B-sch category

m7 would seem like a good fit.

What is your ug school and GPA?

If you have a good UG and GPA, you should apply to Wharton and all of the rest of the M7 outside H/S. If your UG GPA/Institution isn't great, then apply to the rest of the M7 outside H/S/W and supplement it with 3 schools ranked 8-16 that you like personally / fit well.

I don't think you have a realistic shot at Harvard/Stanford, and those applications are very difficult to put together, so wouldn't waste your time.

thanks for the feedback guys. my UG/ gpa wasn't great (3.2 equivalent )

so would you say no real chance for HBS / S. GSB ? Or is there anything i can do to still give m a shot at H / S / W given that i cant really change my UG history

what was your ug school?

UG was in the uk - UCL

UCL is quite a good uni

I think that combined with the GMAT of 720 ought to make you competitive for the top 10. I'd also have a go at Harvard or Stanford- your being international and your undergrad makes you an interesting candidate.

This is strange to me - he works in Middle Office but everyone is saying he's competitive for the top 7-top 10 schools. I am not arguing with anyone here but I was under the impression that working in MO/BO is a red flag for top schools?

i'm interested in hearing more on how people think business schs will view my i-bank MO background. i know the whole FO>MO>BO story but some of the functions our perticular MO team performs in GS is considered FO in Bar Cap, DB etc

One plus point i found was i got the chance to develop more broader soft skills and gain earlier mangement responsiblities while in the MO role than, say, if i was in S & T. (of course this role has its own plus points)

Bateman- it was a 2:2 (econ)

Everyone here says thatbecause they are still in college and are pretty clueless. Adcoms won't look at two profiles and say...oh he worked at GS, so we must take him above the CS guy. Harvard will have GS, MS and even MM firms like Edgeview, Lincoln, Blair, McColl etc

UCL is a great school that I believe would not in itself weaken an H/S application.

What is worrying however is the 2:2. It would be hard enough with a 2:1.

thanks for the responses guys

I hear what your saying about the MO background and 2:2 in UG. Given this i was think about approaching it another way- applying for a oxford/cambridge 1 yr MBA ?

• only one yr long
• cheaper- most top US MBAs (M7) would end up costing $120-140k all in. this way it is only a bit more than a MSc so a little less risky with debt load.

*i should have a better chance there given it is less competitive (background and gmat scores) and surely they place some MBA alumni in M&A

• As i already work fairly close (& network) with the gs IBD teams i just need that little something to help my job application. I thought an US MBA would be best though an oxbridge MBA may be be sufficient ?? any other suggestions ?

Apply wherever you want. MBA is completely random and far less about stats than people on here would have you believe. Check out other forums (gmatclub probably the biggest) and you'll see what I mean. Plenty of 760+ 3.8's getting dinged/wl while low 700's 3.4 getting in every school they applied. It's all about your essays, experience, and clearly conveying your goals. Weigh geography as your highest priority. There are about 3, no more than 4 schools, worth ignoring geography. Beyond those, schools ranked 4 and ranked 20 are the same depending on what you want to do. Sure Duke/Haas are good schools but neither makes sense if you want to work on the opposite respective coast.

"schools ranked 4 and ranked 20 are the same depending on what you want to do."

I disagree with merkin's logic. Generally, I think schools ranked between 4-8 are the same, and 9-15 are the same, and 16-30 are the same, and 31 - Devry online MBA are same. I mean, yes the lines blur obviously, but you won't ever convince me University of Chicago/Kellogg/Columbia/MIT/Tuck and Tepper/Emory/Darden are the same in prestige/opportunity/recruiting.

All aforementioned programs are great schools and your work ethic is always the x-factor in terms of potential success, but being at a better, more selective school with bigger alumni networks and endowments is always an added benefit. Location can have a lot to do with ranking (i.e. Columbia, NYU) but its still overall a better ranked school. For example, if your dream is to work in Pittsburgh, Tepper is great for you. But if you want something globally respected, then you want the best name possible.

Well I stand by my point regarding stats. Regarding school rep, I agree that there are a few schools, more than my initial claim of 4, worth ignoring personal considerations. I don't consider Tuck or MIT to be in that class, overall, but certainly H/S/B/W/K/Columbia are all undoubtedly. Putting those aside, geography or program specialty should be one's primary driver, IMO. Por ejemplo, if you get into USC and want to work in California, it certainly doesn't make any sense to go to NYU. Texas is also a good example, though unique in that it's sway covers a state with the most fortune 500 companies and regional offices of every BB, so a bit more powerful than somewhere like Tepper that might be limited to a city. Personally, I don't give a witch's tit about "global respect" if I land a summer associate gig in IBD at a BB. That is very doable at McCombs, probably even more so than all/many in that 9-15 category. Of course, that all assumes that you want to be in TX. Not everyone likes beautiful women and no state income tax though. :)

Unfortunately you are going to have a very difficult time getting into H/S/W with a 2:2. It's really the equivalent of a 3.0 or lower, not a 3.2. I did a US BA and then came to UK for masters so I spent a lot of time looking at the conversion - the generally accepted metric is:

1st class = 3.7 - 4.0 2:1 = 3.1 - 3.6 2:2 = 2.7 - 3.0 3rd = why even bother

If I'm being honest I would say with your grades and work experience, you would not be a strong applicant for H/S/W. 2:1 is the minimum requirement for the top MBA and masters programs in the UK and Europe, and they are less competitive to get into than H/S/W. For you the goal is a transition to FO, which can be done from a wider variety of b-schools than people on this forum would suggest. Think about NYU, Tuck, Yale, etc - if you look at their class stats you'll see they do send decent % of graduates into banking.

I thought Yale was not that competitive. then I got dinged by them after getting offers at two M7 Schools and two top 15 schools.

Wow..that's sorta burst my bubble ... so do you reckon an Oxford MBA (with reasons listed above) is the best way to go about trying to get into M&A ?? of course will prob still try my luck at HBS/ S.GSB etc but being more realistic

oxford mba with my background/networking should be able to get into BB M&A, right ? Not like i'm aiming for buyside/PE/HF - keep in mind i'll prob finish 2012