Dear College Confidential members,
I have recently been accepted into the two schools: (CMU and Emory). Not expecting to have been accepted into both wonderful schools, I am now torn between the two and would like to receive some advice from those who have been/ are in similar positions. I wish to major in finance and it is my dream to work in Goldman Sachs one day.
*My apologies for the lack of details and vagueness 
Would you rather live in Atlanta or Pittsburgh? Why Goldman Sachs?
Both are excellent schools and comparable to one another though famous for different things. Most folks know CMU for its conservatory, at least thatâs my impression. However, CMU does not have a law school. Oftentimes, companies like Goldman Sachs will give singing bonuses to those that go out and get their JD-MBA. These signing bonuses can often be in the area of 30,000 or more. Emory offers that program, whereas CMU does not. However, if you plan on basing yourself out of the Midwest, itâs ideal to go to CMU. Same with Atlanta for Emory. Youâre also paying for the area, keep in mind.
Are you aware that Oxford Campus is completely separate from the main Emory campus? And Oxford is a long drive away, in the middle of nowhere. It is a tiny campus, and feels more like an LAC. Students may be more close-knit bc of the location isolation. You spend two years on Oxford Campus before transferring to the main Emory campus.
Letâs back up a second and discuss what you want to do at GS.
If youâre trying to do back office grunt work (in SLC or, if youâre lucky, NYC) or Human Capital or Audit or something similar, then Emory will get you there. CMU probably will, too.
If youâre going for the more glamorous jobs (banking, trading, etc), then Emory probably wonât take you there (and I doubt CMU will either)⊠although both are terrific schools.
CMU will open more doors if you want to go into certain business roles prop trading⊠or codingâŠ
Emory if youâre looking for less technical roles⊠(accounting, consulting at certain firms, etc)âŠ
So, figure out what you want to do first and make your choices accordingly.
Getting into school is stressful⊠deciding on a career path is fun⊠so, although you have a lot of work ahead of you, it should be funâŠ
They are both selective, so shouldnât the students be able to land internships that would make them competitive for whatever? I feel like those limitations are only valid for if you follow say, a traditional path (IE the b-school with no second major or dabbling in something like advanced CS or math). In those cases, where you go matters because employers trust that some b-schools train better for some things than others. But a lot of people landing the more high tech/quantitative jobs are not finance majors or did not go to the b-school. As for this obsession of trying to get into a place like GS and high finance from the get-go, I am not sure. And this idea that you need to major in finance to get there is even more baffling. Being talented and picking up computational and legit quantitative skills along with exposure to finance via internships (this is a must as it adds the whole ânetworking componentâ) or course selection may be better unless you attend very top schools that also have elite engineering, math, CS, or econ departments (notice how these are all quantitative- and at very top schools, are very quantitative and mathematically rigorous, much more so than a finance major and basically all majors any any UG business school). I would say open ones mind to other possibilities that result in high pay. These straight and narrow paths via finance majors, with exception of those near the top of the class will likely lead to grunt workâŠgaining quantitative skills appears to open a wider array of options that may not be GS, but certainly pay very well coming out of college and are likely more stimulating. Going to majors/courses that build legitimate problem solving skills (especially involving math) clearly pays off. If you can take a couple of business courses in finance or double major, it would likely make you more competitive for things like GS or other types of firms that pay well.
Simply speechless at the number of thoughtful replies from those at Emory. I did not expect any replies after my similar post on Carnegie Mellonâs forum received only 1 well thought reply
P.S. As you may sense, I am quite indecisive and my indecisiveness is literally oozing out LOL. Sorry if I gave/am giving any of you a hard time with my questions! Also, thank you for your time!
I read your post, but I still think youâre lost. What is your goal? Do you know? To make a lot of money? In that case, I recommend banking. And Emory because Iâm worried CMU might be too rigorous. Although I dont think you have a great shot at being a GS banker from emory - but It sometimes happens.
Banking is very much related to high gpa and pedigree of school. Major doesnât matter much- you wonât see as many math majors with high gpas in banking because there are much easier majors to get that gpa and you will be penalized if your gpa isnât high.
And the people who can get the high gpas as math majors donât waste their time in banking.
Not that being a math major will hurt you as a banker, you might be shooting yourself in the foot.
I think quantitative backgrounds are extremely good to have for pretty much anything other than banking.
I wouldnât major in math so much as something that builds quantitative skill but perhaps has a fair amount content rigor AND grade inflation. I am willing to bet you that QSS and econ. have lots of both because they take into account what is needed to land certain jobs where STEM assumes that you are pre-grad, going into industry, or pre-med (where weeding out a few along the way can only help the âsuccessâ rate of the institution) where 2 of the 3 value experience and skillsets more so than what can often be a superficially high GPA (one you got from a very easy major or avoiding rigorous instruction). There are some jobs that are quantitative that apparently test for the skillsâŠ(which means you need to actually be good, if your GPA resulted from a watered down curriculum as opposed to tough content but grade inflation, then you will be exposed)
There are certain fields in finance that place a high value on quantitative skills like those acquired by a rigorous math degree.
