just as before? So I'd assume there'd still be a ton of incoming talent, just as before?

Also, why do you think Wharton undergrads wouldn't want to go back for their MBA? Was it to leverage another school's network? Or because they didn't view the Wharton MBA as highly as H/S? It's interesting to me that a lot of elite finance people would snub a school like W that has such a deep history in Business & Finance for a school like Stanford -- where I've heard a lot of students become entrepreneurs, are interested in tech, etc. (I'm aware of Sand Hill Road, but still...) is there something I'm missing?

MBB used to kick out pretty much all analysts after 2 years, but now they are doing a lot more direct promotes. PE funds aren't quite there yet, but even there firms such as GTCR, Advent, Bain Capital, some others are experimenting with direct promotes rather than sending them off to b-school. You also see people who jump straight to hedge funds after their PE stint. As I said before, skepticism towards the MBA has grown somewhat given the astronomical increase in tuition while post-mba pay adjusted for inflation has barely nudged. If you are on a great path, you like your job, and you're making great money, why give that up for 2 years of fucking around, throwing cash out the window, and acquiring very few useful skills?

As for Wharton, it's no secret that the undergrad is more prestigious and of higher student caliber than the MBA program. The top Wharton kids dread having to go back there for an MBA; many of my friends who went there and were working top finance jobs did not even apply there for b-school because they saw it as a step down in terms of prestige. For them, it was HBS/GSB or no mba at all. This probably sounds crazy and elitist to the vast majority of people, but even at the upper echelon there is a distinct stratification when it comes to prestige.

 

Very interesting point. I have a friend who is graduating from Kellogg who went McK-prestigious PE shop in MW-Kellogg and he's going back to McK. He told me McK offers some Analysts a "5-year break" of some sort. Basically, you can do what you want for 5 years and you're given a contract to work at the firm if you choose to do so.

I've heard that UGs at Wharton are able to take courses with MBA students, and since grades don't matter as much to MBAs as they do to UGs, the UGs would typically outperform the MBAs academically. However, to get an MBA at Wharton (a top-3 school in the U.S./world), you'd need to have a lot of pedigree -- therefore, I thought there'd be a lot of respect shown from the UG to the MBAs? I'd even assume some/most MBAs have the type of work exp that UGs would want to have, so that'd lead to a real sort of reverence for the MBAs?

You obviously know much more about the "prestige" mindset of those people -- I'd assume though that Wharton's tradition and history in business, coupled with its Ivy league label would kind of edge out Stanford's "oh we're riding the tech bubble and we're entrepreneurs" allure?

 
undefined:

Very interesting point. I have a friend who is graduating from Kellogg who went McK-prestigious PE shop in MW-Kellogg and he's going back to McK. He told me McK offers some Analysts a "5-year break" of some sort. Basically, you can do what you want for 5 years and you're given a contract to work at the firm if you choose to do so.

I've heard that UGs at Wharton are able to take courses with MBA students, and since grades don't matter as much to MBAs as they do to UGs, the UGs would typically outperform the MBAs academically. However, to get an MBA at Wharton (a top-3 school in the U.S./world), you'd need to have a lot of pedigree -- therefore, I thought there'd be a lot of respect shown from the UG to the MBAs? I'd even assume some/most MBAs have the type of work exp that UGs would want to have, so that'd lead to a real sort of reverence for the MBAs?

You obviously know much more about the "prestige" mindset of those people -- I'd assume though that Wharton's tradition and history in business, coupled with its Ivy league label would kind of edge out Stanford's "oh we're riding the tech bubble and we're entrepreneurs" allure?

