The Denzera Advice Archive Thread

[Denzera]

Hey guys,

So, my private message box has been nearly-full for a while. Some of the messages I've saved have been really nice thank-yous or charming stories from people, or some secretive stuff i'm saving for long-term reference... but most are just personal communications that I put a lot of effort into.

Since it seems some people value my opinion, I wanted to share the latter items in this thread. That'll help me clear up some space, and who knows, maybe it'll be informative or at least amusing to people. To those who'd call this tooting my own horn, well, you don't have to read. If nobody cares, this will sink into obscurity, which still justifies a delete from my inbox.

I'll include the date and subject of the message up top, but unless they've indicated otherwise to me, I'll avoid mentioning the name of the other party to the message.

I have one request. Some of the topics I cover may spark some discussion or follow-up. If you want to reply to one of these posts, or ask a follow-up question, please start a new thread. Quote my post if you like, don't care, whatever, but let's not have this become a catch-all discussion thread.

Thanks,
D

[Denzera]

(1) Columbia Housing Lottery. Detailed discussion by a user who was actually doing research on the Lottery's history itself, and came to me because, um, I have all that data.

Date: 5/14/2007.

This had a couple of other back-and-forths before these quotes. First, a reply to an earlier message, asking me questions, from longtime user Primefactor:

----------------------------------------------

Ha, funny enough, one of my questions was whether anyone actually keeps these data. My friend Mike Noble used to work there, he suggested getting in touch with Mark Chatoor or Herman Matte? Think they'd be helpful?
Other than that,

1) Clarify my understanding of "blind doubles"--people go into general selection, either alone or in groups, and find they're too late for singles. Even if they've gone in with a few friends, fearing they might get stuck with a double, if there are no empty doubles left they'll all just have to split up and each go into one with a stranger? How often does this happen? Once all singles are gone, do groups ever willingly take up single spots in doubles, either hoping they won't be filled or ...? Do some doubles go unfilled?

2) EC exclusion suites: are the doubles filled with more sophs or juniors? Have you seen people post ads looking for sophs and juniors to fill them, or do they generally room with people they already know well?

3) Using the senior regroup--how often is it done? Do groups regroup successfully, or do many drop into general selection? What lottery numbers are forced to regroup? Do you think the current method of gathering everyone into one room is effective? Does "regrouping" also allow just kicking someone out of your group and into general selection (you can't add anyone from outside the room at that point, right?)

4) Who leaves on-campus housing? Does it relate to their lottery number? Who gets summer transfers? How big of a move do they make (e.g. the person with #3000 moves into a room vacated by the person who had... #1500? #2000?)

5) Does anyone try to exercise the option of keeping their room or suite? If they are granted the same suite/room option, are they allowed to register and see what their lottery number in suite/general selection would be, or do they have to sacrifice their current room first?

Whew, I think that's all for now. I've been looking at the bulletin board, but it's a bit overwhelming, so any insight (or data!) you could offer would be much appreciated! I'm working with Barnard, too, but they have much fewer interesting rules.

-----------------------------------

My Reply:

-----------------------------------

Mark would have answers to most of your questions, but he's going to be leaving Housing soon so you should get in to talking to him while you can.

Herman is (snip).

1) Blind Doubles. Most people interested in living with a friend or group of friends do so in General Selection. All groups of 2 get to pick something in Suite Selection. Some may choose to drop to general selection if the past tells them that they will get singles in general selection, but by and large those who are rising sophomores in general selection are kinda dumb, and didn't understand the system before they signed up to be its patsies.

Once all singles are gone, people fill up the first half of untaken doubles. Some of the best "blind" doubles will get completely filled before the absolute worst ones get anyone in them, but by and large they all get half-filled, and then completely-filled. People who know each other will occasionally wait around to pick a double together, but not that usually.

All spots get filled most years, although as people drop in the summer, they do summer transfers to get people out of the worst housing situations and fill requests.

2) Historically, most ECX suites have two rising sophomores filling the double, and juniors/seniors in the singles. During registration, you'll see groups of 3 juniors and/or seniors camping out in the lobbies of Carman and John Jay soliciting freshmen to join their ECX groups and fill the double. People will post ads. If you know upperclassmen, it's usually a good deal as a sophomore and people do get pulled in by friends, but I don't think most cases are like that.

