There are some state school kids in my department (DCM), and they are retards.
| +132 | New Article: Dramatic Slide as UBS #22 (US) & New Leadership Desperately Needed | 25 | 1d |
| +129 | Americas M&A League Table Q2 Updated | 60 | 32m |
| +76 | Wealthy Parents / Jaded | 25 | 3h |
| +62 | A COMPLETE GUIDE TO SUMMER INTERNSHIP RECRUITING | 11 | 1d |
| +45 | Boutique firm wants access to my LinkedIn? | 39 | 44m |
| +43 | Restructuring: Anti-climactic Experience | 10 | 1h |
| +33 | Investment Banking in Mexico | 9 | 1d |
| +31 | Investment Banking is Hard | 14 | 3h |
| +25 | IB Net Worth / Savings Check | 9 | 3h |
| +21 | Excel macros for QOL formatting | 0 | 5d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
poor soul
:-(
Yeah, because all us non-targets are universally retarded like that...
You should worry about yourself
Dude you're in DCM... get over yourself.
In my experience, non-targs are almost indistiguishable from Ivy kids after the first few weeks. Aside from a few dopes, non-targs value the money more and will work harder and be more loyal. They will also beat you to death upon command from the MD, as they have never seen that type of money before and it's changing their entire family legacy.....so watch your back.
true story
Target school kid from middle class public school background >>>>> than state school kid
There've already been exact threads like this. Use the search function. Thread over.
first, troll.
second, what about stanford, MIT, caltech, chicago, amherst, or williams?
Why do banks require a college degree?..
What a dumba**.
http://rockbandaide.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Trololol.jpg
They recruit non-target kids because they need to find folks who are actually capable of making MD.
Ok lets be honest here. This has been beaten do death. Obviously (there are exceptions) anyone who goes to an Ivy/target school is significantly smarter, better at problem solving, better at writing, and generally more competent that the average or even above average state school student. Target students are simply the best of the best of their age group in the nation. Now obviously there are exceptions to this - people who narrowly were denied acceptance at top universities, people who chose to go full ride to their state school rather than pay 50k+ for a top school with a shitty financial aid program, etc.
But let me point out another perspective:
If you go to a target, take a second and think about the people at state schools you know from HS who are getting 3.8+ gpa. They probably drink everyday, rarely attend class, do few extra curricular, etc. The don't have a great gpa because they are smarter, or because they are applying themselves more than they did in higschool. They have a high gpa because the quality of competition and the difficulty of the classes at state universities is A FUCKING JOKE. I have friends taking engineering and calc/linear algebra at state schools and they get A's in those classes, and they weren't even smart enough to attempt AP calc in high school. Classes at Harvard (Calc 3 is comparable to Math21a at Harvard) or other target school, teach similar material but present it and test it in a such a different manner that is it infinitely more difficult than any state school.
Now I know there will be target kids on here being all blah blah blah thats bullshit target school classes aren't actually that tough. And yes, they're partially correct, you can make your concentration at Harvard a fucking impossible 4 years of hell or you can take something like gov and econ and coast through with B+'s. But at the end of the day your still in an environment where many of the classes are curved,and you're still competing against other target kids - the top students in the nation. Its not state school with the other mediocre fuck-ups from your public high school.
I also tend to think that target school expect much more out of their students and the resulting responsibility that places on students forces them to grow up and mature much faster than their state school counterparts.
Just my experience.
What are you majoring in?
If you study engineering at Harvard, it is probably because your parents forced you to or because you couldn't get into a decent state school's engineering program. Don't get me wrong- Harvard is a great liberal arts school and has a great math program- they apparently don't know how to run an engineering program, though.
I agree 100% with this.
I'm a state school engineer from a highly ranked engineering program (think GTech/Purdue/Michigan) and I can't help but call your last point out... Admissions are not determined by major/program at the vast majority of schools - the idea that an engineering major at Harvard couldn't get into a state school's engineering program is simply wrong. They got into Harvard College - one of the most selective undergrad institutions on Earth. They may end up more poorly-prepared as engineers, but I'd say the vast majority certainly could have earned admission to many top engineering schools had they chosen to go that route.
http://www.graduateshotline.com/ranks/
lol enjoy your reality check
I'm sure you'll see Harvard's ranking jump considerably in the next ten years on that list. They've totally revamped the school of engineering and applied sciences and many more kids are concentrating in those fields. But I wasn't asserting that Harvard is a top engineering school, its not. It has a liberal arts legacy that it will probably never shed. Its still 19th on that list and there are a handful of other private school above it.
I'm not discounting the engineering programs at those top state schools. I was speaking more in general about how math/science classes at a school like Harvard, MIT, Cal Tech, CMU etc are harder than equivalent classes that teach the "same material" at say UGA, UF, Kansas, etc.
