Thread List
First Page Previous Page Page 153 / 308 Next Page Last Page
Subject#Latest
4 30.06.08
9 30.06.08
16 28.06.08
7 28.06.08
8 28.06.08
26 27.06.08
5 27.06.08
16 27.06.08
2 26.06.08
1 26.06.08
10 26.06.08
5 25.06.08
3 25.06.08
11 25.06.08
15 25.06.08
4 25.06.08
7 24.06.08
1 24.06.08
2 23.06.08
8 23.06.08
1 23.06.08
4 23.06.08
3 23.06.08
3 23.06.08
6 23.06.08
2 20.06.08
6 20.06.08
11 20.06.08
8 20.06.08
7 19.06.08
8 19.06.08
1 18.06.08
14 18.06.08
1 18.06.08
15 18.06.08
1 18.06.08
2 18.06.08
9 18.06.08
2 18.06.08
31 17.06.08
1 17.06.08
6 17.06.08
1 17.06.08
9 17.06.08
7 16.06.08
7 16.06.08
5 16.06.08
2 16.06.08
2 16.06.08
5 16.06.08
First Page Previous Page Page 153 / 308 Next Page Last Page

Which is worse?

 
#1 Which is worse?
18/06/2008 23:38

Old man grad

What would be a better profile for grad. recuiting ... these profiles aren't mine, but I have friends who are considering applying to MC and was wondering which would be more successful with any strategy firms.

Profile 1:

- 4 A's @ A'Level

- 3rd class degree from Cambridge

Profile 2:

- 300 UCAS points

- 2:1 from Redbrick uni

- MSc Distinction from redbrick uni

Reply  Quote   
 
#2 RE: Which is worse?
19/06/2008 00:36

anon to Old man grad (#1)

Profile 2, no question

Reply  Quote   
 
#3 RE: Which is worse?
19/06/2008 08:22

anon to anon (#2)

Profile 1, without a doubt

Reply  Quote   
 
#4 RE: Which is worse?
19/06/2008 08:34

no to anon (#3)

1 every time. Let's be clear.

Reply  Quote   
 
#5 RE: Which is worse?
19/06/2008 08:45

MBB to no (#4)

Without anything truly exceptional by way of work-experience or 'positions of responsibility' neither would get an interview at a top strat firm. so doesn't matter either way.

Reply  Quote   
 
#6 RE: Which is worse?
19/06/2008 08:49

aono to MBB (#5)

Love how the title of the thread is the exact opposite of the question.

Reply  Quote   
 
#7 RE: Which is worse?
19/06/2008 09:51

pp to aono (#6)

The title and the body of the thread contradict each other. Profle 1 is worse. But yes, neither would probably get an interview. 2 at a push if there's something strat relevant in the CV.

Reply  Quote   
 
#8 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 13:02

Alison to pp (#7)

Absolutely 1 is worse. A third, even from Cambridge, will get you no-where.

Reply  Quote   
 
#9 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 13:33

--- to Alison (#8)

A third from Cambridge is a lot harder to get than a 2:1 or even a first from many of these redbrick universities where they spoon feed you everything!

Reply  Quote   
 
#10 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 13:44

anon to --- (#9)

right.... i'm sure that would go down a treat in cover letter or an interview

Reply  Quote   
 
#11 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 13:46

Mars A Day to --- (#9)

A Third is a fail regardless of the University; so you failed at one of the best Universities - hardly bragging rights. Given the quality of education at Cambridge there really is no excuse.

Reply  Quote   
 
#12 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 14:38

anon to Mars A Day (#11)

I think a 3rd at Cambridge is worse than a 2:1 at a decent Red Brick - you worked hard to get to one of best Universities in the world, and then c*cked it up - this shows real laziness, and a lack of perception - you had the opportunity to get yourself sorted (academically and application-wise) for life, but did not seize this opportunity. Not the best credentials.

Reply  Quote   
 
#13 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 14:53

anon to anon (#12)

This conversation is inevitably going to be biased as a result of people who may have a sort of academic 'Napoleon complex'.