3) Regroup is fairly common for groups of 4 and 5 who don't get the suites that they want. They commonly take Woodbridge and Watt and ECX suites (yes, even some seniors signing up for the double - and then transfering out in summer transfer).

Occasionally there will be, say, only two 6-single EC Townhouses left, and 10 groups will try for them and 8 will drop when they don't get them (to take river or BWY singles). There are some disappointed groups every year, but many more people leave happier than when they arrived.

You can add people to your group if you want, including from other groups, but they have to be rising CC/SEAS seniors who haven't picked a room yet.

4) People who learn they're going abroad will leave, people transferring, people taking medical leaves of absence, people going to live in a frat brownstone not in the CU system (like St. A's, or Beta), people who go live with their parents or girlfriend or join a hippie commune... lots of people leave the housing system.

People get summer transfers in class order followed by reverse lottery number order. What you get depends on how picky you are in your request.

I have seen juniors get placed in River, sophomores end up in schapiro or broadway singles. It's a somewhat random process, but the worst case is that you're right where you started.

5) People who declare Same Room Rights, and entire groups of people who declare Same Suite Rights (it takes everyone in a suite agreeing on that to do so, except in ECX), just keep their housing for the next year. they're removed from the lottery, as are their rooms, the same way disability housing, RAs and RA Suites, and all that do. Not a lot of people do it every year but some do. That declaration needs to be made before registration ends (in fact the deadline is several weeks prior), and lottery numbers come out after. You can't just game the system by seeing your number and then deciding to stay, you need to decide to stay first.

Hope that helps.

-D

[Denzera]

(2) "Finance".

Date: 8/15/2007

Initial PM from the counterparty:

----------------------------------

hey denzera,

if you remember a while back i made a thread in the business school forum on "how to become filthy rich." well, i have a few questions for you pertaining to columbia (seas) and the field of finance in general. i hope you don't mind me PMing you, but i know that you're in the business and are a great resource to columbia students on CC, and i'm hoping you can help me out.

well, to start things off, i'm going to major in applied physics at seas. i'm planning to take a balanced courseload consisting of math, science, and humanities/econ next semester. i'm planning to take quantum mechanics, ODE/linear algebra, principles of econ/core course, biology, chemistry, and gateway. that's only tentative, as i realize that those are some difficult classes, and i'll want to participate in extracurriculars when i'm at columbia. a question i have is, do i necessarily need to take a lot of economics courses in order to be considered for a career in finance? i'm basically trying to take a lot of analytical courses in order to present myself as a desirable candidate for an investment firm.

what kind of extracurriculars do you think i should get involved in at columbia? i'm interested in joining a research lab, and i have a list of professors who i would like to contact...but is this kind of experience necessary for a career in finance, or should i focus solely on academics? other possible ec's include volunteering in the surrounding area or some student orgs that i have in mind.

also, do you have any experience with the applied physics curriculum at columbia? i know physics and math there are great, but say i want to go to graduate school in economics after i graduate...what courses/majors would you suggest me to look into?

i might have a few more questions later on, but for the sake of time i think i'll leave it at this for now. thanks in advance for your help!

----------------------------------

My first reply:

----------------------------------

thoughts in no particular order because it's late:

- Don't take Quantum your freshman year. I don't care how smart you are, you're not ready for it. Do 1600 if you like, hell if you're masochistic sign up for 2800 and then drop after 2 weeks once you've realized what kind of mistake you made. But don't act like you're going to end up doing quantum.

- I actually entered columbia assuming I was going to do applied physics. I'd taken the equivalent of 1400 (resnick & halliday calc-based physics, prep for the AP Physics C exam) as a freshman in high school, I almost made the USAMO (one ****ing question off!), etc. In other words, I was no dummy. Physics 1600 was a breeze for me, with a fantastic teacher for the mechanics semester. Problem sets took 4-8 hours per week, no big deal, night-before-it's-due type stuff. And then the next course int he sequence was 2601 quantum mechanics. The very first problem set took me 30 hours to complete, no lie. Two days back to back working dawn till dusk, with help from friends, enemies, and the physics helproom. Nothing but pain. (this was Prof. Cole's class) It didn't get any easier, and although I made a few friends from the experience, it sucked fermented dog balls. Be afraid.

- you soudn as if you'll be entering as a freshman but you never state it explicitly. i'm assuming so.