Nope; you're totally wrong on Wharton. The undergrads look down on the MBAs, and the latter admit that the undergrads are smarter. Getting into undergrad is also more difficult. MBA admission is a joke compared to top colleges. That's all I'm going to say on this.

 
undefined:
undefined:
Very interesting point. I have a friend who is graduating from Kellogg who went McK-prestigious PE shop in MW-Kellogg and he's going back to McK. He told me McK offers some Analysts a "5-year break" of some sort. Basically, you can do what you want for 5 years and you're given a contract to work at the firm if you choose to do so.I've heard that UGs at Wharton are able to take courses with MBA students, and since grades don't matter as much to MBAs as they do to UGs, the UGs would typically outperform the MBAs academically. However, to get an MBA at Wharton (a top-3 school in the U.S./world), you'd need to have a lot of pedigree -- therefore, I thought there'd be a lot of respect shown from the UG to the MBAs? I'd even assume some/most MBAs have the type of work exp that UGs would want to have, so that'd lead to a real sort of reverence for the MBAs?You obviously know much more about the "prestige" mindset of those people -- I'd assume though that Wharton's tradition and history in business, coupled with its Ivy league label would kind of edge out Stanford's "oh we're riding the tech bubble and we're entrepreneurs" allure?

Nope; you're totally wrong on Wharton. The undergrads look down on the MBAs, and the latter admit that the undergrads are smarter. Getting into undergrad is also more difficult. MBA admission is a joke compared to top colleges. That's all I'm going to say on this.

Brady, a few things.

I agree with you that many megafunds guys only consider HBS/GSB. It's mostly a self-selecting process. Most of these guys get into either HBS or GSB, so why shoot lower? Furthermore, I also agree that when you are making $300k+ and are on the right career track, it does not make a lot of sense to go to b-school (even if it is HBS). HBS/GSB are not going to open many doors that KKR/Blackstone do not.

I tend to disagree with you on Wharton. Purely anecdotical - I know about 5 - 6 Wharton undergrads and I still have to come across the first one who looks down upon their MBA program. You know why? Because most Wharton undergrads and Wharton MBAs are not constantly pondering about what 'program' is more prestigious. It's a pointless discussion.

The only two schools where I saw undergrads talking slightly negative about the MBA program were Yale and Duke, which I believe is mostly a result of undergrads not being up to date with an amazing growth that these MBA programs have been through over the last few years.

 
Best Response
undefined:
undefined:
undefined:Very interesting point. I have a friend who is graduating from Kellogg who went McK-prestigious PE shop in MW-Kellogg and he's going back to McK. He told me McK offers some Analysts a "5-year break" of some sort. Basically, you can do what you want for 5 years and you're given a contract to work at the firm if you choose to do so.I've heard that UGs at Wharton are able to take courses with MBA students, and since grades don't matter as much to MBAs as they do to UGs, the UGs would typically outperform the MBAs academically. However, to get an MBA at Wharton (a top-3 school in the U.S./world), you'd need to have a lot of pedigree -- therefore, I thought there'd be a lot of respect shown from the UG to the MBAs? I'd even assume some/most MBAs have the type of work exp that UGs would want to have, so that'd lead to a real sort of reverence for the MBAs?You obviously know much more about the "prestige" mindset of those people -- I'd assume though that Wharton's tradition and history in business, coupled with its Ivy league label would kind of edge out Stanford's "oh we're riding the tech bubble and we're entrepreneurs" allure?Nope; you're totally wrong on Wharton. The undergrads look down on the MBAs, and the latter admit that the undergrads are smarter. Getting into undergrad is also more difficult. MBA admission is a joke compared to top colleges. That's all I'm going to say on this.

Brady, a few things.

I agree with you that many megafunds guys only consider HBS/GSB. It's mostly a self-selecting process. Most of these guys get into either HBS or GSB, so why shoot lower? Furthermore, I also agree that when you are making $300k+ and are on the right career track, it does not make a lot of sense to go to b-school (even if it is HBS). HBS/GSB are not going to open many doors that KKR/Blackstone do not.

I tend to disagree with you on Wharton. Purely anecdotical - I know about 5 - 6 Wharton undergrads and I still have to come across the first one who looks down upon their MBA program. You know why? Because most Wharton undergrads and Wharton MBAs are not constantly pondering about what 'program' is more prestigious. It's a pointless discussion.

