|
its not only due to location hallerbigballer...in NYC Wharton definitely has an edge while Michigan has it in Chicago due to regional effect. However, if you compare # of Wharton vs. # of Michigan/NYU in other banking markets like SF, LA, Houston, London, Boston Wharton still dominates Stern and Ross.
Essentially Wharton is dominant in NYC but usually comes in right after the regional schools in other cities like LA, Boston, Chicago, SF, London, etc. In LA, for example, the only shops that really matter are UBS and CS (the other BB have pretty crappy LA ops)...at these shops Wharton tends to be a close second after UCLA/Stanford. Ross and Stern have no presence here at all. Same in the Palo Alto/SF offices...Stanford/Haas usually have big presence, Wharton has a decent presence, while Stern and Ross have no presence whatsoever.
So yes regional biases matter but Wharton, as compared with Stern and Ross, is able to overcome that bias and place a good amount of kids in each office and is actually competitive against the regional schools for regional spots...a threat that few non-region schools make.
and if location was the only factor then one would assume that NYU should have the largest share of the NY market which it doesnt even come close to having...Wharton,HYP all place more people than NYU.
|