- likewise, ODE/linear algebra aren't freshman-year subjects. I started in Calc 1, although i'd taken as far as multivariable and linear algebra as a sophomore in high school (can't have too many Easy A's in a place like columbia). you'll get to ODE/LinAlg soon enough (and for LinAlg, I recommend taking Prof. Spiegelman's Applied Math 1 class, which is linalg but taught by a master who will make you love him and the subject)

- to get a career in finance, you need 3 things:
1) A good-to-great GPA, at least 3.5. The higher the better.
2) Some sort of experience that demonstrates an interest in finance, be it an internship, a club, some research, some business on the side, some investing, etc.
3) A winning personality and interview skills that help you stand out, make the interviewer feel comfortable, make him feel like he wouldn't mind sitting next to you on a plane or sharing a car. This you can develop by practice, no matter how much of a tool you are.

- excuse me, that was to get a JOB in finance. to sustain a "career", although that word has a rather flexible definition in the financial services industry, you need the willingness to work god-awful hours doing mindless work while sucking up to the right people. we're not talking "ohmigod, i can't leave the office till 9pm tonight!", we're talking "getting home at 4am 4 consecutive days, going to work every saturday and most sundays, never getting vacation, and carrying around a blackberry everywhere so they can always reach you". it's not pleasant. I've skipped the worst of it by taking an unusual career path but to survive, stand out and advance takes truly extraordinary force of will. it's not a character flaw to want more work/life balance than that, or refuse to put up with those quantities of BS. Hell, I can barely stand the levels of BS in consulting, and they treat their analysts much less cynically.

- extracurriculars? Uh, dude, do whatever you find appealing. I did an a cappella group, ultimate frisbee team, karate, and a whole bunch of minor activities, some of them involving politics, some of them involving tech/nerd type subjects, some of them being seasonal stuff like intramural soccer or more personal like classical piano lessons. Really, do whatever suits you, because it's meant to be your break from class (and a helpful way to meet people).

Research is great, but make sure it's something that actually interests you. professors use undergrads as grunt work, so if you're not into it it'll suck. but it's possible to get into some very cool stuff depending on your definition of 'cool'. It's certainly not "necessary" for a position in finance, if anything it makes you look more academic than practical, but what you want to show is diligence and involvement. If you can do those 3 things above, you can get a job in ibanking coming out of columbia. CCE is *very* good at placing kids in IBanks.

- I know the APAM department fairily well but the AP curriculum only a little bit. It looks like fun if you can hack the math. AM is a bit of a wimp-out by comparison, there are slightly fewer requirements and someone who's natively good at math can clean up. again, professor Spiegelman (who's also the dept advisor) is a hero of mine, and the AP professors i've met are awesome.

that's part 1, will send part 2 hold on.

----------------------------------------

Had too much to fit into a 5000-character PM, so sent this afterwards:

----------------------------------------

part 2:

- if you want to do economics after you graduate, you shouldn't major in econ. You should major in math, CS, or something in IEOR, with a minor in econ (math is probably preferred).

- one class you can probably take that's kinda at the intersection of math and econ is Game Theory, a 4000-level class that is interesting to me, at least, for a lot of what I do, and was at the time I took it as well, but is pretty easy by comparison to a lot of math classes. The class is about 80% econ students who think the course is "really hard", and about 20% math / applied math students who think it's the easiest thing they've taken in years, and coast to an A. It's very accessible, even to a freshman, although you may want to wait till soph year to take it.

- If you want to get a job in finance where you're not a dime-a-dozen grunt, you need to make connections and gain experience in something interesting while in school. Columbia provides a UNIQUE opportunity to do so, working for a private equity firm, a hedge fund, or whatever, as an unpaid internship while in school. Find people who know people at such groups, and offer to work for them for free for a little while. Short-term 15-hours-a-week interning may turn into an offer to intern over the summer, which may turn into a paid internship over the summer (jr year), which may turn into a full time offer. Skipping the M&A departments at i-banks is a great step but it's hard to do (and impossible to do at most schools).

That's all the thoughts i've got right now. Later,

Steve

[undisclosed]

You altruistic bastard you.

As someone who got to the 10027 in no small part due to the many, many advices abused from this man I say great thread!

[Denzera]

Ha... just came across Shraf's old resignation message. When he got canned from the board. What a pile of drama. Buncha idjits they all are, who did that.

Glad to have him back. I'll spare everyone the indignity of preserving that message for posterity - all's well that ends well.

[Denzera]

You altruistic bastard you.

