<p>Really? Interesting. How did so many get NY gigs then?</p>
<p>The people I know all networked</p>
<p>Slash knew people who knew people…?</p>
<p>they contacted alumni. it’s powerful stuff if you know how to.</p>
<p>Oh I know – I’m just surprised at how many succeeded at such top firms.</p>
<p>They’re both great schools but I certainly agree on Oldfort on that Chicago is more of a strictly academic/research university as in they would do well in quants and econ as in the theoretical aspects whereas Duke is more like business and wall-street oriented. If you want to go into Wall street, Duke. If going for a PhD, then probably Chicago.</p>
<p>BTW How do you quote on the replys?</p>
<p>Do yourself a huge favor and go to Duke if you’re interested in banking in NYC. I’ve actually come in contact with a lot of Duke alumni throughout the recruitment process. Not so much for University of Chicago. Make of that what you will.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Its [ quote=INSERTNAME] Quote text [ /quote] This is the basic command for all formatting (italics, bold, etc). The name of the OP is optional.</p>
<p>Quick way to pull up formatting for italics, bold, underling: Hit Ctrl + Shift + I (or U or B). [ I][/I ] pops up instantly and you can start typing within the [ I][/I ].</p>
<p>There are a lot of stupid and ignorant people on this thread especially IvyPBear. These are not ****ing low rate schools. You really think that a kid coming out of UChicago with stats that are equal to a Duke counterpart that WANTS to do ibanking has a lesser chance? Your an idiot. UChicago is a ridiculously competitive/prestigious school, and a kid would have as much opportunity to them as any other school aside from H/W probably. You don’t see that many UChi grads in banking because not that many people go to UChi for banking. Not because there isn’t opportunity or they aren’t smart. Both are great schools but I’d rather go to UChi. I’m from the SE and I’ve seen tons of Duke kids take jobs in ATL/Charlotte. Im sure both schools have great reach to NYC, but if you go to Duke and NYC doesn’t work out…I don’t want to be in the SE.</p>
<p>^ I think there’s a bit of flawed logic there. </p>
<ol>
<li>I’ve seen plenty of Duke kids take jobs in the SE. </li>
<li>If NYC doesn’t work out, I don’t want to be stuck in the SE. </li>
<li>UChi > Duke. </li>
</ol>
<p>1) Just because Duke students get jobs in the SE doesn’t mean they don’t elsewhere. I’ve seen Duke UG’s in NYC, Chicago, LA, San Francisco-- you name it.
2) An equal argument could be presented with seeing tons of UChi kids in the Midwest, and I know MANY people who would prefer a job in the SE to a job in the Midwest, so in that case Duke > UChi. Just saying that specifically is a point of personal preference. </p>
<p>Also, you should clarify your example. A 3.9 from Duke and a 3.9 from UChi will probably have the same chance at a BB in NYC. </p>
<p>However, what about a 3.5 from Duke and a 3.5 at UChi? The tiers we set up are basically how many students get taken from each school compared to the size of the school and how many kids want to go. Maybe out all of the applicants, you end up being the last kids on the cutting board. If the bank decides to give one more superday interview to Duke than UChi (which wouldn’t surprise me at all), that UChi 3.5 just lost his job to the Duke 3.5.</p>
<p>However, like many have said all along, the marginal difference that I just pointed out will almost never come into effect, and you shouldn’t chose a school based on the advantage that boost will give you.</p>
<p>^But it is a probable slight advantage. It’s all about the strength of the recruiting at the school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s is the key, and that’s why UChicago is not a target school for many BB firms. When a school is not a target school, it means the firm does not recruit on campus, and resumes from non target school are put into a general pool, which means it’s a lot more competitive.</p>
<p>Cornell is not a target school for CS for whatever reason, but is a target school for MS, JP, DB, Blackrock…When my daughter applied to CS, she was not offered an off campus interview until very late. Ultimately she was offered a job, but it was only after they were finished with all of their target schools.</p>
<p>It is important to go to a target school if you want to work at a BB.</p>
<p>cgurr1 is right, it doesn’t mean students from UChicago are not as smart as students from Duke, it means their focus is different and IBs recognize it.</p>
<p>Oldfort is exactly right. You want to go to a target. And the targets usually are the same schools - HYPS, Dartmouth, MIT. Then Columbia, Duke, Penn. Chicago is less of a target.</p>
<p>There are more target schools than listed above. One way to figure out is by contacting school’s career center, ask them which firm recruits on campus and find out how many students they take each year and from which school. As an example, any Cornell student could apply for IB jobs. It’s not limited to business school students. Is that the case for Penn?</p>
<p>College costs a lot of money…Aside from doing due diligence on research opportunity, class size, location, social scene, “life after” is something people don’t usually consider. If your end goal is to get a job in IB, it’s important to consider if a school could help you reach that goal. It’s no different than if you were going to apply to a medical school later.</p>
<p>I am not going to comment either way, but am going to point out one false statement. Someone said NYC>Chicago and this is not true. </p>
<p>From a compensation perspective, actual work perspective, and networking perspective, Chicago=NYC.</p>
<p>Analysts do the exact same thing no matter where they are. They work 80-100 hrs/week making pitch books and models. The dealflow in the Chicago office is the same as it is in the NYC office. The compensation and bonuses are identical. NYC has more investment banks, Chicago has more hedge funds and prop shops.</p>
<p>Above was not what I witnessed. The bulk of the machinery of the firm- traders, research people, specialists, derivatives desks, etc- were in NYC. And the deal flow one saw involved every type of transaction, nationally, not just whatever the Chicago people happened to be working on. When the chicago people had to handle a big proposal they actually flew into the NY office. NY analysts could interact with the broader part of the firm on a daily basis, not fly in.</p>
<p>Perhaps it depends on the firm.</p>
<p>ivypbear, </p>
<p>as one who works on “wall street,” who attended duke as an undergrad, and who hires undergraduates and graduates for jobs on said “wall street,” i can state, with authority and confidence, that you do not know what you’re talking about.</p>
<p>fwiw, i’ve found chicago grads to be smart and well prepared to “think outside the box.”</p>
<p>^^What’s your opinion on these two schools then for I-Banking, truthfully? Is there a substantial difference in recruitment?</p>
<p>I also who also works at an elite high finance institution the edge is Duke. We don’t even recruit from Chicago. The people hiring you went to school at least 10-15 years ago when Chicago was less on the radar. It also just doesn’t have as big of a “street” reputation. That isn’t to say you can’t get an IB job from Chicago, there are many Chicago alums in finance. I know Duetsche Bank recruits at Chicago for one.</p>