are the LACs targets?
What exactly is a target school? I go to Amherst College, I know that alot of the BB firms recruit here but not every single 1 of them does. Does that make Amherst a target? Would I be considered a target-student if I send my apps online to firms that do not recruit on campus, or am i only a "small target" to those firms that do come?
I'm a Math major with only a 3.57 GPA. I know that there are less students applying for IB jobs here than at Harvard but on my floor alone, there's 3-5 guys also gunning for IB, all with 3.7s+ so the competition is pretty tough here also. Can I at least land an interview for BB Summer Analyst with only 3.57?
Lastly for IB and consulting, how does Amherst compare with schools like Middlebury, Williams, and NYU?
holy shit. use the search button. this is ridiculous
Amherst and Williams are good, dunno what Middlebury is (comm. college?) and NYU is OK I guess.
You think Middlebury is a community college?
and NYU is okay, you guess?
You should probably never post here again, at least not anything about college or college related subjects.
dude if northwestern is considered a "semi-target" by many, then those LAC colleges deserve ThoughtMan's skepticism. i dont know wtf Middlebury is either, why cant people just go to normal schools.
and NYU stern is barely a target (i think) but NYU liberal arts is indeed just "OK" when it comes to BBs
Williams and Amherst yes. To a certain degree, Pomona. The rest, no.
Swarthmore does ok.
Northwestern is a target for Chicago, otherwise semi-target. NYU Stern is a target, but that's because everyone and their mother at Stern wants in at banking. Plus, they all think they're hot **** because they work back-office at BBs during the year while looking down on Ivy-Leaguers by saying "man, we party so hard yo!"
A target isn't just a school where banks recruit. It's a place where the number of offers made is commensurate with size of student body and number of people interested.
There's a certain East Coast prep school set who think schools like Middlebury and Colgate are really amazing.
Amherst, Williams, and Haverford easily have students that can compete with the big universities. And Pomona on the West Coast seems to be becoming a target. Anything else...well, I don't know.
Middlebury is in the top 5 for LACs right up there with Williams, Amherst, Wellesley etc.
Middlebury acceptance rates are considerably LOWER than that of Northwestern's. Bill Clinton just spoke at their commencement. Pretty good for a community college, huh?
I dont give a crap about that "target", "semi-target" nonsense. If you cant make it into I-banking from these schools, you probably aint gonna make it coming from Harvard or Northwestern either.
midd is a great school. so is carnegie mellon. so are lots of other schools that just don't happen to be feeder schools to wall street.
for the 2007 admissions (incoming freshmen), Northwestern accepted 24.7% of its applicants and Middlebury accepted 23%, Northwestern also has 3 times as many applicants as middlebury, and 4 times as many undergrads. is that what you mean by "considerably LOWER" acceptence rates?
http://www.admissionsconsultants.com/college/2007_admissions.asp if you need a reference
bill clinton is so 5 years ago. we had Barack Obama speak at our commencement, wave of the future baby
Dude do you know what percentages are?
Schumacher--do you understand how on-campus recruiting at targets even works? If you did, you'd understand why it's such a big deal.
I went to a target. Every major firm came to present, often more than once, spending tons of cash on food and renting out the most expensive venues on campus in order to sway people. In my year, there were 75 interview spots set aside solely for people from my school for Goldman. On campus interviews, cocktail events at expensive restaurants for people who got to the 1st round, etc. You have lots of choices and can get this kind of access as early as your freshman year by attending presentations.
My friend went to Wash U--great school, but not really a target. They had resume drops, that's it. They actually arrange a New York week during fall break so that seniors have a chance to get some face time with the firms.
Do you see the difference? It's not about the quality of students; it's about whether the students are heavily recruited. It's always better to be at a place where you can make contacts with little effort.
Are LACs considered Targets, Semi-Targets, or Non-Targets? (Originally Posted: 05/26/2014)
Hello,
I attend a liberal arts college that's part of the NESCAC (mid-range, bit lower than Williams/Amherst). I am wondering what I would consider my school, because it seems like most target/non-target discussions on schools are for research universities.