Harvard has been claiming they're going to get their program to Top Five for the past two decades- including when they had a much higher ranking than #19. The bottom line though is that you need a critical mass of undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty to have a competitive engineering program. That goes against Harvard's business model of being a small school that is tough to get into. In order to get to the size required to compete with Illinois, Georgia Tech, and Berkeley, Harvard would have to admit several thousand additional undergraduates and graduate students every year. This would be great- but then folks would have to get over the illusion that only the best get into Harvard when they've effectively tripled the size of their program. And a lot of liberal arts majors there would probably be unhappy with this.
Finally of course, you have the foreign government junket. Countries like Singapore, Bangladesh, Malaysia, etc send their best students to the US for schooling every year- free of charge on the condition that the students return to work in those countries. They tend to pick state schools because they're a lot more cost-effective, though a few do feed students into MIT and Stanford.
Bottom line is that an engineering degree doesn't require small classes. It requires a factory line program and an army of cheap undergrads and grad students to do cheap research. There's a certain critical mass required of people who can get a 5 on the Calc BC exams to be doing a lot of cross-disciplinary research, and I think Harvard will still be trying to get from #15-20 to Top Five in the US News rankings in twenty years.
Probably because they aren't twats, just a thought.
Target kids value the money just as much as non-targets. We're not all rich you know. About 50% of the incoming Columbia class has received financial aid from the university (family income generally needs to be lower than 130K to receive financial aid).
The Ivies just took forever to get their undergraduate engineering programs going, and until recently invested far more money into their liberal arts divisions (exception being Penn, which pumps more money into Wharton undergrad than CAS). Just give them enough time, and they'll definitely surpass the state schools in engineering.
@Illini: Stanford's class size is the same as Harvard's and I'm sure Stanford has one of the best, if not the best, engineering department of any university. Student population doesn't matter. Endowment size and a willingness to improve the program do.
Awww, someones upset they couldn't get into M&A... its ok, there will be a nice fund of funds job waiting for you after you complete your 3 years in "Investment Banking".
Bud, you recently became old enough to legally purchase alcohol. Enjoy that for now, you'll understand the rest life's tough questions later.
Because we're not cunts.
They do so because a lot of kids who go to Ivies are duffs who don't have any killer instinct in the face of adversity. At my NESCAC which has great representation on the street there are tons of these boners. They might be smart but their ass kissing tendencies are extremely obvious and off-putting and any kid from a non-target who has successfully persuaded a girl to leave the bar with him will take one look at them and be pretty confident that they will be more successful in life.
Please lock this thread, the topic is stale. Ivy=easier recruiting, maybe smarter, that's it. Stop being douches, you're overrated.
everybody STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS.
RIGHT NOW.
on average, ivy league kids will be a lot smarter than non target kids. That is something that I would find hard to refute. . However, the standard a trading desk is looking for is well above the average of an ivy league student, because lets face it, there are tons of dumbasses at all schools. When a desk is hiring 1-2 kids, averages go out the window and its much more individual oriented.
In my internship there was a mix of target and non target, and most were pretty indistinguishable. They were all smart, did the work, but only a few were the notch above the desks were looking for, and the distribution between these was fairly random in terms of schools.
I'll come out and admit that I was too dumb and irresponsible to be accepted into an ivy league school (or any target school for that matter). I will also say that I was jealous of and intrigued by people in better schools. That mindset lead me to believe that my school was a lost cause and that there was really no point in doing well or trying (because either way you're fcked right?). With that said, I worked hard since graduating and I never felt inferior to any of the ivy kids in sales or ER. I am not going to compare myself to any trader, quant, structurer, etc. because I don't doubt their ability to completely mind fck me.
I just think that there are non-target exceptions that deserve a "second chance" at respect and shouldn't be discarded as inferior. This goes double for the top state schools that you guys brought up above. Why the fck are you even arguing and trying to draw a clear line between ivy and the other top target schools? Argue about the location, price, faculty, specific programs, or any other criteria but there is no fcking way I'll believe that a kid from a top state school is somehow "genetically" predisposed to underperform an ivy league grad.
If you want prestige, stay in academia. You go into industry because you want money.
Why do Ivy schools have sports teams??
Dolorem ratione amet quam officia ipsa praesentium. Ut ut corporis et at aliquid. Voluptates sunt voluptatem et perspiciatis. Adipisci tempora aliquam quaerat laudantium fugit. Numquam aut rerum suscipit et iusto.
Expedita libero magnam officiis error rerum nihil modi odio. Non neque et molestiae ea amet qui. Perspiciatis nostrum vel perspiciatis architecto. Dicta eos porro illum ab dolores harum. Consequuntur autem saepe sit deleniti et cumque.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Fugit et provident ipsum harum. Est repellat accusantium autem qui inventore commodi quis. Quo est ut dignissimos et error. Id eos vel rerum pariatur.
Illo id a eos. Vel vel est itaque. Et alias fuga harum quis labore.