(06-06-2017 04:51 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 03:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  For the record, Cornell has a very strong IB program.

Oh, no doubt. If you want to go into Wall Street investment banking, then you're better off going to pretty much any Ivy League school over anyone else. That's one of the industries where it truly does pay to go for the most elite brand name possible if that's what you want to do (as they're extremely prestige-oriented). Anyone outside of the top 15 or so schools have a REALLY hard time breaking in even if you have stellar grades. (It's even more exclusive for the top consulting firms like McKinsey.)

From what I've heard from IB people is they'll sometimes also consider an all-american college athlete that majored in business or economics.

IB is a ton of work so they want the most rigorous grads they can find.

(06-06-2017 02:34 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Tech is fascinating because it's arguably one of the "flattest" employment markets in our economy: it's a true international employment market in scope and specific skills are much more quantifiable (more than college degrees in and of themselves). Of course, Silicon Valley still has its favorite colleges, albeit they're the ones with the top computer science programs (e.g. Stanford, MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan, Texas, etc.) as opposed to the more Ivy League-focused Wall Street. (Harvard, Yale and Princeton are the gold standard on Wall Street, whereas Silicon Valley firms look at Cornell as the main Ivy League school target because of their strengths in computer science and engineering, which the rest of the Ivy League is comparatively weak in.) The demand for top tech workers is also so high that they'll dip deeper into applicant pools for people with sought-after skills. If you're graduating from a halfway-decent computer science program right, you're going to have your pick of a multitude of job offers (and the ones graduating from the top ones noted above are averaging over six figures coming straight out of undergrad).

Tech is different because your value is directly tied to your skill level.

In other engineering fields where you are paid a prevailing wage and management is paid slightly more, in tech project managers make less.

Usually a company starts with a great IT architect who they make their CTO. Equity stake in the company, good salary ect. The CTO realizes they don't have time with all the management responsibilities so they try to bring in another big architect at another big salary. In many cases architects make as much if not more than IT Executives. Many architects make then the average CTO.

The project manager in Tech is this expendable gopher who has to sweat getting product delivered and is the first to go if it doesn't make delivery. This is different than the 55 year old engineering managers which are a stuffed shirt, arrogant type usually that sits in a company forever.

But I think the age 50 rule applies only if you look it. It's not discrimination based on resume but once you walk into the interview. To be safe though, you never say that you have more than 15 years of experience on the resume to play down the age. I interviewed someone one time with 33 years of experience who but at the top of his resume that he had 15 years of overall experience.

If you're a hoodie wearing type that eats Indian food and Sushi it's a lot easier to project a younger image. It's not a hunting and fishing atmosphere like you'll find in many of the engineering disciplines. You need a multicultural mindset in Tech.

(06-06-2017 08:53 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 04:51 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 03:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  For the record, Cornell has a very strong IB program.

Oh, no doubt. If you want to go into Wall Street investment banking, then you're better off going to pretty much any Ivy League school over anyone else. That's one of the industries where it truly does pay to go for the most elite brand name possible if that's what you want to do (as they're extremely prestige-oriented). Anyone outside of the top 15 or so schools have a REALLY hard time breaking in even if you have stellar grades. (It's even more exclusive for the top consulting firms like McKinsey.)

From what I've heard from IB people is they'll sometimes also consider an all-american college athlete that majored in business or economics.

IB is a ton of work so they want the most rigorous grads they can find.

It's one of the last truest testosterone-driven fields. More than anything, though, it requires drive and a resume. They work long hours (drive) and they sell their credibility (resume).

(06-06-2017 09:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 08:53 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 04:51 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 03:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  For the record, Cornell has a very strong IB program.

Oh, no doubt. If you want to go into Wall Street investment banking, then you're better off going to pretty much any Ivy League school over anyone else. That's one of the industries where it truly does pay to go for the most elite brand name possible if that's what you want to do (as they're extremely prestige-oriented). Anyone outside of the top 15 or so schools have a REALLY hard time breaking in even if you have stellar grades. (It's even more exclusive for the top consulting firms like McKinsey.)

From what I've heard from IB people is they'll sometimes also consider an all-american college athlete that majored in business or economics.

IB is a ton of work so they want the most rigorous grads they can find.