What criteria is used when determining the recruiting status of schools. Is it selectivity, national rank, # of alumni in industry, rigor of program, etc? I've just been finding the concept of targets/non-targets really confusing, just hoping someone on here could explain. I attend a relatively prestigious school with a difficult econ/finance department and rigorous curriculum in general, yet everything else equal it seems I would be considered less competitive than say a, UVA, NYU, Georgetown., Cornell undergrad IB applicant (No disrespect to anyone from those institutions, I'm just naming random targets/semis) even though I would argue my institution is at least comparable in curriculum, rigor, and selectivity. I suppose those factors are not truly what matters when determining target status?
Anyways, just hoping anyone would shed some light on where top LACs (NESCACS in particular) fall in the target ball park. I feel as though people are quick to just name Williams and Amherst as the only recognizable lac targets and glance over the rest.
Bingo.
The word "target" is thrown around so often by people on this website.
I would say that technically people would call them non-targets because they are too small to receive any OCR; however, due to the strength of the alumni network they probably get bumped up to semi-targets.
If you network well and have decent grades and ECs from a top LAC school there should always be an opportunity to make it into finance/consulting to some degree. Some schools are more geared towards finance while others are not. For example Vassar is a high ranked school but I'm sure it has fewer ties than a school like Colgate just because of the nature of the school and the student body if that makes sense.
Target = most/all banks recruit at your school on campus (for FO positions) Semi = some banks do (for FO positions) Non = banks don't recruit at your school on campus/very few do
Thanks for the responses. A handful of student do go into FO IB roles and my schools has strong connections with three or four bulge brackets, so I guess that makes it barely a semi-target?
If anyone has anything else to add to the discussion I would love to hear it.
Lol, fp175, here we go again...
No, I understand completely. Of course Goldman is going to accept more people from H/Y/P/S because they know there is huge pool of talent, as well as a huge number of students interested in I-banking. Why on earth would Goldman want to recruit at a college with 2,000 people, 95% of whom have probably never heard of i-banking. This isnt the issue here, though.
What IS the issue here are people (most likely still in high school) coming onto these boards spewing cliche info about how it's impossible to get into BB if your non-target, unless you have a 4.0 and can bench 300lbs etc etc. This is simply not true! People in non-targets just have to work a little harder, build contacts, and have resumes with a little extra added sweetness.
If a company is going to throw your resume out just because you went to a Top 5 LAC school, then you really, REALLY, dont want to work for them.
I personally know of 2 people who went to Middlebury ('06 graduates) who got FULL TIME positions as Goldman Sachs analysts. And people want to lecture me about target schools and college recruitment when they have never even heard of Middlebury College. Rolling my eyes again...
I think people need to understand what actually happens. HYPS do not just get more analysts in because of their reputations. It's because of on-campus recruiting. If you are not at a target where there is on-campus recruiting, it will be MUCH HARDER to get in, regardless of how good your little LAC is in nurturing inquisitive minds or how good of a reputation it has in Vermont.
I think LACs are great for a lot of people. I actually think that if you want to go to grad school or law school, they might be better preparation in a lot of ways than bigger universities. But they are not great places to go if you want a good shot at a BB, with the exception of the ones I mentioned above.
This is not a debate on "which schools are good." As long as you remember that, people won't jump on your posts as much.
Sorry I was using Newsweeks statistics which had Middlebury at 24% and Northwestern at 30%. So I retract my comment, Middlebury is just a teeeny bit more selective.
Oh yeah and we dont want to get on the subject of politics here, I think we have enough on our hands! :P
I can see this is pretty pointless though, I'm against the same people as I was yesterday.
We just come from different places. You people went to top schools and saw numerous people get offers in BB. I went to an "okay" school that I'm sure none of you have heard of but still saw a few people land BB jobs.
One of our alumnus was recently busted for insider trading at a BB! They'll probably never hire from my school again.
Wow, OK, so Middlebury is definitely not a Community College. Why are people arguing about what schools a target and whats not, look at this list:
http://www.ibankingoasis.com/node/5768
Adjust for school size (Mich and UCB stand out in that area) and rank them, giving a +/- of 2-3 spots to adjust for year-to-year fluctuation. Coincidence: Stern does lame, Middlebury not on chart.
