<p>I have a laptop and loathe every time I have to use the public computers. University computers are (comparatively) much slower, and during peak times you may have trouble even getting a computer in the public areas. Plus, everytime you use one you have to check those stupid microsoft boxes that say "are you aware that information being sent over the internet isn't 100% secure blah blah blah". If you have your own computer you press ok once and never again. If you are on public computers then you have to do it every single time, which I think is a huge pain. Perhaps I'm just very particular about the way computers are operated and maintained.</p>
<p>Also, without your own computer what will you use for home stereo system and home theatre? How will you download free media and entertainment or chat for 1 cent a minute to friends and family overseas? You can't be chatting on internet phones or watching television shows or movies using public computers.</p>
<p>While part of my question may only be tangential to the intended purpose of this thread I think it is still relevant.</p>
<p>How many LSE students finish their graduate program and then go on to apply to a top law school? How many are successful? And, do students ever try their luck in the job market, and if unsuccessful go on to apply to law school?</p>
<p>I am currently at Berkeley as an undergrad, and from the way you have described the European job market (emphasis on the university, not the degree – mine being PoliSci without any real study of economics) it appears that LSE may provide a certain flattening lacking in the American market (not to sound overly na</p>
<p>I don't hang around law or polisci students so I have no idea what their plans are or how successful they are at achieving whatever their goals may be.</p>
<p>"...from the way you have described the European job market (emphasis on the university, not the degree – mine being PoliSci without any real study of economics) it appears that LSE may provide a certain flattening lacking in the American market (not to sound overly na</p>
<p>Well LSE would simply because organisations look to LSE to recruit new staff for their European offices. Warwick, UCL, Imperial, Kings College, St Andrews and the University of Edinburgh would probably all be better for European recruitment, simply because these schools are targeted for European positions and UCB isn't. The opposite would be true in the case of the western US job market. Regional bias in recruiting is even evident within countries (including the US) and it is especially evident internationally.</p>
<p>Thanks for the valuable advice.
I wanted to ask abt transport in London.Can u tell wt is the best way to reach Bankside House frm the Heathrow airport,especially wen one is carrying loads of luggage?Is hiring a black cab the best option?Do u have any idea how much time it takes to reach?How much is the cab charge?</p>
<p>Hey Nauru, your advice has been so helpful in thinking about possibly taking up study at LSE. I have a spot in the MPA (PPM stream) program for this fall and I was interested in getting more detail regarding some things mentioned earlier in this thread. For those non econ/finance related masters programs like the MPA, is there any recruiting going on for these banking/consulting/top govt jobs or are these students merely exceptional examples fighting an uphill battle?</p>
<p>Also, you had mentioned that the LSE career office has some figures for average salaries based on program and other various criteria, do you know if these can be accessed anywhere online? And more generally, as a US citizen deciding on taking the plunge I have little knowledge regarding the average/typical starting salaries at some of these positions achieved by students graduating from Masters programs like the MPA or others (in the UK or EU as I wish to stay there after graduating) any thoughts on this?</p>
<p>I suppose I am nervous at the amount of debt and just trying to get a more solid perspective on the cost-benefit analysis before taking out the massive financing :/ Thank you for all your answers!</p>
<p>@ adylse: Never ever ever take a black cab, unless your parents are filthy rich and they don't mind you wasting all their money (and even then, there are much better things to waste parents' money on than pointless super-expensive cab fares.) You can take the underground (downstairs in Heathrow Airport) all the way to Southwark Station, which is roughly 7 minutes walk from bankside house. Bring a book though, as the airport is really in the outskirts of the city -- 20 stops or so from Bankside house.</p>
<p>sridge2008 brings up a good point regarding starting salaries:</p>
<p>How does compensation (in absolute numerical terms) for the positions discussed in this thread compare in London to similar positions in the US? I have no idea what to even expect.</p>
<p>Are salaries numerically the same? (i.e. an associate at Company Z's NYC office earns $100,000/year; an associate at Company Z's London office earns 100,000 Pounds/year)</p>
