<p>That list wasn't inclusive, but those are generally, w/ the exception of 2-3 programs out there,that are definetly on the target list.</p>
<p>...So you are saying IB's only go to 9 schools to recruit?</p>
<p>Two things::
A) Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said that just because a school Isn't a target school banks don't recruit there.</p>
<p>B) My post was declaring schools that were relatively "easy" to get an interview at. To be honest, if you're not at Harvard, Wharton, Yale or even Stanford, with a >=3.3, unless you have a >3.6 at a semitarget or >3.8 nontarget, its tough to get an interview. Even those at semis and non with these stats have trouble getting interviews.</p>
<p>Now you are getting closer to the reality. Requirements gradually increase as the "targetness" of your school decreases. It isn't HYW or bust as you seem to have implied earlier. However, there is a large drop-off once you get to the non-targets.</p>
<p>The thing is, one could argue that for a given individual, a 3.7 at a semi-target requires the same amount of effort as a 3.4 at a target. In this case, there is no difference in relative difficulty for landing interviews.</p>
<p>Jnpn,</p>
<p>Throughout my examination of this thread I couldn’t help but gawk at how absurdly ludicrous your statements are. I thought this thread would be about UCLA’s I-Banking program or lack thereof, I suppose I should say. However, all I see is some idiosyncratic annoyance prancing about spouting misinformation and attempting to not only confuse the meaning of this thread but attack every ideological creation that may oppose his own. I can’t help but laugh as your closing post on this thread and how it mentions GPAs in regards to effort at, and I quote, “HYW” I wasn’t aware this thread was about Harvard, Yale, and Wharton. In fact, to my knowledge Harvard and Yale doesn’t even get brought up on the first page. </p>
<p>Now, in regards to UCLA’s I-Banking program I haven’t the slightest idea about its ability to produce successful employees. In reality I sometimes doubt its ability to produce functional human beings by the time graduation rolls around (I jest of course). I will say the UCLA could provide an individual with many opportunities which the individual may be closing the door on prior to attending simply looking for the most profitable career. Before attempting to transfer I’d encourage you to enjoy the eclectic sampling of courses available at UCLA, and enjoy the beautiful weather, because wherever you transfer to I guarantee it won’t be as nice environmentally or socially as UCLA.</p>
<p>Signed: Dartmouth Or Bust</p>
<p>P.S. Hanover is Beautiful, but it’s no L.A.</p>
<p>haha umm I'm not sure where this is coming from but check out mtrizzle06's post. That is where HYW got brought up. I was simply countering a post that was false in its exaggeration.</p>
<p>Many people on this thread seem to be limiting their definition of investment banking to working for a Bulge Bracket firm in NYC, which is short sighted. Both USC and UCLA do reasonably well at placing graduates in banking positions in SF and LA - some with major firms, some with middle market firms, some with boutiques. </p>
<p>signed, a USC alum in investment banking</p>
<p>just to rehash bicostal's point, LA is also a good place for Banking, and SF is 2nd best in the states behind NYC. UCLA's UG program places very well in these areas, BB, MM, or small boutique.</p>
<p>Regardless, most people on this board find that NYC BB banking is the "holy grail" of jobs. While banking in NY is unmatchable, banking in LA/SF are great opportunities to get your finance career going. A lot of people seem to underestimate "2nd tier" banking cities, some for reasons that are good and some that are bad. </p>
<p>The COL in NYC is ridiculous, so banking in any other 2nd tier city will be a much better "value". For the most part, most BB Banks pay the same in (Base + Sign + Bonus) all cities, so your 125K in LA is worth more than your 125K in NYC. I would caution, though, about going to a 2nd tier city, unless you want to stay there. I've heard many stories that indicates where you start is likely where you will end, unless you're an All Star in New York and can lateral to wherever you like. Of course, this is, again, just my .02 and my perception of the banking industry from what I've heard. </p>
<p>All in all, a secondary banking market is really something to aspire for many respects, as opposed to NYC BB Banks. Of course, there are tons of arguments against 2ndary markets, but, all in all, UCLA, USC places quite well in LA/SF, but not as well in New York.</p>
<p>Honestly, if you want to live the rest of your life on the West Coast, you can't do much better than Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, or USC.</p>
<p>Even if you don't, there are other jobs that are worth doing besides the BB banks.</p>