That being said, there are lots of banks, but I don't see their summer analyst spots being drastically different than this list.
NO NORTHWESTERN?
-commits suicide-
He posts below:
"Northwestern should have one up there. Also, Boston College and Middlebury both have one and Georgetown two."
Ok. So many Middlebury is decent. Still haven't heard of it, and definitely none in my SA class.
i dont like those liberal arts colleges, never understood them. i hav a friend whos going to Grinnell, i guess its a good LAC in missouri or something i dont even know, and a while back i asked him "so after u graduate are you gonna do your masters at a REAL university?"
I agree this forum has become downright hostile, with extreme insecurity regarding school reputation and GPA. This lack of inner confidence (i.e. I'm great because I graduated from Yale BS) with this entire board is sickening. ibankingoasis should be invite-only like doostang
Thank you. At the end of the day, there are plenty of kids from HPYS who get rejected from banks. It's not a guarantee of a BB offer by any means; anyone who says otherwise is full of shit. It's just easier, that's all.
The worst thing fp175 is how difficult it is for people on this board to appreciate what you just said. I think there needs to be a seperate board only discussing school reputations, where all the overly-emotional crowd can go and discuss reputations, rankings, recruiting to DEATH, and another forum just to discuss lifestyle issues, future careers opps post-IB etc. This forum is not what it used to be...
Amherst, Williams, Midd, and Wellesley are all recruited by banks.
The reason they don't place as well as places (peer schools) like Dartmouth, NU, Georgetown, Chicago is because LAC students are more likely to immediately pursue post-grad studies than students at large research universities. Also, don't forget that the aforementioned LACs have tiny entering classes (Amherst's is 400, Williams' is 500, Midd's is less than 600). So even if only 10 students (a very realistic number -- no wonder you don't notice them; there's probably only one or two per bank) go into i-banking from Amherst, that's like 30-40 from Dartmouth.
Plain and simple, they are targets.
no theyre not.
brisbane, NO! Wellesley and Middlebury ARE NOT TARGETS what is wrong with you people. Just because you go there doesn't make it a target. A target is a school were BB's recruit at actively, and "target" those students. I'm an SA and can confirm for you that Middlebury and Wellesley are not targets. In contrast, Williams certainly is, I know a handful.
I don't go to either of those schools nor did I apply to either. Nor do I even like either (I'm not a girl; and school in Vermont?).
Also, just because you're an SA at ONE bank and haven't seen any Midd/Wellesley kids doesn't mean that they aren't recruited. Your limited experience (admittedly more first-hand experience than me, though) doesn't really prove anything.
I'm so dissapointed in all of you. This stupid fucking target vs semi vs non target debate is a joke. I have seen so many threads about this topic, please just leave it alone.
If you go to a decent school, get good grades, and bust your ass networking you will be fine.
if u dont go to HYPS or Wharton, youre worthless and you suck at life.
and anyone from a small LAC should promptly kill themselves unless they dont mind being a butler or limo driver for the rest of their life.
Middlebury is not a target. Amherst and Williams are, but many of them go to MM banks and S&T because their alumni are extremely loyal to the school. Middlebury is fantastic for lit and history from everything I've heard and places extremely well for post-grad studies, but not on Wall Street.
Wesleyan and even Trinity are better in the NESCAC alone for that, simply because of their closer proximity to NYC.
someone explain to me how any ivy league is different than a liberal arts school other than the fact that these liberal arts colleges do not offer Phd programs. Liberal arts schools offer the normal majors and I am guessing for most of the ivy league students who do not go to Wharton and actually major in finance, they are econ majors with some sort of finance certificate or something.
i think people arent recognizing that these are very small schools. with limited interest in banking. 90% of the people at these schools are extremely smart, they are just more into hanging out smoking a joint and talking about dostoevsky than studying their vault guides and discussing whether or not 2 drinks is too much at next weeks bear stearns event.
at some point however, a few of those smart kid decide that they want to make some money at some point and think about banking. those 5-10 kids get offers. theyre numbers are small. thats why you dont see them in huge numbers like wharton kids. but they are there and banks do want them. its just a waste of time going all the way up to vermont or williamstown mass to talk to 20 kids when you can talk to 200 kids begging for jobs elsewhere.
it isnt that the banks arent extremely interested in the kids, its that the kids arent interested in the banks. in the end it simply isnt cost efficient for the banks to do sooo much recruiting for these 10 or so kids.
get over yourselves. williams, amherst, and pomona are among the most selective schools in the country. the kids just are not salavating over excel like you are.
