Duke Vs Darden

terp, where are you getting your numbers?

Fuqua 2007-08 employment report:
https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/mba_recruitin ... report.pdf

Darden 2007-08 employment report:
https://www.darden.virginia.edu/uploaded ... al0708.pdf

Fuqua full-time IB = 12% of 377 = 45
Darden full-time IB = 15% of 280 = 42

If we are basing this comparison just on number of students placed (which I don't think proves a whole lot), then they are practically equal.

I think people use finance generally to mean i-banking. As far as that goes, my friend who is a 1Y at Duke told me that there were 43 people "truly interested" in investment banking and of those, 41 got internships at i-banks (these folks are now 2Y's who interned this past summer). Again, I will post more later, but banking is alive and well at Duke. I'm not sure how many offers will be made, but the big banks (or whomever is left: UBS, CS, Citi, GS, MS, JPM, etc.) are all recruiting Dukies. According to my friend, BofA and JPM sent "armies" to Duke for the information sessions.

Based on the data for 2007-08, 49 students at Duke were placed in IB related fields. I m not counting companies such as Amex in this list. The finance recruitment should be better.

I don't know where you're coming up with this information from, but this post along with several of your other comments on this thread are complete falsehoods. First of all, I know very little about analyst recruiting, but I do know that the McIntire School of commerce is one of the most highly regarded undergraduate business schools in the nation (#2 in BW this year, and traditionally considered among the top 3 with Wharton and Ross) and is considered a primary feeder for every big New York investment bank. Duke is a virtual unknown in undergraduate business rankings. The suggestion that Duke is more highly regarded that UVA McIntire on Wall Street is ludicrous. Absolutely insane.

Still, undergraduate business rankings and analyst placements have little to do with MBA level investment banking placements. The fact that you can't seem to understand the difference underscores how ill-informed you are on the subject. Darden has longer and stronger relationships that Duke with the major investment banks. You analysis that most positions at investment banks are filled by recruits from target schools is totally correct, however your assertion that Duke is considered core are more firms is absolutely ridiculous. Granted, the landscape in the investment banking world has changed over the course of the last year, and Darden's traditionally strong relationships with Lehman, Merrill, Citi and DB must evolve, but Darden's ties to wall street as a whole are stronger and more comprehensive. You do seem to flip-flop in your statements regarding banking and S&T, and I will agree that S&T recruiting is less comprehensive at Darden than at other schools, though I don't believe Duke is popular among S&T arms at banks either (don't know for sure, so I won't say).

So, I'm not sure what your agenda is, but stop spreading false information. Consider the investment banking statistics for the two schools, keeping in mind that Duke is more than 1/3 larger than Darden. In other words, Darden places more of their smaller population into banking. Also, remember that Duke has traditionally had its highest placements with BofA and Wachovia (a joke among the wall street elite, though things are changing), while year in and year out Darden has its highest placements with Lehman, Merrill, JP Morgan & Citi.

A final thought to dispute your incorrect assertion that Darden is not a core school for some investment banks - I will offer you a nugget of truth from my own personal experience. I will confirm 100% that the the following firms recruited on-campus at Darden last year and offered me a position on their closed list for investment banking and hired someone from Darden:

(Came and put me on their closed list and hired from Darden last summer):
Goldman
Lehman
Morgan Stanley
Merrill Lynch
Citi
JP Morgan
Bear Stears
Credit Suisse
Deutsche Bank
UBS
Bank of America
Wachovia
CIBC Oppenheimer
Jefferies
Houlihan Lokey
Barclays Capital
Piper Jaffray
BB&T Capital Markets

(Came and hired someone from Darden, but I didn't apply to):
Harris Williams
Keefe Bryuette
Lane Berry
Robert W. Baird
Stifel Nicolous
SunTrust
Lazard
Rothschild

Of course, some of those firms aren't around any more in their original forms, but I can with 100% honesty confirm that each of the above firms considers Darden a core school for internship and full-time recruiting. I'm also quite sure that the firms at the top of that list hire more from Darden than Duke (notwithstanding the smaller size), though since I don't have hard numbers I'll just leave it at that (definitely more from Darden than Duke at my firm last summer).

