Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kid is a drama queen

OP here. No, kid isn't. Quite the opposite.
I know about this because he was grumpy about a test and I was like, 'chill out, you're doing great" and he shared that the upperclassmen talk about how "you need a 4.0 if you want XYZ internship" which may just be a very top finance internship but my kid heard as being any good econ/finance internship.
And I can share further that my DC is not even sure he wants to go into finance. But the social pressure to consider this career path is SO HIGH at the Ivies. It's all anyone is doing. My son is bright, naturally a STEM brain, doesn't want to be an engineer so he's considering it.

OP, I have two kids at Ivies right now. One is pre-med (it's own hell) and the other is IR. I can assure you that finance is not all anyone is doing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Darn. It was a slog to get into the Ivy and now the reward is.... more slogging. Great. I guess he had the summer before college as a break.

It's not easy to get a perfect GPA at his school. He's working his a$$ off.

Well he’s going into a grinding career path, so….get used to it, I guess.

There’s a recurring theme on DCUM- “when does the easy part start.”

If you have committed to the top score/T20/IB & Consulting path THERE IS NEVER A REST. You never “win”. It’s just competition for everything forever.

There’s no “secret trick” to Ivy admits, just grinding and luck.

There’s no “good enough” grade for bulge bracket IB, you are in constant competition for everything all the time. Be the best or get out.

If your kid is already unhappy with the high pressure top HS grind why on earth would they want to sign up for FIVE MORE DECADES of this?

“Why is it so hard to get into extracurriculars”, it’s not at 99.9% of schools. Don’t pick the 0.01% and complain or look for shortcuts.

There’s no shortcut, you just have to win all the time at everything, forever. And everything you encounter will be a competition.

Kids need to go into this with open eyes. If they legit want the “prestige” path, it comes with costs and benefits.

There are lots of things to do in finance that aren’t Goldman. There are lots of things to do in law that aren’t Biglaw.

You want to be a winner? Start winning and stop complaining.

Or, you could just choose not to play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kid is a drama queen

OP here. No, kid isn't. Quite the opposite.
I know about this because he was grumpy about a test and I was like, 'chill out, you're doing great" and he shared that the upperclassmen talk about how "you need a 4.0 if you want XYZ internship" which may just be a very top finance internship but my kid heard as being any good econ/finance internship.
And I can share further that my DC is not even sure he wants to go into finance. But the social pressure to consider this career path is SO HIGH at the Ivies. It's all anyone is doing. My son is bright, naturally a STEM brain, doesn't want to be an engineer so he's considering it.

OP it takes what it takes, each ivy is different with regard to being top 1/4 or better.
At Brown, as A- and A are both counted 4.0, and 45-60% of any given class gets A range, yielding a median graduating GPA of 3.9, thus yes a 4.0 is needed for top finance, top law, top med, every "top".
At my kid's grade deflated ivy, Jane St and other top finance, or MBB, or top law/med, goes to 3.9+ all the time. Less than 15% of stem courses receive true A(4.0), thus having some A- or an occasional B+ are common. Median overall is around 3.7; 3.9 is quite impressive there. The engineers often get top (quant) finance over others even if a little below 3.9.

Similar experience at a public ivy. Lower gpa 3.7+ but took a lot of advanced math classes got quant finance. offers. But they cared less about gpa more about getting past the assessments and.interview rounds. Now pe, hedge funds and long short are reaching out since quant internships are well regarded and they didn’t even care about gpa were more interested in their experiences at the firm.

At hypsm DC and members of their club got internships in traditional ib , and consulting firms had higher gpa’s, then others who got more buy side internships which are similar but more technical in roles

Because the IB and consultants internships are in soft majors?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kid is a drama queen

OP here. No, kid isn't. Quite the opposite.
I know about this because he was grumpy about a test and I was like, 'chill out, you're doing great" and he shared that the upperclassmen talk about how "you need a 4.0 if you want XYZ internship" which may just be a very top finance internship but my kid heard as being any good econ/finance internship.
And I can share further that my DC is not even sure he wants to go into finance. But the social pressure to consider this career path is SO HIGH at the Ivies. It's all anyone is doing. My son is bright, naturally a STEM brain, doesn't want to be an engineer so he's considering it.

