Thoughts on U Richmond

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Richmond is a nice school, but W@L punches well above its weight and is a peer to Williams and Amherst in terms of being a target/semi-target for IB and MBB outcomes - solely based on rabid loyalty of alumni base, typically athletics driven. Amherst and Williams clearly much more prestigious and basically in a class of their own for SLACs, but W@L bros and brahs are all over the street and at Bain, etc etc. Richmond does not have that prevalent sports culture that you find at the above mentioned schools which leads to this culture. Don’t believe me go to WSO site and type in the school names

Actually, no they really aren't. Well, not if you're talking about finance. Adjusted for undergraduate size, top feeders to Wall Street in order of rank: Claremont McKenna, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury (source: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking), Top economics papers by authorship and publication in order of rank: Williams, Wellesley, Claremont McKenna, Middlebury, Richmond, Colgate, Amherst (source: https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.uslacecon.html). Even under pure cost/earnings analyses, with the addition of excluding colleges with engineering, they are not in a class of their own (source: https://www.degreechoices.com/best-colleges/rankings/liberal-arts/.)

When people identify Williams and Amherst in the way they do on DCUM, they're holding on to a long bias by USNews, because *surprise surprise* they're the wealthiest LACs. They do not dominate more than any other top lac, however, once you begin analyzing across outcomes, major publication, or feeding into lucrative industries this becomes clearer.

i get it these two schools annoy people - but they clearly and objectively are the best - these are the only two schools my kids peer group at our NYC private would consider at Ivy level - and this “bias” ensures the tippy top kids keep applying and going there - no one from my kiddos schools would consider Washington and Lee or Richmond ever

Meh, on the west coast at a top private and we see more apps to Pomona and Swarthmore to ivy level than Amherst and Williams (mostly athletes). It’s a condition of where you are. Most top schools have ivy level students applying to ivies, because frankly, LACs are tiny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Richmond is a nice school, but W@L punches well above its weight and is a peer to Williams and Amherst in terms of being a target/semi-target for IB and MBB outcomes - solely based on rabid loyalty of alumni base, typically athletics driven. Amherst and Williams clearly much more prestigious and basically in a class of their own for SLACs, but W@L bros and brahs are all over the street and at Bain, etc etc. Richmond does not have that prevalent sports culture that you find at the above mentioned schools which leads to this culture. Don’t believe me go to WSO site and type in the school names

Actually, no they really aren't. Well, not if you're talking about finance. Adjusted for undergraduate size, top feeders to Wall Street in order of rank: Claremont McKenna, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury (source: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking), Top economics papers by authorship and publication in order of rank: Williams, Wellesley, Claremont McKenna, Middlebury, Richmond, Colgate, Amherst (source: https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.uslacecon.html). Even under pure cost/earnings analyses, with the addition of excluding colleges with engineering, they are not in a class of their own (source: https://www.degreechoices.com/best-colleges/rankings/liberal-arts/.)

When people identify Williams and Amherst in the way they do on DCUM, they're holding on to a long bias by USNews, because *surprise surprise* they're the wealthiest LACs. They do not dominate more than any other top lac, however, once you begin analyzing across outcomes, major publication, or feeding into lucrative industries this becomes clearer.

i get it these two schools annoy people - but they clearly and objectively are the best - these are the only two schools my kids peer group at our NYC private would consider at Ivy level - and this “bias” ensures the tippy top kids keep applying and going there - no one from my kiddos schools would consider Washington and Lee or Richmond ever

Meh, on the west coast at a top private and we see more apps to Pomona and Swarthmore to ivy level than Amherst and Williams (mostly athletes). It’s a condition of where you are. Most top schools have ivy level students applying to ivies, because frankly, LACs are tiny.

totally get this - but we haven’t had a Pomona applicant from either NYC private in the last 5 years, and 1-2 to Swat. Probably 50 to Williams and Amherst, they are just seen differently by the NYC elite

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Richmond is a nice school, but W@L punches well above its weight and is a peer to Williams and Amherst in terms of being a target/semi-target for IB and MBB outcomes - solely based on rabid loyalty of alumni base, typically athletics driven. Amherst and Williams clearly much more prestigious and basically in a class of their own for SLACs, but W@L bros and brahs are all over the street and at Bain, etc etc. Richmond does not have that prevalent sports culture that you find at the above mentioned schools which leads to this culture. Don’t believe me go to WSO site and type in the school names

Actually, no they really aren't. Well, not if you're talking about finance. Adjusted for undergraduate size, top feeders to Wall Street in order of rank: Claremont McKenna, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury (source: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking), Top economics papers by authorship and publication in order of rank: Williams, Wellesley, Claremont McKenna, Middlebury, Richmond, Colgate, Amherst (source: https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.uslacecon.html). Even under pure cost/earnings analyses, with the addition of excluding colleges with engineering, they are not in a class of their own (source: https://www.degreechoices.com/best-colleges/rankings/liberal-arts/.)