It's one of the last truest testosterone-driven fields. More than anything, though, it requires drive and a resume. They work long hours (drive) and they sell their credibility (resume).

Very true. On paper, a lot of people have the drive to be in investment banking. However, that's not enough to break into the field in and of itself since investment banks need to justify charging huge fees for the work of employees that are only a couple of years out of school. As a result, they are definitely selling the resume (e.g. "We've got a team of top economics grads from Harvard and Princeton working on a solution to your problem"). It's the same for top law firms with respect to law schools and even more so for the most elite consulting firms (e.g. McKinsey, Bain, Boston Consulting), the latter of which are actually the most difficult to break into of them all even if you do attend a top 15 school (and you basically have no chance if you're not at one of those places, as they don't give the "drive" credit to people like top athletes in the way that investment banking and other finance-based industries do -- those very top consulting firms are selling pure elitism and brain-power).

Tech and engineering along with industries with clear certifications (such as accounting) don't have the same level of school-based elitism because they are basing their decisions more on quantifiable skills as opposed to qualitative pedigree. Granted, those skills require quite a bit of work and aptitude to obtain, so they're not easy paths if you don't have a certain level of "book smarts".

(06-07-2017 09:13 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 09:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 08:53 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 04:51 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 03:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  For the record, Cornell has a very strong IB program.

Oh, no doubt. If you want to go into Wall Street investment banking, then you're better off going to pretty much any Ivy League school over anyone else. That's one of the industries where it truly does pay to go for the most elite brand name possible if that's what you want to do (as they're extremely prestige-oriented). Anyone outside of the top 15 or so schools have a REALLY hard time breaking in even if you have stellar grades. (It's even more exclusive for the top consulting firms like McKinsey.)

From what I've heard from IB people is they'll sometimes also consider an all-american college athlete that majored in business or economics.

IB is a ton of work so they want the most rigorous grads they can find.

It's one of the last truest testosterone-driven fields. More than anything, though, it requires drive and a resume. They work long hours (drive) and they sell their credibility (resume).

Very true. On paper, a lot of people have the drive to be in investment banking. However, that's not enough to break into the field in and of itself since investment banks need to justify charging huge fees for the work of employees that are only a couple of years out of school. As a result, they are definitely selling the resume (e.g. "We've got a team of top economics grads from Harvard and Princeton working on a solution to your problem"). It's the same for top law firms with respect to law schools and even more so for the most elite consulting firms (e.g. McKinsey, Bain, Boston Consulting), the latter of which are actually the most difficult to break into of them all even if you do attend a top 15 school (and you basically have no chance if you're not at one of those places, as they don't give the "drive" credit to people like top athletes in the way that investment banking and other finance-based industries do -- those very top consulting firms are selling pure elitism and brain-power).

Tech and engineering along with industries with clear certifications (such as accounting) don't have the same level of school-based elitism because they are basing their decisions more on quantifiable skills as opposed to qualitative pedigree. Granted, those skills require quite a bit of work and aptitude to obtain, so they're not easy paths if you don't have a certain level of "book smarts".

Frank - I think there is some school based elitism at the Big 4 Accounting Firms, but I would otherwise agree about the accounting profession generally.

To tie this back to the OP, Buffalo is a great school for a Computer Science degree.

(06-07-2017 10:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 09:13 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 09:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 08:53 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 04:51 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Oh, no doubt. If you want to go into Wall Street investment banking, then you're better off going to pretty much any Ivy League school over anyone else. That's one of the industries where it truly does pay to go for the most elite brand name possible if that's what you want to do (as they're extremely prestige-oriented). Anyone outside of the top 15 or so schools have a REALLY hard time breaking in even if you have stellar grades. (It's even more exclusive for the top consulting firms like McKinsey.)

From what I've heard from IB people is they'll sometimes also consider an all-american college athlete that majored in business or economics.

IB is a ton of work so they want the most rigorous grads they can find.

It's one of the last truest testosterone-driven fields. More than anything, though, it requires drive and a resume. They work long hours (drive) and they sell their credibility (resume).