OP it takes what it takes, each ivy is different with regard to being top 1/4 or better.
At Brown, as A- and A are both counted 4.0, and 45-60% of any given class gets A range, yielding a median graduating GPA of 3.9, thus yes a 4.0 is needed for top finance, top law, top med, every "top".
At my kid's grade deflated ivy, Jane St and other top finance, or MBB, or top law/med, goes to 3.9+ all the time. Less than 15% of stem courses receive true A(4.0), thus having some A- or an occasional B+ are common. Median overall is around 3.7; 3.9 is quite impressive there. The engineers often get top (quant) finance over others even if a little below 3.9.

Similar experience at a public ivy. Lower gpa 3.7+ but took a lot of advanced math classes got quant finance. offers. But they cared less about gpa more about getting past the assessments and.interview rounds. Now pe, hedge funds and long short are reaching out since quant internships are well regarded and they didn’t even care about gpa were more interested in their experiences at the firm.

At hypsm DC and members of their club got internships in traditional ib , and consulting firms had higher gpa’s, then others who got more buy side internships which are similar but more technical in roles

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kid is a drama queen

OP here. No, kid isn't. Quite the opposite.
I know about this because he was grumpy about a test and I was like, 'chill out, you're doing great" and he shared that the upperclassmen talk about how "you need a 4.0 if you want XYZ internship" which may just be a very top finance internship but my kid heard as being any good econ/finance internship.
And I can share further that my DC is not even sure he wants to go into finance. But the social pressure to consider this career path is SO HIGH at the Ivies. It's all anyone is doing. My son is bright, naturally a STEM brain, doesn't want to be an engineer so he's considering it.

OP it takes what it takes, each ivy is different with regard to being top 1/4 or better.
At Brown, as A- and A are both counted 4.0, and 45-60% of any given class gets A range, yielding a median graduating GPA of 3.9, thus yes a 4.0 is needed for top finance, top law, top med, every "top".
At my kid's grade deflated ivy, Jane St and other top finance, or MBB, or top law/med, goes to 3.9+ all the time. Less than 15% of stem courses receive true A(4.0), thus having some A- or an occasional B+ are common. Median overall is around 3.7; 3.9 is quite impressive there. The engineers often get top (quant) finance over others even if a little below 3.9.

Similar experience at a public ivy. Lower gpa 3.7+ but took a lot of advanced math classes got quant finance. offers. But they cared less about gpa more about getting past the assessments and.interview rounds. Now pe, hedge funds and long short are reaching out since quant internships are well regarded and they didn’t even care about gpa were more interested in their experiences at the firm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread just screams out loud that the best path is NESCAC athlete particularly at Williams or Middlebury. Great placement without all of the Ivy League club nonsense.

Huh?
Well first of all, you have to be an athlete. And if that gives an edge then being an Ivy athlete is certainly better than being a NESCAC athlete when it comes to recruiting. And finance club memberships are still competitive at the NESCACS and there are fewer jobs offers to go around at a NESCAC when compared to an Ivy.

There really isn't any school that has a secret hook to this tiny pool of opportunities. Being an athlete may give you an edge (or not--depending on the hiring manager). Being an investment club member may give you an edge (or not--depending on the hiring manager).

No school has a secret hook but if you understand the system there are ways to make the path a better experience. On a per capita basis Williams, Middlebury, CMC, and Amherst all place better than half of the ivies.

Being an athlete is a huge advantage. If you aren't an athlete Ivies might be better but if you can cross the hurdle you are potentially in a much better situation at a top NESCAC or CMC.

Ivy Athlete might be better but it's hard to really do the required club grind and be an athlete. Too much IB recruiting is dependent on the Finance Clubs.
NESCAC Finance and Investment clubs aren't insanely competitive like at the Ivies, if you want to join and put in the effort you'll be in without issue.
On Campus recruiting is great and the pool of kids shooting for IB/MBB is much smaller.
The alumni network is outstanding, especially for Middlebury and Williams. I know of a girls team at one of these schools which had 6 kids doing Finance internships last summer. GS, Jefferies, and BofA were three of them, I don't know the others.

You don't have to be an athlete at a NESCAC to place well
- Incoming at MBB, non-athlete at a NESCAC

In fact three of the people who helped me most in my recruiting processes were alumni of my school's track, football, and lacrosse team respectively

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread just screams out loud that the best path is NESCAC athlete particularly at Williams or Middlebury. Great placement without all of the Ivy League club nonsense.

