Best Undergraduate College for Investment Banking and Hedge Funding

<p>They are the best of the best because NYC attracts them with $$ (higher salaries) and better exit options. Plus you're closer to the action working on the biggest deals. The best analysts after their second year are probably getting offers from PE/HF so these banks have to pay them enough so they'll stay an analyst (and hopefully if you're the best of the best they want you to become an associate w/o going to biz school) and not make that leap. </p>

<p>What would happen if NYC paid people the same as people in Chicago? NYC would lose some of those potential superstars because people would say "hey, I can earn just as much in Chicago as opposed to NYC and my money will go much farther there." </p>

<p>Yes, if you move from NYC to Chicago you will be just as good of a banker. What are you trying to say? Do you honestly think people in this industry (or any industry) are paid on an individual basis for how they perform? The fact is if you move to chicago your bank doesn't have to be as worried about you being lured away by the top PE/HF because those people tend to recruit out of NYC. NYC is the financial capital of the world, the jobs there are the hardest to get, it draws the top talent, the reasons NYC people make more are apparent. </p>

<p>Yes, if you are an analyst in NYC your total compensation will be greater than if you are an analyst in Chicago, SF, Boston, LA, etc.</p>

<p>this explains what you were talking about from before w/ regards to nd grads. While ND may be recruited by chicago firms, much like uchicago and northwestern, for nyc, i.e. the big time, nd is a non-target. So basically, ibanking in Boston, Chicago, or even Miami, let's say, is not comparative when it comes to targets, non-targets, to NYC, where, pretty much, only the ivies are targets?</p>

<p>in addition, lax, you never refuted my argument concerning why indiana and unc got more people to ibanks than northwestern and uchicago. You merely scoffed at it like a hypocritical elitist. Please explain why that happened and how it relates to the fact that one can get an ibanking school from a, gasp, non-target.</p>

<p>thejoker - Please stop posting and try to absorb what lax and majayiduke are saying. </p>

<p>There is a big difference between ND and UChicago/Northwestern in terms of recruiting for front-office investment banking positions, regardless of whether or not the position is in New York or Chicago. UC and NU are better, hands down. That's not to say that ND doesn't produce bankers; it just means that it isn't recruited as heavily as the other two schools and it will be MUCH more difficult getting into banking coming from a non-target like ND, for a Chicago office or not. Bottom line. </p>

<p>Your allusion to UNC and Indiana mean nothing. UChicago and Northwestern are better schools for careers in banking and they are more heavily recruited. That's another empirical fact. The only reason I can think of why the SA class of ONE bank for ONE year might feature more Indiana or UNC kids than UC or NU kids is merely based on numbers -- the public schools will have about three times as many students as UC or NU. </p>

<p>As far as compensation at regional versus big offices, it comes down to deal flow. NYC/London/Hong Kong get bigger, larger, and more frequent deals; hence, compensation (see: bonuses) are better at these large offices. Chicago, for example, has very poor deal diversification. Generally, the Chicago offices of BBs only work on industrials. Houston will generally work solely on energy deals. If you're starting off as an analyst or a summer analyst, you want to have experience doing a lot of different deals. In New York or London or Hong Kong you have the opportunity to work on all sorts of different transactions. For example, if the M&A group of Greenhill is dead because of the recession, at the very least, the restructuring arm is doing well. If Lehman LevFin is suffering, their Natural Resources group can pick up the slack.</p>

<p>
[quote]
in addition, lax, you never refuted my argument concerning why indiana and unc got more people to ibanks than northwestern and uchicago. You merely scoffed at it like a hypocritical elitist. Please explain why that happened and how it relates to the fact that one can get an ibanking school from a, gasp, non-target.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Please link me to where I said you can only get into banking from a target? If you can do that I'll be more than happy to leave this thread....but you can't because I never said that. I did say it is much easier to get into banking from a target which my list shows based on, gasp, the vast majority of summer analysts being from targets. </p>

<p>Like I said, please link me to where I said you can only get IB from a target. I said it was easier and a look at any top bank will confirm this.</p>

<p>Check this out lax: "but you're numbers actually prove my point that where you go to school does not matter as much as your ability to interview well and succeed." (joker)
"HAHA! This was a good laugh. Try this line out on anybody who knows anything about finance, let alone IB, and see what they have to say."(lax)</p>

<p>So now it's clear that you don't know anything about 1) i-banking or 2) reading comprehension. </p>

<p>Does my quote say your UG is all that matters? Can you read? No. But it certainly matters more than your ability to interview because you have to GET the interview first. That's what I said, school is what matters most but it's not all that matters. </p>