Same old BS. As if these kids are magically different or something. My friends at AWS are just as interested in banking and consulting if not moreso.
What is the logic saying that these kids are "more interested in smoking a joint" than getting a job? These were the same kids who applied to Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton and the other Ivies. The applicant pools have gigantic overlaps, with the majority of those getting in at the aforementioned schools choosing them over the teeny-tiny LACs. Yet, as you suggest, as soon as these kids get in, they became magically disinterested in the same things the Ivy kids are interested in? What nonsense.
Knowing a large amount of kids who go to Amherst especially, the "smoking a joint" reference is the most glaring mis-stereotype I've heard in a while. A large percentage of those kids are looking to work as high-power lawyers, bankers, or consultants when they graduate. Especially the athletes, which at a school of only 2000-3000 sutdents, make up a large portion of the population on campus.
Why do people insist kids at Williams are more into discussing literature than wanting to do finance? There is no basis for this, it seems more like an excuse. Econ is the biggest major at Williams, and the applicant pool has tons of overlap with Dartmouth and Princeton.
athletes are different from the normal student body at every top school. i was one. it was how i got into college. all of my athlete buddies were interested in banking just like me.
and i am speaking more to the students who chose the top lacs over the ivys (the happens regularly). sure there are tons of athletes who went to those schools because they were the best schools they got into (me). but, the kids who really wanted to go there, are extremely different from more career oriented student often found at ivies and schools like stern (dartmouth, brown exempted).
and it is important to note the ivies and others (northwestern, stern) have tons more students.
schools like williams that are beginning to get more name recognition are becoming more attractive than before. however for the students who were there 5-10 years ago when it was less known in certain circles if you werent athlete, you were very different than your average wharton/stern kid (40% of williams students play some sort of sport)
fact. ive been there. seen it.
no disrespect to people from other schools. i am just saying its different and that kids at lacs are no less smart and capable than many of the ivy league counterparts.
they are often just into different shit.
the ivies are huge though. when there at 10-15000 kids, there is a wide variety of interests.
Dude Williams is already highly recruited at, but Wessesley and Middlebury aren't. I know Williams is just for a fact because there are at least 3 in my analyst class.
Guys...we've already said this is not about which schools are good. It's about which schools are targets. Stop being so defensive, it's really not important or useful to this discussion to note how many kids at Amherst want to do PhDs in psychology.
I went to private school in the New York area, tons of kids went to LACs, I've heard of all of them, and PLENTY wanted i-banking. This "intellectual" crap is BS; they're no more intellectual than any kid who did well in high school and went to a good college. And no one turned down an Ivy for an LAC unless it was Cornell.
QFT. Same experience, except I'd add Upenn (non-Wharton). I went to a magnet school so I saw kids get in and choose between practically every kind of school in America.
Let me settle this once and for all.
Not Even Close To Being Target: All community colleges (including Cornell) All state schools (-spits on Berkeley-) All pansy liberal arts colleges with undergrad class of 500
Semi-Target: UChicago Brown William and Mary (same thing as Williams i think? oh all those new england schools are the same) Boston College... or Boston University? I think they are the same too. NYU Stern (and if you think NYU is the same as NYU Stern you and your family should be executed)
Target: HYPS Penn (only Wharton)
Super-Target (aka BULLSEYE): Northwestern University.
Hey h4zin, dont call my school pansy! Judging from your recent posts I have a proposition for you...