Very true. On paper, a lot of people have the drive to be in investment banking. However, that's not enough to break into the field in and of itself since investment banks need to justify charging huge fees for the work of employees that are only a couple of years out of school. As a result, they are definitely selling the resume (e.g. "We've got a team of top economics grads from Harvard and Princeton working on a solution to your problem"). It's the same for top law firms with respect to law schools and even more so for the most elite consulting firms (e.g. McKinsey, Bain, Boston Consulting), the latter of which are actually the most difficult to break into of them all even if you do attend a top 15 school (and you basically have no chance if you're not at one of those places, as they don't give the "drive" credit to people like top athletes in the way that investment banking and other finance-based industries do -- those very top consulting firms are selling pure elitism and brain-power).

Tech and engineering along with industries with clear certifications (such as accounting) don't have the same level of school-based elitism because they are basing their decisions more on quantifiable skills as opposed to qualitative pedigree. Granted, those skills require quite a bit of work and aptitude to obtain, so they're not easy paths if you don't have a certain level of "book smarts".

Frank - I think there is some school based elitism at the Big 4 Accounting Firms, but I would otherwise agree about the accounting profession generally.

I agree - the Big Four has its favored schools (as I used to work for one of those firms), albeit they have more of a Big Ten/Pac-12/top flagship focus (similar to tech) as opposed to an Ivy League/top private school focus for the audit/tax areas that want accountants and CPAs. Now, the Big Four management consulting practices (where they're competing against the McKinsey types) definitely have the Ivies/Ivy-equivalents as target schools.

(06-07-2017 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Frank - I think there is some school based elitism at the Big 4 Accounting Firms, but I would otherwise agree about the accounting profession generally.

I agree - the Big Four has its favored schools (as I used to work for one of those firms), albeit they have more of a Big Ten/Pac-12/top flagship focus (similar to tech) as opposed to an Ivy League/top private school focus for the audit/tax areas that want accountants and CPAs. Now, the Big Four management consulting practices (where they're competing against the McKinsey types) definitely have the Ivies/Ivy-equivalents as target schools.

Interesting. In New England they recruit heavily from the Little Ivies (Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin, etc.).

(06-07-2017 10:14 AM)megadrone Wrote:  To tie this back to the OP, Buffalo is a great school for a Computer Science degree.

I am OP. One of my classmates, very smart guy, went to Buffalo for his Computer Science degree. I asked him why, why? He said Buffalo has a great Computer Science department even both their football and basketball suck. The smartest guy in my class went to Stony Brook though.

It's interesting to look back at the histories of the four universities that are currently at the top of SUNY:

Buffalo - was a private university, until purchased by SUNY in 1962
Binghamton - was a private college affiliated with Syracuse, then split and joined SUNY, then was designated a university center in 1965 (but not sure what justified that and/or how that came to pass ...)
Albany - was always a normal/teachers college, and was one of the core schools for the formation of SUNY in 1948
Stony Brook - established by SUNY in 1957 as a public university for Long Island

And then you have the four statutory colleges at private Cornell University, fulfilling the land-grant mission for the state to this day, as well as a fifth institution SUNY-ESF that was a statutory college at Cornell, then closed, and was restarted near Syracuse but not as a statutory college.


Naturally leads one to play a "What could have been ..." game, for the state of New York: What if New York had simply copied the Penn State U model that Pennsylvania developed, using the Morrill Act money to establish a new university to fulfill the land-grant mission, in the late 1800's or early 1900's?

Would that school have grown to similar size and research prowess as Penn St? Would it have had a similar type of athletics history? Would it have a fantastic rivalry with Syracuse? Would it be in the ACC or the Big Ten, today? Would Buffalo and Binghamton still be private?

Fun to think about ... but alas it did not happen.


As has many others have already stated, there is no "Penn State equivalent" in the state of New York, based on the decisions that state has made. So the answer to the OP is a resounding "there is none".

(06-07-2017 10:42 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Frank - I think there is some school based elitism at the Big 4 Accounting Firms, but I would otherwise agree about the accounting profession generally.

I agree - the Big Four has its favored schools (as I used to work for one of those firms), albeit they have more of a Big Ten/Pac-12/top flagship focus (similar to tech) as opposed to an Ivy League/top private school focus for the audit/tax areas that want accountants and CPAs. Now, the Big Four management consulting practices (where they're competing against the McKinsey types) definitely have the Ivies/Ivy-equivalents as target schools.

Interesting. In New England they recruit heavily from the Little Ivies (Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin, etc.).