The only two schools where I saw undergrads talking slightly negative about the MBA program were Yale and Duke, which I believe is mostly a result of undergrads not being up to date with an amazing growth that these MBA programs have been through over the last few years.

The vast majority of people don't stress over the mundane intracacies of small differences in "prestige". A few very insecure narcissists, like Brady, do. That also leads Brady and those of his ilk to constantly be unhappy, if you can't tell from his posts. Which in return, in conjunction with the insecurity, adversely affects their career.

He hasn't figured this out yet, but someday he will.

 
undefined:
undefined:
undefined:Very interesting point. I have a friend who is graduating from Kellogg who went McK-prestigious PE shop in MW-Kellogg and he's going back to McK. He told me McK offers some Analysts a "5-year break" of some sort. Basically, you can do what you want for 5 years and you're given a contract to work at the firm if you choose to do so.I've heard that UGs at Wharton are able to take courses with MBA students, and since grades don't matter as much to MBAs as they do to UGs, the UGs would typically outperform the MBAs academically. However, to get an MBA at Wharton (a top-3 school in the U.S./world), you'd need to have a lot of pedigree -- therefore, I thought there'd be a lot of respect shown from the UG to the MBAs? I'd even assume some/most MBAs have the type of work exp that UGs would want to have, so that'd lead to a real sort of reverence for the MBAs?You obviously know much more about the "prestige" mindset of those people -- I'd assume though that Wharton's tradition and history in business, coupled with its Ivy league label would kind of edge out Stanford's "oh we're riding the tech bubble and we're entrepreneurs" allure?Nope; you're totally wrong on Wharton. The undergrads look down on the MBAs, and the latter admit that the undergrads are smarter. Getting into undergrad is also more difficult. MBA admission is a joke compared to top colleges. That's all I'm going to say on this.

Brady, a few things.

I agree with you that many megafunds guys only consider HBS/GSB. It's mostly a self-selecting process. Most of these guys get into either HBS or GSB, so why shoot lower? Furthermore, I also agree that when you are making $300k+ and are on the right career track, it does not make a lot of sense to go to b-school (even if it is HBS). HBS/GSB are not going to open many doors that KKR/Blackstone do not.

I tend to disagree with you on Wharton. Purely anecdotical - I know about 5 - 6 Wharton undergrads and I still have to come across the first one who looks down upon their MBA program. You know why? Because most Wharton undergrads and Wharton MBAs are not constantly pondering about what 'program' is more prestigious. It's a pointless discussion.

The only two schools where I saw undergrads talking slightly negative about the MBA program were Yale and Duke, which I believe is mostly a result of undergrads not being up to date with an amazing growth that these MBA programs have been through over the last few years.

Wharton only came up because westcoastanalyst repeatedly asked questions about it, in case you haven't noticed. I personally could care less about this topic since I'm now done with b-school, but I figured I would answer his question and give my personal take.

 

Co-sign.

Apollo was always ahead of this. Their associate program was 4 years (although a lot of guys burned out [tough culture] and went to a HF after two years or did choose the MBA). Now a number of the leading MM PE firms have tried it out; FFL is the latest (two senior associates who didn't get pushed to b-school).

Keep in mind however that we're discussing tiny shifts. It's not as if hundreds of people who were basically guaranteed an HSW admit are now rethinking whether they even want to go. It's more that there's a slowly increasing number of the most predictable pedigreed candidates (2 + 2 + MBA + greatness?) who were at elite undergrad institutions followed by elite banking or consulting firms followed by elite investment firms who are rethinking whether they need an MBA at all.

For those who do decide that it's worthwhile, the crop of schools they'll happily attend seems to narrow. Whereas M7 was the goal and HSW was great, it's now H/S that's the goal and if not, thanks anyway. Whether this is brought on by increasing entrepreneurialism ("If I don't like what I'm getting, I'll take it on myself to carve my own path" [doesn't necessarily mean starting your own company, simply a higher level of 'activism' and less passiveness than in the past]), higher tuition and lower compensation relative to pre-crisis levels, or what ... it's a phenomenon.

