Thoughts on U Richmond

[Anonymous]

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

[Anonymous]

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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is clearly better than all the schools mentioned on this thread…

Oh brother. Not if the kid doesn’t want to go a big school. Not that you prestige whores ever consider fit. Lots of kids with similar objective measures at all of the schools mentioned.

UR may also be a good choice relative to UVA if you're not full pay or if you desire a school that draws from a broader geographic base. It's also a good choice if you want guaranteed admission into the business school, which UVA does not offer.

[Anonymous]

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

[Anonymous]

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

I don't know about IB, but terms of consulting, when I visited campus a year ago the list we were shown had Big 4 firms but not MBB. We subsequently got a mailing listing McKinsey... They must have got a student in for the first time in a while.

[Anonymous]

sorry for hijacking Richmond thread with W&L thoughts but did check out WSO and found this thread / comment - which I think is the major difference between Richmond and a school like Davidson against W&L

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/off-topic/thoughts-on-washington-and-lee

“Very underrated as an IB placement school, WL is a legitimate target school for some firms. The alumni connection is much better than bigger schools and they will go to bat for you. The biggest advantage is that you are competing against a much smaller candidate pool given that the class size is ~500 students, and there are legitimate spots for WL students at various firms. 100% the best liberal arts school target.”

[Anonymous]

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!

[Anonymous]

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!

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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

Well yeah, obviously. But what if they don't get into Amherst or Williams? What if they don't get into Washington and Lee? Slightly lower tier schools like UR exist for a reason.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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

[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

No one including UR defenders/boosters is claiming that UR is the equal of Amherst and Williams. So I don't really understand your point.

[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

LOL “Objectively the best” then relies on an anecdotal argument

[Anonymous]

I think Richmond is a bit of an underperformer given its endowment. W&L overperforms due to extreme alumni loyalty.