Jump to content
Urch Forums

Mikoyan

Members
  • Posts

    21
  • Joined

Converted

  • My Tests
    No

Mikoyan's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

1

Reputation

  1. Care to explain why it is less competitive now?
  2. I come from European country where we do masters before PhD. People from my home country who go to abroad to do PhD have masters already. I have 2 options to do masters degree: A) I study normal masters courses. B) I study most, if not all, PhD core courses. Both will give me same msc degree. Only benefit of option A is that those courses are easier. Benefits of option B: 1) If I stay in my home country and I do PhD, I save time, because I have already done most if not all PhD core courses 2) If I get good grades in PhD courses, it is stronger signal than MSc level courses 3) If I go to do PhD abroad then core courses and comps are probably somewhat easier because I have already studied same material. In PhD micro courses they use MWG. In macro they use Ljungqvist & Sargent, Acemoglu (growth) and Gali (monetary), and also some other books. It seems to me that these books are widely used in PhD programs across the world. I didn't see that they use SLP which seems weird. I don't know what they use in econometric courses. But these books, at least MWG and L&S seems to be commonly in use, which is a good thing. But I don't know how hard these PhD courses are for me. We have different grading system than in US. When I look at results from older courses, there might be like +20 students and only 2-3 get best grade. Most get mediocre grades, so I'm not sure if I could get best grades. And if I get average grades it could work against me. So the problem is that I don't know how adcoms react if they see that I have average grades in econ PhD courses. Of course I try to do my best to get best grades. What do you think? Probably I should ask about my professors. I don't want to publicly post course materials, but if somebody wants to see some course materials from those PhD courses and tell me how rigourous they are, it would be nice.
  3. Well, I would think that given that you want to move to US ASAP, you think that it is beneficial for econ phd admission, and you have money to do it, then I would be inclined to say that you should go to US now. Whats to lose? Only risk that I can think is that for some reason you don't adapt to US and get bad grades there (though one could say that this could happen in phd program too?), and of course it is the costlier option.
  4. I don't know what Scandinavian university you are talking about, but there are Scandinavian universities that send students to top American econ phd programs. You should check if your university has done that. But on the other hand if you wan't to move to USA ASAP and think that it would be beneficial to your admission, I don't see reason why you wouldn't do that. Although we are talking about just 3 math courses, though important courses AFAIK. But, take my words with a grain of salt.
  5. Of course. That is the stuff that I can study on my own. But otherwise it doesn't help me to get admitted, because when I study on my own some finance stuff, it helps only in interviews, but I don't have done those courses. I mean study on my own: studying without officially being in the course. I learn but I don't get grades or any certificate that I have learned those things. Edit. Those mathematical finance courses and one finance course are courses that I can participate officially. If I do that, they will appear in my transcript and I get grades from those courses. I also, obviously learn those things. But then things like corporate finance. I can't go to corporate finance course. But, I can study on my own those things. I can learn those things. But they don't appear in my transcript. I don't get grades, I don't get any "official" evidence that I have learned some stuff. It will only appear if I get into interview and I can there show that I know that stuff, even though there isn't corporate finance course in my transcript. I hope you guys understand what I mean. Also, as you probably have noticed, English isn't my native language, so if my posts looks like I'm rude or something like that I don't mean to be rude at all (yes, I need to improve my English proficiency).
  6. I can study on my own some finance, but that won't help me to get admitted. I might be able to complete 2 mathematical finance courses offered by math department and one finance course, but it isn't corporate finance course. I don't know how I should view this finance option.
  7. ytam1 and chateauheart, I appreciate your answers. For all who are interested, I made a thread about these questions to PhD in Business subforum. There might be more people with finance PhD knowledge and also I don't hijack kicpatl17's thread anymore. http://www.www.urch.com/forums/phd-business/157674-finance-phd-without-finance-background.html
  8. I asked these questisions in Economics PhD subforum, but I think that I might get more answers here in PhD in Business subforum. I have studied only economics, math and statistics. I would love to do finance minor, but it doesn't seem possible here. I might be able to study 1-2 finance courses, and maybe some mathematical finance (at math department, maybe 1-2 courses), but nothing else. I read some old posts about finance PhD's, and it seems that: 1) many Finance PhD students have studied economics and math, and little to no finance before their Finance PhD 2) first year at Finance PhD is usually quite similar than first year in Econ PhD (ie. if you are ready for first year Econ PhD, you are ready for first year Finance PhD) Are these still true? I'm interested because finance is somewhat interesting to me, but I have always thought that I would have to study a lot finance in order to get in to Finance PhD. I have only studied econ, math and stats. I also quote answers that I got:
  9. In economics phd jargon real analysis means undergraduate analysis. Analysis I, II, and introduction to analysis sounds exactly right. AFAIK for physicist and in some other fields real analysis means graduate level analysis, so it is kinda confusing. But here in urch econ phd forum real analysis is UG analysis course (like Analysis I).
  10. I don't like to make a new thread and this might be slightly offtopic, but I feel urge to ask: I read some old posts about finance PhD's, and it seems that: 1) many Finance PhD students have studied economics and math, and little to no finance before their Finance PhD 2) first year at Finance PhD is usually quite similar than first year in Econ PhD (ie. if you are ready for first year Econ PhD, you are ready for first year Finance PhD) Are these still true? I'm interested because finance is somewhat interesting to me, but I have always thought that I would have to study a lot finance in order to get in to Finance PhD. I have only studied econ, math and stats. Edit. Maybe I should make a thread in PhD in Business subforum, although I'm happy if some of you econ PhD guys can answer and if kicpatl17 doesn't mind this offtopic.
  11. Just out of interest, I know this is offtopic: is it common for psychologists to take microecon courses?
  12. How is a industry job market for econ masters? Same than with ugrad degree?
  13. Quite surprising, at least to me, that management consulting hires econ PhDs quite frequently, but commercial banks not so often?
  14. Take my words with a grain of salt, but AFAIK usually they do understand that grading isn't same in every place.
×
×
  • Create New...