When people identify Williams and Amherst in the way they do on DCUM, they're holding on to a long bias by USNews, because *surprise surprise* they're the wealthiest LACs. They do not dominate more than any other top lac, however, once you begin analyzing across outcomes, major publication, or feeding into lucrative industries this becomes clearer.

i get it these two schools annoy people - but they clearly and objectively are the best - these are the only two schools my kids peer group at our NYC private would consider at Ivy level - and this “bias” ensures the tippy top kids keep applying and going there - no one from my kiddos schools would consider Washington and Lee or Richmond ever

Meh, on the west coast at a top private and we see more apps to Pomona and Swarthmore to ivy level than Amherst and Williams (mostly athletes). It’s a condition of where you are. Most top schools have ivy level students applying to ivies, because frankly, LACs are tiny.

totally get this - but we haven’t had a Pomona applicant from either NYC private in the last 5 years, and 1-2 to Swat. Probably 50 to Williams and Amherst, they are just seen differently by the NYC elite

Sure, but I don't think that says anything at all. You're talking about one private school in New York and generalizing across al privates. There are many NY privates who get more than 2-3 Pomona students a year, and some have way more applicants than what you are implying. Furthermore, this really all has nothing to do with your claim that "[Amherst and Williams] clearly and objectively are the best."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Richmond is a nice school, but W@L punches well above its weight and is a peer to Williams and Amherst in terms of being a target/semi-target for IB and MBB outcomes - solely based on rabid loyalty of alumni base, typically athletics driven. Amherst and Williams clearly much more prestigious and basically in a class of their own for SLACs, but W@L bros and brahs are all over the street and at Bain, etc etc. Richmond does not have that prevalent sports culture that you find at the above mentioned schools which leads to this culture. Don’t believe me go to WSO site and type in the school names

Actually, no they really aren't. Well, not if you're talking about finance. Adjusted for undergraduate size, top feeders to Wall Street in order of rank: Claremont McKenna, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury (source: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking), Top economics papers by authorship and publication in order of rank: Williams, Wellesley, Claremont McKenna, Middlebury, Richmond, Colgate, Amherst (source: https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.uslacecon.html). Even under pure cost/earnings analyses, with the addition of excluding colleges with engineering, they are not in a class of their own (source: https://www.degreechoices.com/best-colleges/rankings/liberal-arts/.)

When people identify Williams and Amherst in the way they do on DCUM, they're holding on to a long bias by USNews, because *surprise surprise* they're the wealthiest LACs. They do not dominate more than any other top lac, however, once you begin analyzing across outcomes, major publication, or feeding into lucrative industries this becomes clearer.

i get it these two schools annoy people - but they clearly and objectively are the best - these are the only two schools my kids peer group at our NYC private would consider at Ivy level - and this “bias” ensures the tippy top kids keep applying and going there - no one from my kiddos schools would consider Washington and Lee or Richmond ever

Meh, on the west coast at a top private and we see more apps to Pomona and Swarthmore to ivy level than Amherst and Williams (mostly athletes). It’s a condition of where you are. Most top schools have ivy level students applying to ivies, because frankly, LACs are tiny.

totally get this - but we haven’t had a Pomona applicant from either NYC private in the last 5 years, and 1-2 to Swat. Probably 50 to Williams and Amherst, they are just seen differently by the NYC elite

The rest of the country is applying to Swat and Pomona more. They are the most competitive top LACs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Richmond is a nice school, but W@L punches well above its weight and is a peer to Williams and Amherst in terms of being a target/semi-target for IB and MBB outcomes - solely based on rabid loyalty of alumni base, typically athletics driven. Amherst and Williams clearly much more prestigious and basically in a class of their own for SLACs, but W@L bros and brahs are all over the street and at Bain, etc etc. Richmond does not have that prevalent sports culture that you find at the above mentioned schools which leads to this culture. Don’t believe me go to WSO site and type in the school names

Actually, no they really aren't. Well, not if you're talking about finance. Adjusted for undergraduate size, top feeders to Wall Street in order of rank: Claremont McKenna, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury (source: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking), Top economics papers by authorship and publication in order of rank: Williams, Wellesley, Claremont McKenna, Middlebury, Richmond, Colgate, Amherst (source: https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.uslacecon.html). Even under pure cost/earnings analyses, with the addition of excluding colleges with engineering, they are not in a class of their own (source: https://www.degreechoices.com/best-colleges/rankings/liberal-arts/.)