<p>Intaglio5 -- To answer your first and somewhat reasonable question, compensation is about the same. Investment banking starting salaries are about 20-25% higher in London than in New York, from what I've seen. Your second question is inane. "Company Z pays their associates in the Tokyo office a salary of 8 million yen per year. Is it then reasonable to think associates in Company Z's NYC office earn 8 million dollars per year?"</p>
<p>Sridge2008 -- recruiting is for the entire school equally, not for individual programs. Getting a job in banking/consulting/international organisations is an uphill battle for everyone because there are far more qualified applicants than there are jobs available (in the range of 60:1 to 120:1). Will you have a harder time getting a job in banking if you only studied irrelevant and non-quantitative majors such as politics and public administration, compared to someone who studied proper economics? Probably, but only because the econ person would likely have more intelligent answers to technical interview questions, and a better sense of the way the (financial and economic) world works. This may lead to more confidence in a technical interview and ultimately a better performance than the person who just doesn't have the background. It's not just because of "economics" on the CV I don't think.</p>
<p>I don't know where the salary data can be accessed online, if at all. I looked through a binder of printouts in the careers service office. Anyway, it's not particularly useful information because your results are independent of other people's individual results. If you're concerned about earning potential then just bear in mind that LSE graduates have the highest average starting salary of all the universities in the UK, including Oxford and Cambridge.</p>
<p>Regarding MPA salaries, I don't know. Seeing how most people from that program are probably looking to work in the public sector, their starting salaries are probably fairly modest I would think. I don't really see any reason for public organisations to pay well when there are literally thousands of highly qualified youngsters willing to do the job for next to nothing simply because they need the experience. Just look at the UN; they make interns work for free because they know modern yuppies have rich parents who will pay their kids' manhattan rent for them, so that an actual salary isn't "necessary". lol</p>
<p>The cost benefit is pretty stark to be honest. It's hard to imagine grown men and women offering substantially more opportunity later in life simply because of a certain name on a piece of paper. But apparently people really are that superficial in the real world, and certain educational "brand names" open doors that other "brands" never could. If you ask me, I think it's stupid. There are better universities than LSE in Europe but Americans would never consider going to those or hiring from those because they don't have the right branding. Such a dumb concept... Anyway, you need to look at your own situation and ask how much value the degree will really add to situation. That's a different answer for everyone, depending on existing opportunities, location of prior education, goals, etc.</p>
<p>Thanks for your in depth answer nauru, I really appreciate it. My main question was about the recruiting, because I feel I can perform in an interview but I wasnt sure as to whether those opportunities for interviews at top consulting firms/banks were offered to students of non-quantitative fields or if they were lucky to get them at all. All I need is to know i will have the chance :) Thanks again!</p>
<p>The short answer is yes; top consulting firms and banks interview people of all academic backgrounds at LSE. The long answer is that without some decent quantitative and analytical ability I don't see you doing particularly well in banking interviews unless you are going for HR or marketing. Top banks ask technical questions in interviews about economics, math, finance, and logic. It's not just personal BS and examples of when you volunteered to be president of some club you didn't care about just to get it on your resume so you could fluff it up during interviews (although there is a little bit of that).</p>
<p>Non quantitative people tend to do better landing consulting jobs than bank jobs I think. Also bear in mind that the application/interview process for the London offices of top banks includes at least one math test under somewhat tight time constraints. So if you suck at math you should probably get yourself sorted out before the application process starts.</p>
<p>My second question wasn't inane; considering that I'm an American (as has been stated in a previous question) studying in the UK next year (again, previously stated), and that it's generally understood that UK prices and US prices are numerically comparable, i.e. a coke in the US is $1, a coke in the UK is 1 pound (or is this a safe assumption? no way to know since you didn't answer my question), then I think it's fair to ask if the salaries across the two countries follow the same 1:1 numeric relationship as costs.</p>