I will make a $5,000 (1/1) bet with you right here right now, for all to see, that in 5 years time, you will have nothing to do with investment banking.
loll someone cant take a joke... that list i made was sooo serious, right Dang?
actually, the one part that WAS serious was that those wiener liberal arts schools ARE for pansys. get a real education in a town that actually has a population >2000. all top-tier college kids are pampered to some extent, but those LACs just push it to another level. no one needs THAT much individual attention. what students do need is a CITY with bars and clubs and stores and restaurants... not cornfields far as the eye can see.
i must admit, im a gambling man. 5 years? youre right, ill have nothing to do with i-banking. ill be either getting my MBA or ill be in HF or PE. 90% of my "recent posts" have been just screwin around at work, making fun of people and crackin jokes. so your judgment is way off, my friend.
AHAHAHAHAHA!
How on EARTH did you get into Northwestern?
First of all, in 5 years you will have nothing to do with finance, because you have a 3.3 and no ECs. As you wrote, "i figured this would help in interviews and would also show initiative. but then again, absolutely none of that matters, leadership experience, work experience, dedication, initiative, preparing 2 years early for interviews...none of that matters when u go to a semi-target with a 3.3 gpa :-(" Northwestern is a great school, with many people that go on to banking, but not with 3.3s and douche attitudes
Second of all, you need to realize that just because a school is not a "target" in the same sense as HYPS, which are outstanding schools, they can still be targeted by banks. You seem unable to comprehend that just because you have no shot, people at not top-four ivies do. I go to a top-five LAC, and I can tell you that many banks, including GS/MS/BS/C/JP/Laz come to campus and present, and conduct on-campus interviews. Thus, they are actively targeting and recruiting. Lastly, our class is about 400. Average Econ/Math grads are about 70. About 30-40 immediately continue to Ph.D. Thus 30-40 enter the world to seek employment. Excluding peace corps and teach for america, probaly 15-20 pursue finance. And this year, I personally know 5 full time first year analsyts: 2GS/2Citi/1MS. And five SAs this summer: 2GS/2Citi/1Laz. So please, stop bashing others and providing inaccurate information, simply because you are childish and insecure.
wow. why dont you reach way up your ass and try to pull that enormous stick out, because i think its starting to affect your brain.
im very flattered that youve been following my posts and that you know so many details about my life and my achievements. at least, so you think. "3.3 gpa and no ECs".. are you mentally retarded? i dont need to prove anything to you but ive had extensive leadership experience on campus in my first year at NU, not to mention the fact that i have been consistently working since i was 15 years old. literally, the only thing going against me is my gpa, which i have a year and a half to improve. (i would disagree when you say the "douche attitude" makes me any less of a candidate for banking) i never said im a shoe-in at a BB, im very worried that i wont get into one. but i do hav plenty of time to bring up my gpa and worse comes to worse, MM firm here i come.
im sorry that i insulted your pansy LAC, but dont be offended just because you had to go to school on some farmland in New Hampshire where the only thing to do for fun is get drunk and go cow tipping. Any school that costs 40,000 a year and has a 1:1 student-teacher ratio is going to be "prestigious" and send kids to top firms/grad schools. that doesnt take away from the fact that your school sucks because its a crappy experience, and youre probably an ivy league reject (as a lot of people at northwestern are... tho i never applied to an ivy.. or any school besides northwestern).
am i saying this to be abrasive? absolutely. am i saying this because of the joy i feel by pissing you off and getting you LAC wieners all riled up? absolutely. deep down do i think liberal arts schools have their merits and develop very talented, intelligent, well-rounded students? well, the true answer to that question might appear as a concession for peace, and id rather bicker and argue as long as possible, for it makes my excel monkey workdays just a little more interesting.
by the way, thanks collegeboard.com but i dont think anyone asked for every fucking statistic about your graduating class. i know you feel an overwhelming desire to prove yourself and your university worthy in my eyes, but i dont give a shit how many math majors go onto become phds from your school
haha h4zin is the next aspiringmonkey
but seriously, h4zin, rather than wasting time posting on a forum, and crying about not being able make it into ibanking, why not use that time to search for alumni, or something.
i dont know aspiringmonkey but ill take that as an insult
i agree its a waste of time, but anything to relieve the boredom of work.