When people identify Williams and Amherst in the way they do on DCUM, they're holding on to a long bias by USNews, because *surprise surprise* they're the wealthiest LACs. They do not dominate more than any other top lac, however, once you begin analyzing across outcomes, major publication, or feeding into lucrative industries this becomes clearer.

i get it these two schools annoy people - but they clearly and objectively are the best - these are the only two schools my kids peer group at our NYC private would consider at Ivy level - and this “bias” ensures the tippy top kids keep applying and going there - no one from my kiddos schools would consider Washington and Lee or Richmond ever

Meh, on the west coast at a top private and we see more apps to Pomona and Swarthmore to ivy level than Amherst and Williams (mostly athletes). It’s a condition of where you are. Most top schools have ivy level students applying to ivies, because frankly, LACs are tiny.

totally get this - but we haven’t had a Pomona applicant from either NYC private in the last 5 years, and 1-2 to Swat. Probably 50 to Williams and Amherst, they are just seen differently by the NYC elite

Sure, but I don't think that says anything at all. You're talking about one private school in New York and generalizing across al privates. There are many NY privates who get more than 2-3 Pomona students a year, and some have way more applicants than what you are implying. Furthermore, this really all has nothing to do with your claim that "[Amherst and Williams] clearly and objectively are the best."

+100 it’s funny that poster thinks that anyone cares

[Anonymous]

prestige chasing new yorkers believe they are the best - you can certainly disagree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Richmond is a nice school, but W@L punches well above its weight and is a peer to Williams and Amherst in terms of being a target/semi-target for IB and MBB outcomes - solely based on rabid loyalty of alumni base, typically athletics driven. Amherst and Williams clearly much more prestigious and basically in a class of their own for SLACs, but W@L bros and brahs are all over the street and at Bain, etc etc. Richmond does not have that prevalent sports culture that you find at the above mentioned schools which leads to this culture. Don’t believe me go to WSO site and type in the school names

Actually, no they really aren't. Well, not if you're talking about finance. Adjusted for undergraduate size, top feeders to Wall Street in order of rank: Claremont McKenna, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury (source: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking), Top economics papers by authorship and publication in order of rank: Williams, Wellesley, Claremont McKenna, Middlebury, Richmond, Colgate, Amherst (source: https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.uslacecon.html). Even under pure cost/earnings analyses, with the addition of excluding colleges with engineering, they are not in a class of their own (source: https://www.degreechoices.com/best-colleges/rankings/liberal-arts/.)

When people identify Williams and Amherst in the way they do on DCUM, they're holding on to a long bias by USNews, because *surprise surprise* they're the wealthiest LACs. They do not dominate more than any other top lac, however, once you begin analyzing across outcomes, major publication, or feeding into lucrative industries this becomes clearer.

i get it these two schools annoy people - but they clearly and objectively are the best - these are the only two schools my kids peer group at our NYC private would consider at Ivy level - and this “bias” ensures the tippy top kids keep applying and going there - no one from my kiddos schools would consider Washington and Lee or Richmond ever

Meh, on the west coast at a top private and we see more apps to Pomona and Swarthmore to ivy level than Amherst and Williams (mostly athletes). It’s a condition of where you are. Most top schools have ivy level students applying to ivies, because frankly, LACs are tiny.

totally get this - but we haven’t had a Pomona applicant from either NYC private in the last 5 years, and 1-2 to Swat. Probably 50 to Williams and Amherst, they are just seen differently by the NYC elite

Just sounds like your HS has a crap record with Pomona, more than anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With respect to the above, this analysis of Walll Steeet and IB feeder schools includes the LACs CMC, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury, W&L, Hamilton, Richmond and Bowdoin:

Top Feeders to Wall Street https://share.google/sIKVMp6ZezB0RHomq

good data - I guess I’m speaking anecdotally based on my personal experience with my recruiting firm that has placed in both finance and consulting in NYC over the last 20+ years - we do see kids from all these school, but my observation on W&L loyalty is real and palpable - but I guess it could be seen as Ivy+ plus Amherst and and Williams, then everyone else - if my kid wanted IB or consulting and wanted a liberal arts experience, would 1000% steer them towards Amherst or Williams - zero question on that

This is exactly how W&L wants to be seen. But there is an enormous schism between its reputation in some corners and reality. Their marketing is good, I will give them that!

how so? pls elaborate - would be helpful - and how does that compare to Richmond? this is good stuff!

Just remember that this is a UR thread so lots of UR boosters are participating. I doubt many WL alums are.