Stand alone hedge funds and investment banks that engage in sophisticated hedge fund-like strategies (either for their own account - proprietary trading - or for clients) need people who can take large data sets and develop profitable trading algorithms. This typically requires high level math skills and/or software development skills. It probably depends on the firm whether an undergraduate degree suffices or whether more - a graduate level degree of some kind - is required.
One can probably check with Emoryâs career counseling office to see whether Wall Street investment banks and hedge funds recruit at Emory.
@aluminum_boatâ Iâm sorry, but I feel I have to clarify something for you. Iâm going to be a freshmen at Oxford this fall with a desire to work in what you called a âglamorous jobâ, but your belief that Emory (and Iâm not sure if you included GBS when you said Emory) wonât be able to get you into banking, trading, etc. is just completely wrong. Iâve been reaching out to alum in the field and theyâve all said how well Emory prepared and helped them get into those jobs. And if you look at GBSâs graduating class and the fields they are going to, a huge percent went into finance (not back office, hr, etc. But a combination of investment banking, private equity and maybe corp fin?). And if you do a simple search on linked in of something among the lines of âEmory university investment banking,â you will find pages and pages of front office investment bankers who graduated from - yeah you guessed it - Emory.
I donât consider banking, trading, etc glamorous jobs. I consider banking at GS, JPM, trading at Citadel, consulting for BCG, etc. glamorous jobs. As a whole, not Citi, BAML, WF, Deloitte etc. (although they are great jobs with some fantastic niche groups -that I consider glamorous).
Iâm including GBS.
PE firms very rarely hire undergrads - I am still doubtful more than a negligible couple of them hire from Emory.
I specifically said
and I still stick by it.
Itâs a shame they stopped publishing actual numbers almost a decade ago.
http://goizueta.emory.edu/degree/undergraduate/career_management/placement_statistics/2008.html is the last time they did it. Take a look for yourself. 3 hires. And, I canât show it, but itâs definitely possible that all of them were IT, Human Cap, etc.
This doesnât mean that nobody from Emory has ever worked for GS/MS/JPM in the front office⊠But itâs not something you should âbankâ (pun intended) on. Iâve heard through the grapevine that we had a guy get an offer from GS TMT not that long ago, although the rumor is he turned it down.
@aluminum_boatâ I suppose it wonât be as easy to get a FO position at Goldman or some of the other BBâs coming from Emory as opposed to coming from HYP, but I hope we are both able to agree that the âhigh financeâ jobs like investment banking, trading, etc. at many top firms are quite doable, especially coming from GBS, as well as the fact that the OP doesnât REALLY know if he wants to work at gs. Yeah, it may sound glamorous and all, but until he can see what itâs like at the other firms and their cultures, he doesnât truly know where he wants to work.
And question, are you still at GBS? Iâve read that Emory alum at EBâs are very loyal and willing to help, especially lazard and maybe jefferies if I can remember correctly? I also think Iâve seen many at PWP on linkedin. Can you confirm if thereâs any truth to this?
I donât know anyone at PWP and I only personally know one person at Lazard (but, Lazard definitely recruits at Emory, or at least used to do so). And I didnât go to GBS, so Iâm not the best person to ask.
Take interesting, useful classes (not necessarily the toughest available, but sometimes they are)⊠meet the right people⊠make good impressions⊠be friendly and willing to learn and ambitious and motivated⊠Emory has a ton of opportunity for people who are willing to put in time and work.
But, while Emory grads exist in those top jobs, itâs not a feeder school like HYPWS - as long as weâre clear about that.
@aluminum_boat What does the âWâ in HYPWS stand for?
@MyOdysseyâ : Itâs Wharton because he doesnât want to say âPennâ lol⊠If anything I would have maybe included Chicago (because of elite econ. dept that is much more quantitative than normal, which is something H and Y also have in common. Duke is very good/on the come up with its econ. dept as well and has had increasing success with placementâŠthere seems to be a correlation with âgreat econ deptâ as opposed to âgreat b-schoolâ with exception of Wharton which has more rigorous quantitative requirements/pre-reqs than many other UG b-schools). I would also imagine MIT is there (as a an awful high percentages of them go to Wall Street and other financial firms with their math skills among other things). Regardless, Iâm surprised that there is any argument over this issue of some schools being much bigger targets than others. This is well-known and precedented. They donât necessarily keep this trend going because those schools are the only with âthe bestâ (that idea is kind of obsolete given the rise of other schoolsâ student bodies), but because of the prestige associated with the names of the institutions from which they recruit. Business and Law are naturally very prestige driven and hiring from Wharton, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT, and Stanford makes them look good. In addition, there is âfeed-forwardâ of alumni who run those places which no doubt tips the scales in favor of those who are from their alma materâs. This will be consistently perpetuated. For it to change, the other schools with similar student bodies would have to become as prestigious those places (in terms of name recognition dominance-right nowâŠDuke is kind of going their in terms of that). You may also have to move your school further to the North (Stanford is special) lol.