I know in Houston my firm recruited at Texas, Texas A&M, Houston, Baylor and Lamar. You might get a TSU or Prairie View grad occasionally but they didn't really recruit there or Texas St. or Sam Houston St.. Dallas would look at Texas Tech, North Texas, TCU and SMU students (in addition to Texas and Texas A&M). It actually pretty closely followed the I-A/I-AA dividing line at the time. Of course the largest numbers were Texas and Texas A&M, but it was influenced by who the partners were.

(06-07-2017 10:42 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Frank - I think there is some school based elitism at the Big 4 Accounting Firms, but I would otherwise agree about the accounting profession generally.

I agree - the Big Four has its favored schools (as I used to work for one of those firms), albeit they have more of a Big Ten/Pac-12/top flagship focus (similar to tech) as opposed to an Ivy League/top private school focus for the audit/tax areas that want accountants and CPAs. Now, the Big Four management consulting practices (where they're competing against the McKinsey types) definitely have the Ivies/Ivy-equivalents as target schools.

Interesting. In New England they recruit heavily from the Little Ivies (Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin, etc.).

Those recruits would be for the management consulting practice (where the Big Four definitely targets Ivies and their equivalents). Those are the highest paying and most prestigious jobs that the Big Four offers to undergrads since they're for management strategy roles. I'd be shocked if many (if any) CPAs come out of those schools since they actually go out of their way to NOT have practical business classes (as those are deemed to be "vocational" for liberal arts schools).

(06-07-2017 12:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:42 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Frank - I think there is some school based elitism at the Big 4 Accounting Firms, but I would otherwise agree about the accounting profession generally.

I agree - the Big Four has its favored schools (as I used to work for one of those firms), albeit they have more of a Big Ten/Pac-12/top flagship focus (similar to tech) as opposed to an Ivy League/top private school focus for the audit/tax areas that want accountants and CPAs. Now, the Big Four management consulting practices (where they're competing against the McKinsey types) definitely have the Ivies/Ivy-equivalents as target schools.

Interesting. In New England they recruit heavily from the Little Ivies (Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin, etc.).

I know in Houston my firm recruited at Texas, Texas A&M, Houston, Baylor and Lamar. You might get a TSU or Prairie View grad occasionally but they didn't really recruit there or Texas St. or Sam Houston St.. Dallas would look at Texas Tech, North Texas, TCU and SMU students (in addition to Texas and Texas A&M). It actually pretty closely followed the I-A/I-AA dividing line at the time. Of course the largest numbers were Texas and Texas A&M, but it was influenced by who the partners were.

Yeah, it's also a sliding scale. In the Chicago office for audit and tax, basically anyone with a 3.0 or better from Illinois, Notre Dame, Michigan, Indiana or Wisconsin would get a job offer almost sight unseen. We'd hire a smaller but material number of people from all of the other Big Ten schools plus DePaul and Marquette. Past that group, we might have taken 1 or 2 people per year from each of the other local schools (basically token hires), but they needed to have insanely great grades and extracurricular activities.

There was similar tiering for management consulting, only it was much more snobby with most hires coming from Northwestern, University of Chicago and Michigan (Ross School of Business specifically, which has Ivy-level admissions standards), a few token hires from Illinois, Indiana, Notre Dame and Wisconsin and then basically no one from any schools ranked lower than them.

(06-07-2017 05:26 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:42 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Frank - I think there is some school based elitism at the Big 4 Accounting Firms, but I would otherwise agree about the accounting profession generally.

I agree - the Big Four has its favored schools (as I used to work for one of those firms), albeit they have more of a Big Ten/Pac-12/top flagship focus (similar to tech) as opposed to an Ivy League/top private school focus for the audit/tax areas that want accountants and CPAs. Now, the Big Four management consulting practices (where they're competing against the McKinsey types) definitely have the Ivies/Ivy-equivalents as target schools.

Interesting. In New England they recruit heavily from the Little Ivies (Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin, etc.).

Those recruits would be for the management consulting practice (where the Big Four definitely targets Ivies and their equivalents). Those are the highest paying and most prestigious jobs that the Big Four offers to undergrads. I'd be shocked if many (if any) CPAs come out of those schools since they actually go out of their to NOT have practical business classes (as those are deemed to be "vocational" for liberal arts schools).