This topic has been overwhelmed by mentions of schools other than Richmond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With respect to the above, this analysis of Walll Steeet and IB feeder schools includes the LACs CMC, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury, W&L, Hamilton, Richmond and Bowdoin:

Top Feeders to Wall Street https://share.google/sIKVMp6ZezB0RHomq

good data - I guess I’m speaking anecdotally based on my personal experience with my recruiting firm that has placed in both finance and consulting in NYC over the last 20+ years - we do see kids from all these school, but my observation on W&L loyalty is real and palpable - but I guess it could be seen as Ivy+ plus Amherst and and Williams, then everyone else - if my kid wanted IB or consulting and wanted a liberal arts experience, would 1000% steer them towards Amherst or Williams - zero question on that

This is exactly how W&L wants to be seen. But there is an enormous schism between its reputation in some corners and reality. Their marketing is good, I will give them that!

how so? pls elaborate - would be helpful - and how does that compare to Richmond? this is good stuff!

Just remember that this is a UR thread so lots of UR boosters are participating. I doubt many WL alums are.

This topic has been overwhelmed by mentions of schools other than Richmond.

Someone can't handle that UR will never be WILLIAMS level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With respect to the above, this analysis of Walll Steeet and IB feeder schools includes the LACs CMC, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury, W&L, Hamilton, Richmond and Bowdoin:

Top Feeders to Wall Street https://share.google/sIKVMp6ZezB0RHomq

good data - I guess I’m speaking anecdotally based on my personal experience with my recruiting firm that has placed in both finance and consulting in NYC over the last 20+ years - we do see kids from all these school, but my observation on W&L loyalty is real and palpable - but I guess it could be seen as Ivy+ plus Amherst and and Williams, then everyone else - if my kid wanted IB or consulting and wanted a liberal arts experience, would 1000% steer them towards Amherst or Williams - zero question on that

This is exactly how W&L wants to be seen. But there is an enormous schism between its reputation in some corners and reality. Their marketing is good, I will give them that!

how so? pls elaborate - would be helpful - and how does that compare to Richmond? this is good stuff!

Just remember that this is a UR thread so lots of UR boosters are participating. I doubt many WL alums are.

This topic has been overwhelmed by mentions of schools other than Richmond.

Someone can't handle that UR will never be WILLIAMS level.

What is WILLIAMS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With respect to the above, this analysis of Walll Steeet and IB feeder schools includes the LACs CMC, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury, W&L, Hamilton, Richmond and Bowdoin:

Top Feeders to Wall Street https://share.google/sIKVMp6ZezB0RHomq

good data - I guess I’m speaking anecdotally based on my personal experience with my recruiting firm that has placed in both finance and consulting in NYC over the last 20+ years - we do see kids from all these school, but my observation on W&L loyalty is real and palpable - but I guess it could be seen as Ivy+ plus Amherst and and Williams, then everyone else - if my kid wanted IB or consulting and wanted a liberal arts experience, would 1000% steer them towards Amherst or Williams - zero question on that

This is exactly how W&L wants to be seen. But there is an enormous schism between its reputation in some corners and reality. Their marketing is good, I will give them that!

how so? pls elaborate - would be helpful - and how does that compare to Richmond? this is good stuff!

Just remember that this is a UR thread so lots of UR boosters are participating. I doubt many WL alums are.

This topic has been overwhelmed by mentions of schools other than Richmond.

Someone can't handle that UR will never be WILLIAMS level.

I think it’s more that people get frustrated that any thread about LACs gets immediately taken over by arguments about whether Swat, Williams, Amherst, or Pomona are the best. I don’t think anyone is saying Richmond is Williams (maybe W&L people are). We get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With respect to the above, this analysis of Walll Steeet and IB feeder schools includes the LACs CMC, Amherst, Williams, Middlebury, W&L, Hamilton, Richmond and Bowdoin:

Top Feeders to Wall Street https://share.google/sIKVMp6ZezB0RHomq

good data - I guess I’m speaking anecdotally based on my personal experience with my recruiting firm that has placed in both finance and consulting in NYC over the last 20+ years - we do see kids from all these school, but my observation on W&L loyalty is real and palpable - but I guess it could be seen as Ivy+ plus Amherst and and Williams, then everyone else - if my kid wanted IB or consulting and wanted a liberal arts experience, would 1000% steer them towards Amherst or Williams - zero question on that

This is exactly how W&L wants to be seen. But there is an enormous schism between its reputation in some corners and reality. Their marketing is good, I will give them that!

how so? pls elaborate - would be helpful - and how does that compare to Richmond? this is good stuff!

Just remember that this is a UR thread so lots of UR boosters are participating. I doubt many WL alums are.

This topic has been overwhelmed by mentions of schools other than Richmond.

Someone can't handle that UR will never be WILLIAMS level.

What is WILLIAMS?

The best liberal arts college in the country, trampling Richmond for centuries over and over again.

[Anonymous]

Williams? Never heard of it. More people know of the Williams sisters than know Williams.

[Anonymous]

Amherst is a neighborhood in Atlanta? Didn’t know there was a college there too.

[Anonymous]

What is Pomona? A breed of dog?