OMG fury of Pelihu.... ..... Revenge of the Sith.......

Pelihu,

Here are my comments.

1) In all of my posts on this thread, I only talk about S&T. I did not work in IBD, I didn't recruit others within IBD, and therefore can't really talk about it. I have many friends in IBD, but I am going to stick to what I've seen first hand.

2) Anyone who worked on Wall Street knows that you don't need to be a business major to get your foot in the door. There are plenty of engineering, psychology, computer science, and even art majors. Just because Duke isn't ranked for undergrad business doesn't mean that the name isn't a strong brand on Wall Street. I have many Duke friends who are in IBD and majored in engineering, economics. Again, I am not telling you that ALL ibanks are Duke heavy, but I can tell you that the Duke presence at my firm was much stronger than Darden's presence (similar at 2 other firms that I interned).

3) "The suggestion that Duke is more highly regarded that UVA McIntire on Wall Street is ludicrous. Absolutely insane." I am sorry but I 100% disagree with you. I also think you are strongly biased in this argument.

4) "Still, undergraduate business rankings and analyst placements have little to do with MBA level investment banking placements." I disagree here as well. One inadvertently drives the other as I argued in a previous post. I don't think you have the experience to tell me that I am 100% wrong. We just have a difference of opinion. I worked on a recruiting team for a year and I can tell you that sometimes analysts work and lead these teams because they are so in touch with the campus community. Many analysts push for their school with HR (just like I did) and as a result get more recognition for their school within the firm.

5) "Darden has longer and stronger relationships that Duke with the major investment banks." Another claim that you can't make. Did you do recruiting at an ibank? Did you talk to HR at some of these firms? Have you gone to the Duke recruiting events to compare them to yours? I suspect the answer is No.

6) "[H]owever your assertion that Duke is considered core are more firms is absolutely ridiculous." The firm that I worked full-time at is on your list and Duke was a core school. I interned at several places on your list as well - Duke was a core school for both analyst and associate recruiting for both S&T and IBD.

7) "So, I'm not sure what your agenda is, but stop spreading false information." I apologize if I am offending anyone, but I am merely stating my opinion in an effort to answer the initial question. Everything that I am stating is all ME, obviously none of it is official and I am telling you my opinion based on what I've seen.

8) "A final thought to dispute your incorrect assertion that Darden is not a core school for some investment banks - I will offer you a nugget of truth from my own personal experience. I will confirm 100% that the the following firms recruited on-campus at Darden last year and offered me a position on their closed list for investment banking and hired someone from Darden." Fantastic. But I will still argue that Duke is more highly regarded on Wall Street based on my experiences (especially in S&T).

9) "I can with 100% honesty confirm that each of the above firms considers Darden a core school for internship and full-time recruiting." Again, I think this is a claim that you aren't qualified to make. Conducting an info session or holding an occasional interview doesn't necessarily mean that the school is part of the core list. The list is official and is decided on by HR. I suspect that you haven't seen this list from each of the firms you mentioned.

I never said that nobody recruits at Darden. Plenty of firms do and you've seen them at recruiting events at your school. I just think getting your foot in the door would be much easier coming out of Duke.

I apologize if I offended you, but I think choosing Darden over Duke for finance is absolutely insane. This is my opinion and I am sure that there are others who will agree with me. Again, I am not affiliated with Duke by any means.

I know this isn't what you wanted to hear but don’t shoot the messenger…

I think you are both wrong, and you should just go to Chicago.