im not crying, im defending myself. i made a mock-list of target schools based upon common pretentiousness of HYPS being the absolute best and everything else a "semi-target" or worse. then i get insulted and attacked for calling LAC's pansy schools because people are so devoted to their institution that they cant handle a joke. if someones bashing ME personally and saying ill never make it in finance, fabricating crap like i "dont have any ECs", yeah i will defend myself, if only for the satisfaction of devising effective comebacks and having the last word.
so far, waltersobcheck is the only one who took a worthy stab at me, yes, i am wasting my time, and i hope to god i dont become the next aspiringmonkey (just looked thru some of his posts). but where he was mistaken for saying ive been "crying", it is the LAC pansies who have been doing the real crying in this thread because i made a joke about their schools. boo-hoo
No one even said the LACs are crappy.
They are not as targeted or recruited at as the top Ivies and Stanford/MIT.
GET OVER IT and enjoy your Midwestern or New England college. I already have my job and degrees, I don't give a crap what the rest of you do or don't do.
dont worry about how i spend my time being productive. theres more things to do than just networking, and believe me im already on that.
if northwestern isnt holding me back and my gpa isnt holding me back, then why are u saying i should consider a career change? yeah, i feel pressure of getting into a BB, mostly because of my mediocre gpa, but that pressure just motivates me to work harder... so in effect, it will make me "cowboy up" this coming school year, or even this summer with the accounting class im taking.
yes, starting fights over the internet is stupid. having debates/arguments is not. but i dont care to continue the LAC vs Normal Top-Tier Well-Rounded University debate because clearly its a matter of preference. and i guess i just didnt come from an "intellectual/affluent environment" lol... ("arrogant cocksucker" indeed)
Quibusdam expedita possimus recusandae dolorum. Architecto quia voluptatem eum. Eveniet voluptas officiis non culpa. Facere consequatur qui dolorem in architecto debitis.
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...
Voluptas nam et qui quos. Quas cumque aut voluptatem omnis sit quo molestiae. Saepe aperiam ducimus ea esse repellendus necessitatibus dolores. Incidunt magnam corrupti vitae ut voluptatibus perspiciatis. Est illum nam exercitationem facere. Aut rerum soluta velit dolorum dignissimos dignissimos.
Maxime qui et magni qui. Quis dicta ut ratione libero. Non et vero dolores molestias et non modi. Magnam esse exercitationem quas dignissimos nemo nam autem.
Veritatis odit ducimus qui. Ea dolores est id illo dolor enim. Molestias ut quos inventore veritatis. Harum cum consequatur impedit autem sit maiores.
Aut laudantium neque architecto ea non facere. Reprehenderit officia atque sunt. Voluptatem ab nam et quis consequatur eligendi minima. Architecto et vitae neque aut. Debitis odio modi aperiam non aut et. Voluptas placeat deleniti saepe laboriosam voluptas voluptas. Cupiditate assumenda quaerat quae dolore eum minima deleniti.
Quibusdam blanditiis est corrupti est quibusdam voluptatum. Quidem aspernatur molestiae sed et iste laboriosam culpa. In nesciunt qui autem recusandae dolores ut. Vero incidunt dolorum cupiditate ut.
Error dolor eos vitae inventore quis voluptatem eligendi. Vero cumque quisquam animi. Vero beatae cum iusto ut. Cupiditate laboriosam magni ratione nam vel laudantium.
Exercitationem suscipit neque voluptate non ut non non. Qui minima eligendi nihil deleniti perspiciatis modi quae sed. Quia quia sint beatae nihil fugit tempore dicta cumque. Repellendus pariatur hic sed voluptatem ut. Asperiores in deserunt qui vel ad rem alias.
Nihil nobis porro architecto eos dolor veritatis. Et optio nam et perspiciatis sunt quas sit nostrum.
Distinctio et natus reprehenderit. Atque architecto velit delectus laboriosam occaecati voluptate. Qui sed dolorem veniam possimus magni. Placeat aspernatur ullam aut nesciunt alias officia et laborum. Quia sed ea dolores quis porro. Tenetur dolores facilis ut et delectus.
Et quia enim ea. Eaque dolorem quas adipisci est consequuntur. Fuga repellendus odio libero quis et. Distinctio iusto non neque expedita.