| Topic Name: |
LBS vs. LSE |
| Message Name: |
FT |
| Date Posted: |
03/10/2000 |
| In Reply To: |
I am new to this discussion, but it appears that ANY ranking from the FT, a British Newspaper, will be over bias and protective of British Universities. The British aren't especially known for their willingness to admit defeat. I'm an analyst at a top 10 I Bank in NYC and can say that LBS does have the best reputation among European B schools.
However, it would probably compare to Darden at UVA or UCLA, which as far as I know, aren't in the top 10 in the states.
|
| Message: |
You know, ANY ranking, be it businessweek, USnews, or FT, will always be subjective or biased in one or the other way.
But the FT is the only ranking that compares MBA programmes worldwide, in that respect the only method to directly relate US schools to European counterparts.
But I'm sure it's a better schools than Darden or UCLA if you want to join i-banking.
I agree with the previous posts, Cambridge MBA is total shit.
Not sure about Cranfield, but heard that it is quite good for Industry positions along with Warwick.
PS: As a genral note, I agree that the Brits hate admitting defeat.
roger and out.
|
|