Here's a list of firms that hired from Chicago this year:

1. "Joe's Crab Shak and Steakhouse", located on the first floor of the Lehman Brothers Building
2. "Equities in Dallas", a strip joint located on i-95 near Chase Manhattan's nighttime IT operations building.
3. "Barbarians At The Gate", a street ice cream vendor located just off fifth street near BOA.
4. "Brokers' R uS", a low volume broker-dealer with two offices in Tajikistan and southern new guinea.
5. "Gordon Gecko", a discount pet store in Austin, TX.

You shouldn't be wasting your time with these other "wannabe" programs. As we say round here,

If you wanna get down with the WACC
the only place to be
is at the mother (!@#(!@ GSB!

rhyme, you remind me that I should visit the forum more often.

ROFL.... great comment rhyme

i agree

Uchicago > everything

Just to help promote this discussion

Was checking US News specialty rankings .

Finance - Duke rated 12 and Darden 21.
Management - Duke 8, Darden 7

Although these rankings dont seem accurate because it rates Duke and Haas above Cornell (i know Terp06 would have something to say abt this).

in my opinion, both the schools are very similar in terms of their finance and GM placements and standing at least in NY and other surrounding regions. Its the international placements and reputation that I am more worried about.

I'm not offended because of your conclusion, I'm offended because you are spreading lies based on invalid logic. You say you know nothing about IB recruiting, yet you draw your conclusions based on just your limited knowledge of S&T recruiting at the college level.

1) For example, you say "What I can tell you is that every bulge bracket bank has its own set of recruiting schools known as the core. About 95% of available seats get filled up by students from these schools. Duke is almost always part of this core (I've seen the recruiting process at several banks), while Darden isn't on every list that Duke is on." then draw the conclusion that banks recruit more at Duke than Darden. Wrong, because you know nothing about investment bank recruiting and are basing your thoughts solely on undergrad S&T placements which are a very small part of the finance world.

2) You say you know nothing about IB recruiting, then conclude that that Duke is more highly regarded on Wall Street? How can you possibly conclude this. By and large, when people talk about Wall Street here they are talking about Investment Banking. When people talk about S&T they say so specifically. An to conclude that S&T = Finance as you have is just stupid.

So, I'm not angry at you because you've reached a different conclusion. I am mad at you because you are spreading lies based on faulty logic.

Also, if you go to Duke, you run the risk of being associated, however loosely, with the Cameron Crazies, college basketball's least photogenic (yet most filmed) fans. Irony...

Lastly, Durham has got to be in the running for worst city in America.

My 2 cents in this splitting-your-hair argument.

i) UVa and Duke almost get equal recognition for analyst recruiting. McIntire is #2 on BW but then Duke is a higher ranked school.

ii) Darden is not an 'other' school by any definition. It is very much a network school and will get your foot in the door in finance (both IB and S&T).

Haha, I was never considering Chicago GSB...until now.

ok

Wow. I missed this back in the day.

Foodstamp may be right at UG level , and is certainly right that they pick people from all sorts of ridiculous backgrounds to go into S&T and then try and teach a history major how to do math.

That said, I don't think Duke has anywhere near the big deal with getting MBA's into S&T. I wouldn't know whether to say it is better or worse than Darden (from my personal experience Darden seemed about more, but Duke's people were always way more fun and less serious). Mind, doing an MBA to get into S&T is a strange fish - I always got the feeling Darden was a priority over Duke.

That said, I rarely met any people from Chicago as they were all to busy feeding roosters and working the grind in Gary, Indiana.

Just to clarify, Duke does not have a business undergraduate program. However, Duke UG is a core school for IB recruitment, like much of the Ivies. I don't know enough about UVA UG to speak.

Either way, we are comparing apples to oranges. UG != MBA. At the MBA level, Fuqua and Darden are about equal for IB recruitment. But I mean, if you really want to go to IB, probably better to go to one of the more quant schools. The general interest in IB at Fuqua just isn't as high as it is in schools like Booth, which probably explains the lower placement.