Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As tough to get into these days yes but not nearly as enjoyable once you get there. A total joyless grind.

My DC and friends are having a blast there.

For $75000 per year, Chicago should throw in an annual passport to Disneyland so kids can have a blast on parents' dime.

Nah, not needed. They have Chicago music, bars, food, festivals and a beach.

So does UVA with similar outcomes.

Charlottesville vs Chicago?????

Yeah, the anti-UChicago trolling has gotten extreme if you guys are trying to tell us Charlottlesville is a comparable city to Chicago. Over 60 million people come to Chicago for vacation per year, contributing nearly $14 billion to the city. Why? Because Chicago has a tremendous amount to offer.

Charlottesville is a nice small city (there are 46,000 people) but to treat the two as comparable is crazy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As tough to get into these days yes but not nearly as enjoyable once you get there. A total joyless grind.

My DC and friends are having a blast there.

For $75000 per year, Chicago should throw in an annual passport to Disneyland so kids can have a blast on parents' dime.

Nah, not needed. They have Chicago music, bars, food, festivals and a beach.

So does UVA with similar outcomes.

Charlottesville vs Chicago?????

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As tough to get into these days yes but not nearly as enjoyable once you get there. A total joyless grind.

My DC and friends are having a blast there.

For $75000 per year, Chicago should throw in an annual passport to Disneyland so kids can have a blast on parents' dime.

Nah, not needed. They have Chicago music, bars, food, festivals and a beach.

So does UVA with similar outcomes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As tough to get into these days yes but not nearly as enjoyable once you get there. A total joyless grind.

My DC and friends are having a blast there.

For $75000 per year, Chicago should throw in an annual passport to Disneyland so kids can have a blast on parents' dime.

Nah, not needed. They have Chicago music, bars, food, festivals and a beach.

Good theater scene too. And great movie series (nightly double features) on campus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As tough to get into these days yes but not nearly as enjoyable once you get there. A total joyless grind.

My DC and friends are having a blast there.

For $75000 per year, Chicago should throw in an annual passport to Disneyland so kids can have a blast on parents' dime.

Nah, not needed. They have Chicago music, bars, food, festivals and a beach.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You also don’t even know how long the university has been around. You say it changed in 2000 or 2010, but was a certain way for 50 years beforehand. You realize it was founded in 1890, not 1950 or 1960, right?

If you’re going to troll, at least get your facts right.

Going back up to 50 years was obviously in reference to baby boomer college grads who now control Fortune 500 c-suites, corporate recruitment, and the donor class. Baby boomer Ivy MIT Duke UVA Michigan Cal alums control every facet of global industry. In comparison, very few Chicago alums do (as they had too many quirky weirdos and students who pursued academia).

So while recent efforts have been made to funnel more UC kids into high-status high-pay tracks, Chicago obviously wouldn't have anywhere near the foothold their peers have. Therefore Chicago kids are at a disadvantage in high prestige gigs as the tracks aren't plowed, UC alums aren't there [in high enough numbers] to look out.

There's truth in this. What it ignores though is that the UChicago alumni who did go into finance or consulting did extremely well, e.g. founders, managing partners. And that doesn't even include the Booth alumni advantage that Career Services actively works . The reality today is that client facing roles are increasingly required to also be quantitatively comfortable. And who has the rep for being comfortable with sophisticated numerical/data analysis and proven record to learn and work hard within a firehose environment ...MIT and UChicago. Kids from these schools who are the mainstream personable types that want finance and consulting are closing the deal on the opportunities they want. It's a valid point about the old plowed paths. The question is do they kids want to follow those any more? Look at how early the BBs have started recruiting in reaction to no longer drawing the candidates they want. Parallel to Stanford's experience, SV is calling hard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As tough to get into these days yes but not nearly as enjoyable once you get there. A total joyless grind.

My DC and friends are having a blast there.

