bango

having high marks in top US schools is definitely much easier than at LSE. I would say a 60 at LSE would compare to an A in US. Distinction (above 70) is A+.

well, I think PUC-Rio and to a second extent EPGE/FGV (also in Rio) are top programs but University of Sao Paulo is only second tier, at least regarding placement in top programs. They lag way behing PUC-Rio in their historic placement. IMPA may be considered first tier, but they don't have an entrance exam and are very dependent on just one researcher. Besides that, it is a very small program. With respect to Doctoral studies, PUC used not to praise its Doctoral Program, as it motivated its best students to follow a PhD Program abroad. But that has changed, mainly by pression from the Brazilian Government, that has downgraded PUC in its rankings, for 'not having enough Doctoral Students'. This year, there are at least 5 new PhD Students getting their degree at PUC, a record!

you forgot PUC-Rio. go to Departamento de Economia - PUC Rio and see.

LSE and LBS are currently offering funding to almost all (LSE) and all (LBS) students they accept. Which doesn not mean it is easy to be accepted. But why not give it a try ?

Totally agree with econphilomath, LoRs are all that count. But I disagree about meritocracy... I can personally testify that in some places in Latin America that places very well in top10 in US Schools, a set of new young professors who want to get a higher reputation between students who want to apply for PhD in US is trying to revert the meritocracy process to a "kiss-my-***" process. They completely discredit students who don't love them, but are considered (by grades, among peers and by other professors) to be better than students that kiss *** of these professors. They invent rumours about quality of research of these students who dared not ask them LoRs, trying to punish them not to be well placed in a top US School next year (instead, trying to place their worse students that kiss his *** there). In 2 years, they almost ruined the reputation of this Latin American university, because new students don't know anymore if merit is valid there.

Where are international universities?

What is the ranking of LSE ?

Hi, how would you rank LBS and LSE PhD Programmes in Finance? cheers, bango

hey AT, I hope everything will be ok for you. But I pretty much felt last year what you are feeling now. The only advise I can give you is to try to calm down and if necessary, wait another year for applying. The problem with my LoR is kind of what AT has explained. This professor gave LoRs for 4 students. I was competing with another guy to see who was the 'star' of my department this year. This professor told me explictly: 'In you LoR, I wrote: 'if you do a good job, bango will be a good researcher'. In the other guy's LoR, I wrote: 'unless some catastrophe takes place, the other guy will be an excellent research'. I think this is a subtle way of giving someone a bad letter. Do you think I should have waited another year or I did good in going to LSE? Cheers

hey AT, hope you got your place at a BS now. I am writing just to tell you my 'sad' story. I applied last year (december 2006 to start in September 2007) and had a very strong profile. I come from a University in Latin America that places on average 3 or 4 of its students in top-5 US schools every year. I was considered by my peers and some professors one of the 2 best students and best macro student. Everyone expected me to go to Princeton, as it is often the case for this type of profile. My problem: one of my LoR was not good. The professor wrote that I had a very high potential, but that I was a 'raw diamond' in research. I was really angry at that time, because this professor had told me before that he would give me a good LoR, and I really had an alternative to his LoR. The matter was indeed a political internal problem of my Econ Department in Latin America, as this professor was trying to venge himself from the other 2 professors that wrote me the LoRs. (that is not only my opinion, he almost said me so!) Anyway, my main mistake was not to diversify LoRs. the 2 other LoRs were very good, I know because the professors who wrote them were really shocked I didn't enter into a top-5. (and angry about the 3rd Professor). These 2 professors usually put their recommendants in Princeton and sometimes in Harvard or Chicago. So, I got accepted to LSE MRes, the only university the 'bad' LoR was not sent. I was on a waitlist for funding, but finally didn't get it. I was profoundly depressed, but I then found out LSE had a Finance Department and their placement was even slightly better than the Econ Department. Of course, Finance was one of the fields that interested me (the other being Macro). So, I wrote to the Director of Phd in Finance at LSE, and, as they had a late application process, they considered my application and offered me a place with full funding. I still hesitated because I could have the chance to make into a top-5 in US this year, but after talking to some friends who are in PhD top-5 and some professors at my home university, I decided to accept the LSE offer. I will be frank, although I think the department is quite good and I am happy here at LSE, I still don't know if my decision was wise: exchange one more year and maybe a top-5 place for starting the PhD in a top-15 earlier. That's it, I just wanted to share with you my 'sad' story.

Do you think is it very hard to perform well in the job market after a PhD at LSE in Economics or Finance?

what about LSE? A lot of you guys has not even mentioned LSE. Do you think is there a bias because LSE is not an American university?

and what about a degree from LSE Finance? Does it preclude you from teaching in Economics Department or IMF/WB/Consulting?

ok, so after reading all your points (I initiated the thread), I still cannot say that I have not made a very good decision. I will try to be short: I have applied in 2006/2007 to all top US Schools + LSE as everyone from my Master (in Latin America) does. This Master usually puts its 3 best students into US top-5 programs. I was second best student (by some standards, the best student) I had a problem with one of my letters (for very strong political reasons in my department, the professor pretended he would give me a good letter to revenge himself of the other 2 professors that were giving me the LoRs) and I got rejected in all US Schools (before my application, all my colleagues thought that I would be accepted in Princeton, as every previous applicant from my Master with similar profiles were). By chance(?), LSE asks only 2 letters (this bad letter was not on LSE application) and I was accepted. I hesitated a lot if I should go into LSE or wait another year. (I could have had other good letter - this time for sure). After consulting some friends that are already in their 2nd, 3rd year in top US Schools, they told me that I would be crazy to exchange another year just to 'upgrade' from LSE to Princeton. So I decided to come to LSE and am at the PhD Program. Do you think I should have waited and re-applied? I am very confused now. Do you think my chances of getting well into the academic American job market are very small? Any personal opinion? zsla?

Hey guys, what do you think about these programs? Have you heard about the LSE Department of Finance? (it is in its first year as they were together with Accounting until 2006). Where would you put these programs in a worldwide ranking? What do you think chances are for an average PhD student graduating from these programs into getting a good position in the american academic job market? what about the european academic job market?