I am permanently behind on PMs, it's not personal.
 

To OP's thread: I'm really only close with two people in M7 so I don't have a whole lot to add on each of the M7. One did a Booth MBA and went to a hedge fund while the other I would consider one of my role models and was in PE and IBD previously but is still in the MBA program at HBS.

 

M7 value is a boost to the morale. You will be more motivated to stick to the grind: ''Hey, I went to HBS, I can do this.''

People who are not admitted to an M7 wrongly see it as a reflection of their lack of intelligence = they're less motivated = accomplish less = see it as ''proof'' of their lack of intel.

Shoutout to the M7 gatekeepers. Yall are doing a good job at helping people self select out.

 
undefined:

M7 value is a boost to the morale. You will be more motivated to do stick to it: ''Hey, I went to HBS, I can do this.''

People who are not admitted to an M7 wrongly see it as a reflection of their lack of intelligence = they're less motivated = accomplish less = see it as ''proof'' of their lack of intel.

Shoutout to the M7 gatekeepers. Yall are doing a good job at helping people self select out.

LOL

 

@Human Capital" or whoever you are, seriously, stop making new fake accounts dude and get a life. What happened to msfvsmba and other Brady accounts? They're all linked to this same guy who likes talking about hook ups in almost every serious thread. Check out his other posts under different screen names in other forums, I even read his comment long time ago where he told the OP that he'd choose Stern over Columbia just because the girls are hotter there and that he loves vagina, something like that. You are a horrible person.

Firstly, women are not objects. If you need vagina, you can go to the whore house but I doubt any decent goal oriented independent woman will give a fk about you. They're not there for flings. Secondly, if you'd choose Stern over Columbia or one school over another based on your fked up "criterion", then I would say you are short sighted and you need to reevaluate your life.

Lastly, about "hook ups", you don't go to business school because there are women there and there's a good chance of getting laid. It's like applying to a lot of target schools with crappy profile and hoping you get an offer or at least interview invitation from one of them. That's wrong. You will only attract negative people if you think like that. It depends on mental connection and so many other factors. That person you feel some kind of connection with may not be your business school mate. She or he may be a college drop out doing an odd job. Watch good will hunting and I hope it "talks" some sense into you. Yes, there's a decent chance of meeting that special someone at business school but don't make it a "criterion". There's a a decent chance to meet that person anywhere.

In college(bschool), I had a brief affair with this person who was already in a committed relationship. I thought they were the one at first but it got so toxic and so dysfunctional, I realized what I was pushing them into and felt guilty. I had no emotional connection with that person and therefore, I had to end it. I ended up in relationship with this girl who went to a state school and studied liberal arts, and interestingly, we went to the same elementary, junior high, and high school.

So I'm just saying if you want something long term, you can find that anywhere. If you want a fling or something temporary like "hook ups" or one night stands, go to the whore house, or there's plenty of strippers. Business school is a turning point and only for those who want something out of life.

PS: Who are you? Did you actually go to a business school? Give us your LinkedIn to verify this. I won't be surprised if this is all just your imagination and something you wish for because you can't actually get it lol

 

In fairness, it should be notes that Wharton has the highest avg. gmat score (tied with GSB, and higher than HBS). And a higher avg. GPA than HBS. I'm not saying these are the end-all, be-all (they're not) but they are relevant in assessing quality of the classes, a supposed indicator of school quality.

They are all amazing schools and the VAST majority of people would be well served by attending ANY of them.

 

I can comment on MIT, doubt how helpful it'd be to you b/c I've only met a small sample size of current students (10-15). Seems to me like a school that has a very distinct personality. Most of the people I met were (surprise, surprise) pre-MBA engineers. If that's your cup of tea, I'm sure you'd love it there.

