Griedman

I agree that math can be practiced but you should also have a serious consideration about your econ phd-plans. It is going to get harder and there simply won't be time. Econ phd-programs are very demanding math-wise. Imagine solving 7 mwg-problems, several multipage macro prelims and tons of advanced math every week while learning new econ AND math concepts. I'm not saying that you can't do it, but the fact is that people who are not very good at math rarely survive the first year in good programs. It would be an upward battle and comparative advantage could lie somewhere else

So, you're worrying that you don't get enough exposure to heterodox ideas if you attend an orthodox program. Do you think that if you lack formal training in mainstream econ someone will take you seriously when you criticise it? Imho, this is a much bigger thing to worry about

Given that you have access to professors from a top school in UK you should ask from them first. They probably have better idea where you can get in than we do. Anyways, I think you have a very good profile. If I were you I would throw a few more applications to top 10 and stop worrying about gre.

What universities are you applying to? I'm pretty sure most (especially american) programs do not give you any credit even if you have seven master's degrees. But this question cannot be answered unless you give some idea about your current institution and the schools you're planning to apply. But like chrishacker said, you might be able to take the prelims, but I think this option is only available if you have taken a phd-level sequence

If typical placement is 50-70 and we assume that your thesis and courses go well, I'd focus on this range and I'd also throw a few applications to higher ranked schools that have accepted your students in the past (assuming they have done well). Process has a lot random elements so include some safety schools too. Good luck

Where does your school usually send students? And what is relatively unknown? I'd like remark that getting in and getting with funding are two different things and when you down in rankings proportion of funded students shrinks

I would take topology and probability and whatever interests you ;)

Confirmed. My D was the second best grade in the exam that had +80% failure rate and almost all who passed got E's. I'm still bitter

Depends on a paper. RAing for a prof is good in two ways: It gives you a chance to show interest in economic research and tells the adcoms that you have some idea what it is. It also gives a recommendation letter, given that you work hard. Universities want students who a) Pass the prelims and b) Do good research. Thus, some research experience (and little more math would) boost your profile a lot. About the math courses, I would skip differential equations and take a course in probability or more analysis or more stats. However, this is a minor issue.

I agree with Cat. Try to get a RAship from a school where you can also take few math courses, at least LA and math stats and maybe RA. Work your a** off for a prof, get one more letter and some research experience. If your aim is to start a consulting firm I'd look for schools that also have business schools. You might get some valuable connections and you can also take courses there. And when you're writing your SOP make sure you tell them why you want move private sector to academia. Don't tell them you want to start a consulting firm :) Best of luck

Getting into Pompeu Fabra will be hard without Barcelona GSE master's, EUI funding is very good for EU-nationals but I think not so for foreigners. SSE has good funding but Stockholm is very expensive and finding apartments is a pain in the ear. All these would be solid for monetary though

I think you do have a shot to top 10/15. Eventhough analysis is an important course, it is a single grade. It all depends what will your letter writers say, how stars are aligned, how your interests match to what particular institutions are looking for and what the adcoms had for lunch before they read your profile. Good luck

Process is very competitive but so is your profile. B+ from metrics one and two are biggest "weaknesses". I'm very surprised if you don't get into "top7". THis doesn't mean that you shouldn't have some safeties. Measure theory has very little marginal value for your profile. Best of luck

Required? No, it is possible to get in with strong math bakground, int micro and grad metrics. Especially if you're planning to do theory or metrics Disadvantage? Yes, obviously it doesn't hurt to have more econ in your transcript.

Not this again :D Wrong thread boys

#1 because: a) He offered to write you letter. This is a strong statement from him that the letter will be very good. b) He knows you from class and from the outside, thus the letter will be more detailed and more credible. If this is your "third letter" you're doing great. Assuming that the first two letters dominated these options.

I was writing a longer post but in the end I realized that I really don't have much to say. Edited by Mod: When you have nothing nice to say, it's better to say nothing at all.

Maybe an assistant prof who buys hardcore math books for intimidation... And for anyone who is looking for meaningful advice, please skip the previous seven posts

REMINDER: Your real analysis grade, your future placement[ATTACH=CONFIG]6790[/ATTACH]

I'm going to do macro so believing is enough, right?

I would definitely take RA2, it covers some important topics that were missing from your RA1 class

Pub+A in grad micro=amazing results next year, best of luck Catrina

It was pretty lonely out there

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: BSc Econ, math,finance and quantitative finance, Small European department Undergrad GPA: 4,5/5 Econ: 4,9/5(rank 1) Type of Grad: Econ Grad GPA: 4,9 (rank 1) GRE: 168Q 158V 4.0AWA Math Courses: Math for econ 1&2 (4,4), calculus (More like intro analysis) (5), LA (5), Euclidian topology (3), Series and integrals (5), ODE (2) Basic methods in statistics (5), Probability (4), Statistical Finance (5), Multivariate Analysis (4), Econ Courses: Basic: Micro (5), macro(5), history of economic though(4), theory of money&banking(4), public economics(5) Intermediate: Micro(5), Macro(5), Mathematical economics(5), Development economics(5), Labor economics(4), international trade (5), IO (3) Advanced: Micro(5), Macro(5), Econometrics(5), Fiscal policy(4), Advanced IO(5), Game Theory (5), Financial Econometrics(5) Other Courses: Lots of finance courses Letters of Recommendation: 3 econ profs, not big shots but decent connections. At least two stellar letters, third is good too Research Experience: Bachelor's thesis, Master thesis in progress, RA for summer Teaching Experience: Ta in mathematical economics and advanced macro Research Interests: Many ideas from different fields Worries: Not from a "feeder"-school SOP: x^2+y^2=1 Applying to: MIT, Princeton, Stanford,Chicago, Yale, UPenn, NYU, NWU, UCLA, Ohio State, Minnesota, Duke, Wisconsin, WUSTL, Cornell RESULTS: Acceptances: WUSTL, Wisconsin Waitlists: Penn, Minnesota Rejections: Princeton, NYU, MIT, Michigan, Cornell, Chicago, UCLA, Stanford, Yale, Duke No reply: OSU Comments: Coming from an institution that has never sent a student to US and applying to the schools I did was no doubt a risky bet. This bet was too risky for most of the departments too. However, I always had the option to do phd in Europe. I was supposed to change school after bsc but I lacked an insignificant course and thus didn't get my degree in time to do that. I am pretty sure that my results would have been better if I had done that but buts don't really make a difference. I also started studying pure math too late and ended up taking too many hard courses at the same time an ended up with few bad math grades. I am pretty sure that without this board I would have been shut out, thanks guys and cite my papers when they come out ;)

I'm such an a-hole that I'd probably write a paper about that