For $75000 per year, Chicago should throw in an annual passport to Disneyland so kids can have a blast on parents' dime.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chicago is where overachiever prep school kids go when they get rejected from every Ivy, Stanford, Notre Dame and Duke. It's a peer to Northwestern, with a less attractive student body. Rank it where it belongs in the 12-15 range and it'd have none of this tiger mom fueled frenzy. It's WashU in a major city.

+1 spot on.
No matter how much they strive, they are not in the same league as HYPS. Nothing to be ashamed of, just reality. Kinda sad that these Chicago fans are so insecure about this.

Given that Chicago fills more than 50% of the class with early applicants, it is not statistically possible that most of the students have been rejected from HYPS.

Anonymous wrote:As tough to get into these days yes but not nearly as enjoyable once you get there. A total joyless grind.

My DC and friends are having a blast there.

Anonymous wrote:UChicago is screwed because finance and trading is leaving the city due to high taxes and crime. Much of the little finance recruitment they boast about are Chicago office slots, which is in decline and was already second fiddle to what banking gunners are after. UC does not have anywhere near the pipelines to Wall Street or Silicon Valley that Ivies, Duke, MIT and even GU have.

Based on the few recent Chicago alums in my family, most of them became generic non-MBB consultants who make 60K-70K a year. Not a bad living but certainly not high-flying six-fig first year after bonus comp you see HYPS Wharton Duke kid pulling.

amen. analyst days were the best.

UChicago is screwed because finance and trading is leaving the city due to high taxes and crime. Much of the little finance recruitment they boast about are Chicago office slots, which is in decline and was already second fiddle to what banking gunners are after. UC does not have anywhere near the pipelines to Wall Street or Silicon Valley that Ivies, Duke, MIT and even GU have.

Based on the few recent Chicago alums in my family, most of them became generic non-MBB consultants who make 60K-70K a year. Not a bad living but certainly not high-flying six-fig first year after bonus comp you see HYPS Wharton Duke kid pulling.

Anonymous wrote:You also don’t even know how long the university has been around. You say it changed in 2000 or 2010, but was a certain way for 50 years beforehand. You realize it was founded in 1890, not 1950 or 1960, right?

If you’re going to troll, at least get your facts right.

Going back up to 50 years was obviously in reference to baby boomer college grads who now control Fortune 500 c-suites, corporate recruitment, and the donor class. Baby boomer Ivy MIT Duke UVA Michigan Cal alums control every facet of global industry. In comparison, very few Chicago alums do (as they had too many quirky weirdos and students who pursued academia).

So while recent efforts have been made to funnel more UC kids into high-status high-pay tracks, Chicago obviously wouldn't have anywhere near the foothold their peers have. Therefore Chicago kids are at a disadvantage in high prestige gigs as the tracks aren't plowed, UC alums aren't there [in high enough numbers] to look out.

Anonymous wrote:Well, they opted out of big name sports, in reality. They were a founding member of the big ten and had the first heisman winner. They chose the withdraw from the big ten in 1946.

But again — why engage with reality when you can bash the school like a buffoon?

1946? That's ancient history, fool. Your glory days during Roman Empire won't work. Mother father Pee-wees.

Well, they opted out of big name sports, in reality. They were a founding member of the big ten and had the first heisman winner. They chose the withdraw from the big ten in 1946.

But again — why engage with reality when you can bash the school like a buffoon?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread reads like Chicago's cheap and gaudy advertisement/promotional brochure.

No it just shows how a few people who hate the school try and derail every thread about the school. If you tried that with Dartmouth or Notredame or Tufts or Tulane even that STD capital Dook, you would get an even more violent reaction. It's called school pride. UChicago didn't have any for many many years but now has it in spades.

Not really. You never see anyone wearing shirts for Chicago. There’s some shame there.

LOL

You realize UChicago is pretty small, right? It has about 16,000 total students, including undergrads and grad students. By comparison, Michigan has about 41,000. The smaller size plus lack of big name sports teams is the reason why you don’t really see people with Chicago shirts on.

But why think about it critically? Just bashing the school is way easier.

Chicago nerds play touch football.