<p>It's really pathetic to see you try your hardest. Do you want me to tell you what you want to hear? Will that make it easier? How about this:</p>

<p>Yes, ND is great for IB recruiting. It is a prestigious school with graduates that wall street firms just cannot wait to get into their banks. You will have great opportunities to work in nyc at the top banks. Furthermore ND has a superb business school!</p>

<p>You can either have me tell you the truth or what you want to hear. They aren't the same however.</p>

<p>joker, you're done. Please don't respond any more - you just turned from an innocent HS kid into an annoying one who is incapable of accepting the fact that his dream school sucks for banking. If you have to work this hard to defend your school, CLEARLY you need to come to terms with reality.</p>

<p>Lax just blew you out the water.</p>

<p>"Does my quote say your UG is all that matters? Can you read?"</p>

<p>You tell me (you should try reading):</p>

<p>"but you're numbers actually prove my point that where you go to school does not matter as much as your ability to interview well and succeed." (joker)
"HAHA! This was a good laugh. Try this line out on anybody who knows anything about finance, let alone IB, and see what they have to say."(lax)</p>

<p>No, you did not explicitly state: it does not matter where one goes to school. But you did say that its a joke to consider that the individual is more important the school in ibanking. If you can't evaluate/ understand the meaning of your own sentences, that's your problem, not mine.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But you did say that its a joke to consider that the individual is more important the school in ibanking.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Where did I say that? I believe I said that where you go to school is the most important factor in getting an IB job. I stand by that, you wont get an interview at 95% of schools. Once you get the interview yes, it's about the individual, but you underestimate how difficult it is to get an interview. </p>

<p>You put words into my mouth left and right yet, when asked, can never present me with quotes saying what you claim I said.</p>

<p>read the sentence. enough said.</p>

<p>Is NYU(CAS) a target school? Does i-bank recruit in non-stern NYU? Can econ major in CAS get enough attention from BB i-banks?
What about Tepper in Carnegie Mellon?</p>

<p>I tend to believe that the individual is much more important than the school--but I do understand joker's point about getting the interview. However, I strongly disagree that only "target" schools will get someone an interview.</p>

<p>There are many non-target schools that place quite well on Wall Street. For example, USC is not a "target" school, per se--but places a large number. Indiana is not a "target" school, but their Investment Banking Workshop program (The</a> Investment Banking Workshop at Indiana University) has placed over 60 students per year into IB--and last year had a 100% placement rate. </p>

<p>Certainly people coming out of Penn (especially those who went to Wharton or took classes at Wharton while majoring in another field) will place quite well--as will NYU with their finance majors, both because of academics and location. Yale has placed well with their Business certificate program and Virginia has probably done better than any school except Wharton. And we all know that many of the Ivy league graduates go on to IB jobs--but that may be as much a reflection of their family connections (in many cases) as it is a reflection of their academic preparation. </p>

<p>The point I'm trying to make here is that I disagree with joker's overall argument--which is that only "target" schools will do much in the way of placement to an IB job. While it is true that it will definitely give you an advantage (because they will go to the schools and do interviews there, and because many of the people at the Wall Street firms were recruited themselves from these schools), it is far from accurate to say that students from other schools have no chance to be recruited merely because they attended a non-"target" campus.</p>

<p>P.S. It should also be realized that sometimes a "target" school does not send many people to Wall Street. Emory was a "target" for years, and still is for some IB firms, but the number of firms recruiting there has fallen recently--not because the students are weaker, but rather because most of the students there have declined most of the NY offers to stay in Atlanta and the SE region--probably because they came from there originally--but possible also because of the higher cost and poorer weather one finds in NY versus costs and weather in the southern and SE regions of the US.</p>

<p>There are so many flaws with your argument, but I will not address them at this time. </p>

<p>One thing I will point out is that Emory was, and still isn't, a "target" school by any means. It was very recently "targeted" by Goldman, but just because one BB holds an information session there per semester does NOT mean that it is a "target" school. </p>

<p>Please do not spew your misinformed banter all over this forum. Please and thank you.</p>

<p>*was never</p>

<p>for the record, it is not jokers argument, calcruzer, it is lax's.</p>

<p>Always a pleasure to see some clueless kid getting owned online.</p>

<p>mendoza is not a "bad" school but it is outclassed by many other schools in terms of NYC job placement.</p>

<p>i know that. i know hyps, wharton, mit, and others are better. All i was wondering is whether or not ND is a semi-target, esp. in chicago.</p>

<p>who wants to go to ND anyway</p>

<p>:D</p>