As someone who got to the 10027 in no small part due to the many, many advices abused from this man I say great thread!

I just found the message where you asked me about your essay topics. Should I post that?

[Denzera]

(3) "Sophomore Housing".

Date: 12/3/2007

As a personal remark, this girl is an absolute sweetheart, ten kinds of awesome, independent of anything written here. But anyway, her initial PM:

-------------------------------

Hi Denzera!

I'm currently a freshman at Columbia College (living in JJ) and I was hoping that you could either give me some info about sophomore housing or point me in the direction of some helpful posts of yours. The meeting for applying to the LLC is coming up this week and I was curious as to what my other best/worst-case scenarios could be and how exactly the housing lottery works as far as applying with other people, etc.

Thanks!

-----------------------

My reply:

-----------------------

Hey (snip),

Sure I can take a minute. I'll try to be brief [ed: HA!] since this is a big topic. The first thing to consider is what your priorities are. Commonly, if you have a significant other, your #1 priority is to get a single, and everything else is a distant 2nd. If that is the case, your best shots at a single are, in rank order, as follows:

1) Get an upperclass RA to pull you into their suite as an "RA Rider". RAs in suite-style buildings can choose people to live with them. If you're friendly with one, see what they're doing - they can just plain give you a single.

2) Organize (and I mean organize, do not join) a group of 8 people to go in for a Ruggles suite. You can do this with groups of entirely your fellow freshmen. If and only if you organize the group, you're entitled to make everyone stipulate that you get one of the 2 singles in the suite. Ruggles 8s are the best shot that a group of rising sophomores have to get an apartment-style suite for housing - most sophs end up in McBain or Schapiro doubles, or worse. Plus you'd be living with your friends. Figure out how to sell it, i.e. "wouldn't it be better to choose your roommate, have your own bathroom and kitchen, and live on 114th st?"

3) Apply to and get in to the LLC. It's a bullsht process, but 50% of rising sophomores get singles.

4) Go into 125 wallach and ask Mark Chatoor how you can get transferred to Plimpton with some of your friends. Ask if he knows what demand was like for those suites the previous year and what it would take in order to get high enough in line to live there. Plimpton is a Barnard dorm on 120th and amsterdam that has enormous 5-single suites, with sliding-glass-door showers in the bathroom and a living room + kitchen. Great lounges in the first floor, and nice security people, and you're next door to appletree. The reason Columbia kids live there is because of the BC-CU housing exchange - more BC students live at CU than vice-versa, so they owe us some beds, and give us Plimpton suites to fill to make up the difference. This is where I lived sophomore year AND junior year, because it was such a great choice.

5) If Mark tells you there's no way underclass groups are getting high enough on the list to make Plimpton, ask him if he expects to get 616 W 116th suites from BC this year, and if so, whether you could top that list. 616 is another BC dorm, a good one, that has 3 big singles and a big double.

6) Failing all of that, roll the dice with the lottery. You usually need under 500 or 600 or so as a number in order to get Furnald (or the Wien leftovers). With numbers distributed from 1-3000, that's about a 20% chance at most. That means 80% of the sophomores who hit the lottery end up in doubles, many of them blind doubles.

However, there are some situations where the priorities are not as clear-cut. East Campus exclusion suites (the 5-person suites in the high-rise that have a special lottery rule involving excluding people from points averages) have enormous common areas with lots of furniture, kitchens with dishwashers, air conditioning, and spectacular views. Some people decide it's better to take a double there (by going in with 2 juniors and a senior, or even >1 senior) rather than roll the dice on a single.

Furthermore, if none of options 1-5 pan out, it's still probably better to enter the lottery as a group of 2 (or 7, trying for a suite in 47 claremont) than to enter in general selection. At least then, if you don't get a number good enough for Furnald, you can choose in suite selection and take a decent double somewhere (maybe even a Watt studio double) rather than end up on the McBain shaft.

Feel free to share this advice with your friends if you find it useful. Good luck,

Steve

---------------------------------

Some snippets of her further replies (my own have been lost):

---------------------------------

Dear Steve,

Thank you SO much! That was ridiculously helpful. I was actually looking for both strategies and basic info since Columbia sort of leaves you in the dark about stuff like this for the most part. I spent a little while last night looking over the information but the way you spelled it all out in your articles was much more palatable

My pie-in-the-sky setup would be a single within a suite with my friends. There's no significant other but I keep odd hours (night owl) and I just like the convenience of living alone. However, if it were between a crappy single (corridor style, common bathrooms, no kitchen) and a double in a nicer place (suite, shared bathroom, kitchen) with someone I actually know and like, I would definitely go for the double. I think at this point I am going to go about trying to organize either a Ruggles suite or an LLC Suite and wrangle my way into getting a single in one of those if at all possible.