In terms of recruiting, Sloan is a big consulting school, but I've heard they're ramping up in entrepreneurship and Tech. Sloan is also known for its LGO program and I've heard a lot of people there take advantage of Operations/Supply Chain Management and Manufacturing-type jobs post-MBA. I don't think you'd get much love at Sloan for PE/VC recruiting -- even though you're in Boston.

 

Are you finance guys getting laid this little that you have to try to make people feel bad for wanting to 'hook up' with girls while at b-school?

Like seriously, if you don't take the quality of girls into the slightest consideration when choosing a school, then how the hell are you suppose to enjoy the 2 years of your life from 'work'.

Call me crazy, but there ain't no way in hell I'm going 2 weeks let alone 2 years without getting in bed with some undergrad or grad chick, and I'd rather go somewhere where there are at least a couple decent looking girls.

You guys cause about the SEC than you do about sex, and that's a problem in my book.

"It is better to have a friendship based on business, than a business based on friendship." - Rockefeller. "Live fast, die hard. Leave a good looking body." - Navy SEAL
 

I have never liked you, your attitude, and your condescending tone. Going to Princeton doesn't make you "smart", so remember that. There is difference between education and academic education. And I am not even going to be pissed off by your judgements because you don't even know me. All they do is just show what kind of person you really are.

And, yes, this account is linked to that Brady catfish, who has nothing else of value to do with his life. Let me pull out the packets and his IP.

Now, go back where you came from and be miserable.

PS: Don't worry about my getting laid, because I get laid very often. The difference that I have someone who actually likes me, not someone who will fk anyone for money. Plus you're judgement is clouded by getting laid. Maybe because you don't get it, yet flaunt it because it makes you look "cool" or something. That's very fked up mentality.

 

I don't mind calling Brady, Human Capital, or whoever out when he's trolling. But it seems like, for you, there's something more going on- like some sort of obsession with a guy you've probably never met.

FWIW if you look at the posts and you know Brady as well as the public info out there on him, you'll realize that Human Capital asks a lot of questions that Brady probably knows the answer to, or that would be irrelevant to Brady (EG how to get in from a non-target). I don't think it's him, although I've been wrong before.

Back to my point- if it's fair game to call Brady out on his funny reasons for going to b-school, it's OK to call you out for having a funny view of sexual chemistry.

Maybe it's just a huge culture gap between the US and the UK.

 

Look, how am I obsessed with the guy? This is the first thread where I have called him out after getting tired of seeing his BS everywhere. So, try again.

PS: Do I have to meet someone to call them them out because they're trolling online? It's not like I'm romantically obsessed with them, I don't even know wtf he looks like. Stay classy

 

I think Brady is generally speaking just someone who is a expert troll. I find his "hookup culture'', dating website, etc. threads hilarious because they are so far off from reality. I do not agree with his racist posts he seems to put on WSO all of the time. I do agree with you that a lot of my threads lately could be answered by him and you are also right that we are not the same person. I guess we just have some similar interests but I never do any racist or sexist threads like he does. I may say something like "What about the hookup culture?" as a joke but that's about it. And I agree Interlude12 probably has some weird obsession over me. Why the hell would he ask for me to post my linkedin earlier?

 

I must admit that I'm kind of disappointed at how this thread (which was meant to uncover useful information for applicants into an elite business school) turned into users insulting each other. Let's all be honest -- at the end of the day, how far does bickering with a stranger get you?

If you are reading this thread, you are likely either: - an MBA grad (in which case, you can make an impact on someone's application w/ your contribution), or you are - a prospective applicant (trying to gather as much info as possible to enhance your application and sharing insights you've learned throughout the process)

Now, that being said, let's see if we can get this ball back rolling on the right track.

 

Have nothing for/against Kellogg or Booth.

The only thing I've mentioned is that I was more impressed with Kellogg's resources they devote to PE, when compared with Booth. If you want specifics, look at Kellogg's PE course catalog and curriculum (compared to Booth's), look at how they've fared in Wharton's PE Competition the past 2 years, and note how both programs do the Buyout Lab and SPITC.

