Bucknell, The Street, and Pipelines not named Keystone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Interesting school for those scoring in the mid-to-high 1300s on the SAT.

I have been aware of Bucknell University since the early 1970s. At that time, many of the students came from well off families who owned their own business. The elder son of the well respected head of school at my private school attended and graduated Bucknell University. He was a solid student & a college athlete. Attractive, well-rounded, very social students.

The kids I know at Bucknell now or in recent years also adhere to this stereotype. Kids with great family pedigrees, lots of money in the family, privately educated, attractive, etc. They weren’t acing Calc BC in 10th grade, but they aren’t dumb.

[Anonymous]

The top SLAC Wall Street feeders are Williams, Middlebury, CMC, and Amherst, followed closely by Colgate. The rest place some grads there, but at much lower rates.

[Anonymous]

i’ve told this story before on dcum

my kid was a recruited D3 athlete, all the top names Nescac etc. Didn’t go ED which is another story

but W&L had an accepted undecided athlete event at alumni house in wealthy fairfield county enclave. Maybe 10 kids, with a room of 20-25 W&L wall street alumni, all levels analysts up to mds/partners.

felt like central casting for the movie the firm - the host shut the oversized front doors, turned to the recruits and said something along the lines of “we take care of our own, once ur one of us, ur always one of us”

my kid chose a nescac but we still laugh about how impressive / borderline creepy that was - but the message was clear, you would have a direct pipeline to the street

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Great question.

The poster who repeatedly posts about Bucknell University being connected to Wall Street is exaggerating.

CMC as well as Wash & Lee are solid options to consider if aiming for a job in finance.

The most common aspect among the 3 schools is the proclivity toward consuming large amounts of alcohol. Not kidding. I like all 3 schools, but the heavy drinking aspect would be my biggest concern if I had a child at any of these 3 elite LACs.

Heavy drinking isn't exactly unusual on the Street -- may as well get acclimated early.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Peak Frameworks doesn't have W&L, Bucknell or Davidson listed anywhere.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

They start their analysis based on sheer numbers -- smallest school on their list is Dartmouth (which has almost 1000 more undergrads than Bucknell).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great question.

The poster who repeatedly posts about Bucknell University being connected to Wall Street is exaggerating.

CMC as well as Wash & Lee are solid options to consider if aiming for a job in finance.

The most common aspect among the 3 schools is the proclivity toward consuming large amounts of alcohol. Not kidding. I like all 3 schools, but the heavy drinking aspect would be my biggest concern if I had a child at any of these 3 elite LACs.

Heavy drinking isn't exactly unusual on the Street -- may as well get acclimated early.

What a gross and unhealthy attitude. You can get by fine without drinking “on the Street.” Promoting alcoholism is sick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Peak Frameworks doesn't have W&L, Bucknell or Davidson listed anywhere.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

They start their analysis based on sheer numbers -- smallest school on their list is Dartmouth (which has almost 1000 more undergrads than Bucknell).

This just isn’t true? CMC is in the list and only has 1200 students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s mostly just a great school for low income students with no network. Everyone else is worse off with Bucknell on their resume. It’s much worse than the two schools you noted, which are very respected in various corners of Wall Street.

You can hate Bucknell or love Bucknell but it is not known for being a school for low income students. It’s filled with lots of UMC kids.

Exactly. My Gen X cousin who went there (from Michigan) was the daughter of a Wharton MBA grad who was an auto industry VP (big VP, top of the corp). She's actually had a pretty good business career.

My husband was a FG Pell Grant recipient. He flew for an on-campus visit and liked it. Couldn't afford it. FG wasn't cool then.

[Anonymous]

I heard the "Pipeline poster" quit posting. Maybe it's not necessary to pile on...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I heard the "Pipeline poster" quit posting. Maybe it's not necessary to pile on...

The pipeline poster maybe gone, but there’s actual Bucknell boosters that also lost. It’s rancid and actually clogs a lot of threads with pages about Bucknell when they aren’t necessary or asked for. The Bucknell troll at least kept it within school suggestion posts, so it was honest advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than comparing Bucknell to intellectual lacs, how does it compare to finance-minded lacs like Claremont McKenna or Washington&Lee?

I don’t agree that CMC and W&L are not “intellectual LACs”. Nor do I agree they are “finance minded” - their graduates do lots of other things besides finance and I bet most of them do not do finance.

30-40% of CMCs graduating classes major in Economics. They are one of the few LACs with a masters in finance. Their most notable alumni are entirely in finance. Even their new integrated science program is about graduating science majors with computational skills to immediately skirt grad school and run towards industry to make money in biotech and data science.

Just because they majored in econ does not mean they went into finance. In fact most of them don't. In the classes of 2013-22, most CMC grads (21%) went into tech and entrepreneurship, 16% went into accounting/finance, 11.5% into government/law (very common for CMC grads to get law degrees), 13% into nonprofits, 9% into consulting, etc.

But the main point is that regarding CMC as somehow "not intellectual" like it's a vocational training school is just wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than comparing Bucknell to intellectual lacs, how does it compare to finance-minded lacs like Claremont McKenna or Washington&Lee?

I don’t agree that CMC and W&L are not “intellectual LACs”. Nor do I agree they are “finance minded” - their graduates do lots of other things besides finance and I bet most of them do not do finance.

30-40% of CMCs graduating classes major in Economics. They are one of the few LACs with a masters in finance. Their most notable alumni are entirely in finance. Even their new integrated science program is about graduating science majors with computational skills to immediately skirt grad school and run towards industry to make money in biotech and data science.

Just because they majored in econ does not mean they went into finance. In fact most of them don't. In the classes of 2013-22, most CMC grads (21%) went into tech and entrepreneurship, 16% went into accounting/finance, 11.5% into government/law (very common for CMC grads to get law degrees), 13% into nonprofits, 9% into consulting, etc.

But the main point is that regarding CMC as somehow "not intellectual" like it's a vocational training school is just wrong.

CMC is on the west coast. “Tech and entrepreneurship” is fintech and financial pipelines in Google and Apple, not Software engineering students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than comparing Bucknell to intellectual lacs, how does it compare to finance-minded lacs like Claremont McKenna or Washington&Lee?

I don’t agree that CMC and W&L are not “intellectual LACs”. Nor do I agree they are “finance minded” - their graduates do lots of other things besides finance and I bet most of them do not do finance.

30-40% of CMCs graduating classes major in Economics. They are one of the few LACs with a masters in finance. Their most notable alumni are entirely in finance. Even their new integrated science program is about graduating science majors with computational skills to immediately skirt grad school and run towards industry to make money in biotech and data science.

Just because they majored in econ does not mean they went into finance. In fact most of them don't. In the classes of 2013-22, most CMC grads (21%) went into tech and entrepreneurship, 16% went into accounting/finance, 11.5% into government/law (very common for CMC grads to get law degrees), 13% into nonprofits, 9% into consulting, etc.

But the main point is that regarding CMC as somehow "not intellectual" like it's a vocational training school is just wrong.

CMC is on the west coast. “Tech and entrepreneurship” is fintech and financial pipelines in Google and Apple, not Software engineering students.

+1 CMC doesn’t even have a CS major

[Anonymous]

this thread has been endless comedy. thanks everyone. I think the Bucknell booster has made it all satire at this point.

"Pipeline to the street 4 ever!" LOL

[Anonymous]

How did a Bucknell thread become about Claremont McKenna? There’s a topic guys! Stick to it!