Any old fool can get a first in Media Studies from the University of Huddersfield. But can the same people all get a third in Classics from Cambridge?

And besides, after a few years Cambridge issues you with an MA anyway.

Reply  Quote   
 
#14 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 15:22

Heads in clouds to anon (#13)

Just caught up on this thread and am amazed at some of the posts. For all your ex-oxbridgers saying that a 3rd from there is better than a 2:1 and MA from a redbrick, take your heads out of your bottoms and wake up.

Let's get this clear, a redbrick doesn't mean the University of Huddersfield. It means Warwick and Nottingham and Durham and Manchester etc etc etc.

I know a lot of people that would actually prefer a 2:1 from those institutions that a 2:1 from Oxbridge, let alone a 3rd! It shows you just might have had a life beyond reciting the "crazy" parts of the Iliad.

Reply  Quote   
 
#15 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 16:14

Alison to pp (#7)

Absolutely 1 is worse. A third, even from Cambridge, will get you no-where.

Reply  Quote   
 
#16 RE: Which is worse?
24/06/2008 16:16

anon to Heads in clouds (#14)

Just to antagonise the Napoleon complexers even more, I add the following:

Re: Durham, everyone knows that place is full of Oxbridge rejects

Hehe

Reply  Quote   
 
#17 RE: Which is worse?
25/06/2008 10:44

--- to deleted (#0)

Come on guys, they're both something to be very proud of! A degree from any reputable institution takes hard work and plenty of intelligence!

Reply  Quote   
 
#18 RE: Which is worse?
25/06/2008 10:45

dfr to --- (#17)

Not sure if everyone would agree with that statement...

Reply  Quote   
 
#19 RE: Which is worse?
25/06/2008 11:02

Casio to dfr (#18)

Personally I disagree. I got a 2:1 from a redbrick in what is consider a very academic degree (law)... without much work.

I went on to do a masters at a less distinguised uni (convenient location to home) and passed easily despite giving up pretty much!

It's not a reflection on my intelligence rather on the lengths these places go to to push up their pass rates. Particuarly the non redbrick which basically told us the questions coming up in every exam, it was a farce. Yet plenty still manged to fail, quite sad really.

Reply  Quote   
 
#20 RE: Which is worse?
25/06/2008 22:38

anon to Casio (#19)

Carol Voderman?!?

She ended up doing alright

Reply  Quote   
 
#21 RE: Which is worse?
26/06/2008 07:46

anon to anon (#20)

Oh yeah, we all conveniently forgot about that thicko Carol Vorderman. There's no way that member of the "nines club" at cambridge could EVER have got a 2:1 from a respectable redbrick. Proof if ever you needed it that standards are higher at the redbricks.

Reply  Quote   
 
#22 RE: Which is worse?
26/06/2008 09:09

anon to anon (#21)

I regularly hire candidates who have a 2:1 from a redbrick uni but would not consider a 3rd from cambridge or indeed Oxford for an interview.

Reply  Quote   
 
#23 RE: Which is worse?
26/06/2008 10:59

Sooo not! to anon (#22)

A third no matter what Uni its from is a FAIL!

I would hire a 2:1 from redbrick with the right attitude anyday.

I also often find that ppl from Oxbridge have very little real life experiance and would not work well with my clients - they want someone who understands them and thier staff!

Reply  Quote   
 
#24 RE: Which is worse?
26/06/2008 11:14

anon to Sooo not! (#23)

would you say a 2:2 in the late 80s from a red brick uni = 2:1 today

Reply  Quote   
 
#25 RE: Which is worse?
26/06/2008 20:12

no to anon (#24)

no

Reply  Quote   
 
#26 RE: Which is worse?
27/06/2008 18:30

Anon to no (#25)

Agree with the above, a 3rd from the '80s is more like a 2.1 today ;)

Reply  Quote   

Top of Page

ThreadID: 45146

Advertise
Your Jobs!