Very good find though.

+1 SB

 

this thread is hilarious...and surprisingly helpful.

people always say just do a search for a comparison of top schools, but you get tired having to read in between all the boring, detailed BS. this gets right to the heart of the matter...stereotypes...who said theyre not useful?

anyway. i agree on the MIT sitchy from the last two posters as well -- i think its the undergrads (about half and half from my experience) that fit more of the nerdy/awkward stereotype vs the MBAs, plus Sloan has been actively focusing on the communication skills of their entrants for years now.

 

Pretty funny, but some of the stereotypes are outdated. Chicago Booth, for instance, has fundamentally changed in the last several years or so in terms of the student body. Still quanty and dorkier than kellogg, but the students are very outgoing, down to earth, and fun. Nothing like the stereotype that people have of Booth.

HBS is still pretty douchey. Lol.

 
mbavsmfin:
Pretty funny, but some of the stereotypes are outdated. Chicago Booth, for instance, has fundamentally changed in the last several years or so in terms of the student body. Still quanty and dorkier than kellogg, but the students are very outgoing, down to earth, and fun. Nothing like the stereotype that people have of Booth.

HBS is still pretty douchey. Lol.

Nice try, Sunil Kumar Named.

 

Haha. Just realized that the video is produced by Wharton Follies. They do great work with their videos, and their annual follies show is freaking hilarious. A friend recently got exposed because he relentlessly hits on undergrad chicks at smokey joe's. Lol. They do a great job of making fun of their classmates and embarrassing them.

 

Vitae qui molestias vel molestiae corrupti voluptatem dolor. Assumenda necessitatibus quas id nihil.

Ut tempora ducimus deserunt et ratione est iusto et. Suscipit voluptas ad rerum sint unde veritatis. Quidem laudantium quia sunt corrupti.

Consequatur perspiciatis qui ea ut quia mollitia. Saepe ipsam est ut voluptas quis accusantium nihil. Voluptatem suscipit velit accusantium consequatur. Ad eveniet veniam nobis molestias harum ut.

I hate victims who respect their executioners
 

Ad et voluptatibus tenetur quisquam aliquid laudantium porro. Repellendus tenetur eum et maiores rerum labore. Quia ut dolor praesentium facere neque. Et necessitatibus inventore eaque earum sapiente. Modi minus quo ipsam quo libero doloremque non.

Minima saepe sapiente praesentium officia quia. Consequatur delectus nesciunt veniam accusantium. Id sint sapiente illum nemo in eligendi. Aperiam qui qui esse similique incidunt repudiandae veritatis.

Est sit dolor culpa. Ut officia ut cumque. Et ea dolorum id at. Occaecati facilis aperiam qui laborum dolorem expedita voluptatem. Distinctio harum assumenda nesciunt dolores quia quos. Excepturi aut deleniti ipsam sapiente illo odio et. Eius rerum sit qui blanditiis quos.

 

Earum aut voluptatem natus eveniet reprehenderit. Quam saepe autem sit. Impedit explicabo nam perferendis minus corrupti ab. Aperiam quas ullam explicabo iure ducimus ea.

Nostrum necessitatibus voluptas illo provident fugit. Doloremque nisi beatae aperiam culpa. Animi maxime quaerat cumque molestiae deserunt cupiditate. Quia consectetur natus numquam adipisci ipsam. Nobis veritatis rerum officia cum magni officiis voluptates.

 

Alias fugit aspernatur in. Aut dolorem laudantium modi voluptas veniam incidunt minus neque. Maxime numquam quam molestiae sapiente inventore. Consequuntur sapiente est reiciendis deleniti.

Unde qui reprehenderit quia expedita sequi animi. Et autem corrupti ut aut similique labore. Voluptatibus est aut in eius voluptas delectus. Et inventore dolor rerum voluptatem asperiores.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (85) $262
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (65) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (198) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (143) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
5
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
10
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”