Yes definitely.

(06-07-2017 09:13 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 09:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 08:53 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 04:51 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-06-2017 03:53 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  For the record, Cornell has a very strong IB program.

Oh, no doubt. If you want to go into Wall Street investment banking, then you're better off going to pretty much any Ivy League school over anyone else. That's one of the industries where it truly does pay to go for the most elite brand name possible if that's what you want to do (as they're extremely prestige-oriented). Anyone outside of the top 15 or so schools have a REALLY hard time breaking in even if you have stellar grades. (It's even more exclusive for the top consulting firms like McKinsey.)

From what I've heard from IB people is they'll sometimes also consider an all-american college athlete that majored in business or economics.

IB is a ton of work so they want the most rigorous grads they can find.

It's one of the last truest testosterone-driven fields. More than anything, though, it requires drive and a resume. They work long hours (drive) and they sell their credibility (resume).

Very true. On paper, a lot of people have the drive to be in investment banking. However, that's not enough to break into the field in and of itself since investment banks need to justify charging huge fees for the work of employees that are only a couple of years out of school. As a result, they are definitely selling the resume (e.g. "We've got a team of top economics grads from Harvard and Princeton working on a solution to your problem"). It's the same for top law firms with respect to law schools and even more so for the most elite consulting firms (e.g. McKinsey, Bain, Boston Consulting), the latter of which are actually the most difficult to break into of them all even if you do attend a top 15 school (and you basically have no chance if you're not at one of those places, as they don't give the "drive" credit to people like top athletes in the way that investment banking and other finance-based industries do -- those very top consulting firms are selling pure elitism and brain-power).

Tech and engineering along with industries with clear certifications (such as accounting) don't have the same level of school-based elitism because they are basing their decisions more on quantifiable skills as opposed to qualitative pedigree. Granted, those skills require quite a bit of work and aptitude to obtain, so they're not easy paths if you don't have a certain level of "book smarts".

I don't know if it's that they can vouch for the talent level by selecting Ivy grads as much as an Ivy background assumes a level of socialization and cultural fit.

The conversation that goes back in forth when my brother who is a corporate lawyer Ivy grad and his friends that are Ivy Investment Bankers is "what route do you need to go to get the seven figure jobs" This is all to avoid being stuck in a corporate dead end track that peaks out at 200-300k.

Almost everyone that attends an Ivy is clued into the money to be had in the corporate center of New York City and the right jobs after graduation to get there. Journalism majors from those schools are choosing to work for financial media outlets. That's how Erin Burnett and Sara Murray from CNN got going in financial media. My brother started in commodity research before going back to law school.

They Ivies give you that socialization. They teach you how to travel and handle displays of wealth. Graduates trend liberal but eschew liberal extremes. At least the ones with a Manhattan career in mind.

Any client of one of these Manhattan firms knows they can only expect so much out of someone who is 25 regardless of anything because there are things you can only see with experience. My brother for years did work for Fortune 500 clients but only after leaving he could see that everything was done by a template with limits creativity. It takes experience and what is more telling is how those grads do after the age of 30 and do they really get into those seven figure tracks.

(06-07-2017 05:52 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 05:26 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:42 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2017 10:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Frank - I think there is some school based elitism at the Big 4 Accounting Firms, but I would otherwise agree about the accounting profession generally.

I agree - the Big Four has its favored schools (as I used to work for one of those firms), albeit they have more of a Big Ten/Pac-12/top flagship focus (similar to tech) as opposed to an Ivy League/top private school focus for the audit/tax areas that want accountants and CPAs. Now, the Big Four management consulting practices (where they're competing against the McKinsey types) definitely have the Ivies/Ivy-equivalents as target schools.

Interesting. In New England they recruit heavily from the Little Ivies (Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin, etc.).

Those recruits would be for the management consulting practice (where the Big Four definitely targets Ivies and their equivalents). Those are the highest paying and most prestigious jobs that the Big Four offers to undergrads. I'd be shocked if many (if any) CPAs come out of those schools since they actually go out of their to NOT have practical business classes (as those are deemed to be "vocational" for liberal arts schools).

Yes definitely.

The above isn't true. The lack of CPA's is because although accounting has a very high starting salary, it plateaus at a comparatively low level.