Huh?
Well first of all, you have to be an athlete. And if that gives an edge then being an Ivy athlete is certainly better than being a NESCAC athlete when it comes to recruiting. And finance club memberships are still competitive at the NESCACS and there are fewer jobs offers to go around at a NESCAC when compared to an Ivy.

There really isn't any school that has a secret hook to this tiny pool of opportunities. Being an athlete may give you an edge (or not--depending on the hiring manager). Being an investment club member may give you an edge (or not--depending on the hiring manager).

No school has a secret hook but if you understand the system there are ways to make the path a better experience. On a per capita basis Williams, Middlebury, CMC, and Amherst all place better than half of the ivies.

Being an athlete is a huge advantage. If you aren't an athlete Ivies might be better but if you can cross the hurdle you are potentially in a much better situation at a top NESCAC or CMC.

Ivy Athlete might be better but it's hard to really do the required club grind and be an athlete. Too much IB recruiting is dependent on the Finance Clubs.
NESCAC Finance and Investment clubs aren't insanely competitive like at the Ivies, if you want to join and put in the effort you'll be in without issue.
On Campus recruiting is great and the pool of kids shooting for IB/MBB is much smaller.
The alumni network is outstanding, especially for Middlebury and Williams. I know of a girls team at one of these schools which had 6 kids doing Finance internships last summer. GS, Jefferies, and BofA were three of them, I don't know the others.

You don't have to be an athlete at a NESCAC to place well
- Incoming at MBB, non-athlete at a NESCAC

Anonymous wrote:It's like college admissions now. You need very good grades and test scores (for those that ask for them) but you also need extras, like the right leadership roles, competition trophies, etc.

+1. This can’t up in the recent Harvard study on why kids didn’t go to class or participate in class - they are too busy running the business clubs in order to secure internships

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I cannot imagine being this invested in my kid’s employment prospects. Pathetic.

I think this might be the dumbest dig I've read to-date on DCUM.

Truth hurts

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kid is a drama queen

OP here. No, kid isn't. Quite the opposite.
I know about this because he was grumpy about a test and I was like, 'chill out, you're doing great" and he shared that the upperclassmen talk about how "you need a 4.0 if you want XYZ internship" which may just be a very top finance internship but my kid heard as being any good econ/finance internship.
And I can share further that my DC is not even sure he wants to go into finance. But the social pressure to consider this career path is SO HIGH at the Ivies. It's all anyone is doing. My son is bright, naturally a STEM brain, doesn't want to be an engineer so he's considering it.

A bear market will make a big dent here….I see many middle managers in finance acutely vulnerable in 26-28 period… may make things easy for next gen

Anonymous wrote:My DC is at an Ivy and says that the chatter is that you need a 4.0 through fall of sophomore year to at all be in the running for a strong finance internship after junior year. Is this true or similar to what you've heard?

My kid is working their tail off for this as As are 95+ and averages on most exams are 70s, 80s. Doing ok so far but it'd stressful--93/94 in several classes.

My lower ivy kid with barely 3.5 got a wall street internship and return offer (and is now employed there). Their major was computational econ. So much more mathematical than regular econ, and their thought was that they got wiggle room on the gpa due to that. But who knows?

It's like college admissions now. You need very good grades and test scores (for those that ask for them) but you also need extras, like the right leadership roles, competition trophies, etc.

Aren't grading inflated at Ivies? Not an Ivy, but my DC was told to maintain atleast a 3.6 gpa for BB from NYU stern (which grades on a curve, no more than 35% of class gets an A).

Anonymous wrote:My DC is at an Ivy and says that the chatter is that you need a 4.0 through fall of sophomore year to at all be in the running for a strong finance internship after junior year. Is this true or similar to what you've heard?

My kid is working their tail off for this as As are 95+ and averages on most exams are 70s, 80s. Doing ok so far but it'd stressful--93/94 in several classes.

Unless your kid is at Brown, 4.0 is still rare at ivies, less than 5% maybe 10% max for Harvard(easiest grader next to Brown)

Anonymous wrote:It should be easy to get 3.9+ gpa since schools like Harvard are handing out As like candies.

It was lot tougher 15-20 years ago. Average gpa back then was around 2.8-2.9 gpa not 3.5 gpa now days.

Grade inf;ation varies quite a bit across the Ivy League. Some are handing out nearly all As (Harvard/Yale/Brown) while others center grade distributions around an B+/B. Penn is reasonably tough with grading as is Princeton.