<p>It was inane considering you've been accepted to LSE (and apparently have very little grasp of how exchange rates and purchasing power work). I am Canadian by the way, and I had already figured you are American.</p>
<p>UK prices and US prices cannot be generalized. They vary considerably from city to city, region to region. It is understandable that if you've only really been to central London, as a TOURIST, that you probably frequented shops and restaurant which are designed to rip off tourists like yourself and your kin. </p>
<p>Anyway, since you are going to be in London, let's compare the London price level to the New York City price level. please find below a link to an informative comparison table from Mercer (results from a far more reliable study than what you and your friends have "generally understood"), which has indexed cost of living in the world's most expensive major cities. </p>
<p>As you can see, the weighted average price index in New York City is 100, while in London it is 126.3. Thus it makes sense to pay London workers about 25% more than NYC workers for doing the same job, +/- a couple of percentage points to account for exchange rate fluctuations. It does not make any sense at all to pay London workers double.</p>
<p>Lots of non-economists make the mistakes of
a) assuming London prices are representative of the UK as a whole
b) assuming their random American hometown's prices are representative of prices in the US as a whole
c) assuming that while on vacation in a foreign place, the price level observed as a tourist is representative of the price level for people who live in that place (and who actually know where to shop)
d) assuming that the price level one experiences in said American hometown is the price level tourists experience when visiting the United States
e) assuming that the impact of a higher price for an irrelevantly cheap item such as a can of coke has any significant impact on the cost of living for the average person, or any visible impact on weighted price indices whatsoever</p>
<p>In closing:
Is London an expensive city? Yes.
Do most Americans (and Canadians) who haven't lived for years in other countries use their extremely limited experiences as tourists as a basis to grossly exaggerate differences in price level between places? Yes.</p>
<p>I work for an investment bank in New York City (not a random city in the US) and would like to work for an investment bank in London after graduating (not a random city in the UK). And, despite the volume of words you have written in response to my initial question, I still have no concept of the numerical salary range I can expect going into a similar position in London. </p>
<p>In fact, the only thing I have learned from the volume of words you have written in response to my question is that I will probably hate a good number of LSE students for their curmudgeonly disposition and their quick recourse to condescension.</p>
<p>For a front office role at a BB you are looking at 35-40k sterling base salary for a brand new analyst straight out of school. So about $75k base on average. I don't really know what people with full-time experience make, but hopefully with the above information you can come up with a ballpark figure for your own situation.</p>
<p>To everyone who's been asking about job prospects I'd just like to reiterate:</p>
<p>Many LSE students land very competitive jobs, but not without being very proactive and working very hard on making their applications stand out. When there are 100 high quality applications for each job in a given sector, nobody has an easy time getting noticed.</p>
<p>People who wait until the end of their time at LSE for a job to land in their lap end up not having many (if any) options by the time graduation comes. People who start making job applications as soon as their LSE program starts (or even a few weeks earlier, at the beginning of September) tend to be much more successful in landing the most sought after positions. </p>
<p>From what I've seen this appears to be equally true for all programs, from economics to european studies.</p>
<p>Nauru - thanks for the help on this thread. I have a few questions for you and anyone else about the Postgraduate diploma in accounting + finance at LSE:</p>
<p>I have no intention of pursuing the Msc after the diploma - what would my career prospects be like with just the diploma? (by "career prospects", I really mean getting 1st round interviews at top tier firms - IB/MC/etc)</p>
<p>I'm trying to evaluate how the diploma is viewed by recruiters and want to be sure it is not looked down on - any insight you can offer regarding the reputation of the diploma will be appreciated.</p>
<p>The LSE website mentions that 1/3 of diploma graduates go on to IB, another 1/3 to MC/audit and the remaining 1/3 pursue Msc - Do you have any anecdotal evidence on outcomes of diploma graduates?</p>