----------------------------------

Thanks for the clarification! I went to a meeting today about the LLC and felt like I was already one step ahead of the game. I think they said something about allowing you to apply in groups of four if you do the whole early-binding choice thing.

-----------------------------

And so it goes.

edit: Let me also include,

(3b) "Housing Advice"

Date: 3/3/2008

Some further comments from me on a question from someone else, but also about sophomore housing:

----------------------------

Hi,

The short answer is, get a group of 7 or 8 together, and get a 47C suite or a Ruggles suite, respectively.

About 8% of rising sophomores get into Furnald and get singles (95 of them). Another 10-12% get pulled into RA suites, special-interest housing, frats, and other non-lottery situations. Another 10% join up with upperclassmen to go into East Campus on the EC Exclusion rule, where 2 freshmen sign up to take the double in a suite with 1 double and 3 singles. The double isn't that huge, but EC is a great building, you have an enormous living room (and a kitchen with a dishwasher, not to mention a private bathroom), views are great, you can get on the roof, etc.

That's a third of the class getting nice situations. Everyone else is fending for themselves. Those options will include:

- Groups of 2 to take things like leftover Watt studio doubles, Wien walk-through doubles, Broadway and Schapiro doubles, and largely, McBain.
- Groups of size 3, 4, 5 and 6 will be left with no options. There is a CHANCE (albeit a slim one) that a group of 6 might get one of the first-floor suites in Ruggles (2 doubles / 2 singles) or even the first-floor suite in 47 Claremont (same). But usually groups with 20 points or with between 10-20 pts will end up taking those spots.
- People dropping to general selection will get placed into the worst Schapiro doubles, and McBain blind doubles (typically the shaft). Or they may not end up with anything, since lottery space will end somewhere between lottery numbers 2200-2500. The remaining students go on the Sophomore Wait List, and are guaranteed housing, but will get placed randomly, usually in not-so-nice spots.
- So frankly, the best options most people have will be getting a group of 7 or 8 people who want to live together, and then sharing 1-2 bathrooms (2 in the case of ruggles, 1 in 47C), a kitchen, and some decent-sized bedrooms. This accounts for 20% of the class, so it's not like your odds are that far against you. Getting a single upperclassman in your group (and promising him/her one of the singles) is a good way to assure yourself of getting one of the suites, because if you have >10 points you will pick before all of the groups with only 10 points.

That's my analysis, it was true as of 2006 but your mileage may vary.

Send me what you've got if you want specific advice.

-Steve

[undisclosed]

Freedom of press I say.

[Denzera]

(4) "Class Choices", in which I talk about Intensive G-Chem.

Date: 9/6/2007

I don't have his original PM, but I believe he inquired about where (among his choices) he should push himself. My reply was:

--------------------------------

No, the sad truth is that recruiters and financial services firms don't care what classes you took, they care that you got A's. they want to be able to say you graduated cum laude from Hot Sheit University on your blurb to clients. That's it.

I took full advantage of whatever scheduling and requirements quirks I could in order to manipulate the system into getting me a 3.9. Obviously I did a bunch of work, but my road was easier than many others. That's not to say that I don't like a challenge - I took a bunch of classes that I didn't have to, and got A's, out of interest. But my real "challenge" was getting a top GPA, and that's what I focused my energies on.

Physics 2800 is just way too hard. The top, absolute smartest students in SEAS will all take that class, which is great if you want to meet smart people but bad if you're getting curved against them - even if you're pretty smart yourself. Being average is pretty respectable there but if it gets you a B+, nobody's happy.

Honors math is at least a little different. It's more proofs, and less traditional calculus curriculum. They go into more interesting areas of mathematics, and if you legitimately enjoy math (as I do), it'd be a good choice. When I was in SEAS, though, only CC kids were allowed to take the Honors track, so I cant' speak to exactly how it'll go down.

Where I would push yourself, if you would have my advice, is in Chemistry. Intensive G-chem is, indeed, a little bit harder than regular G-Chem. But:

1) It's one semester instead of two. you're done with your requirement after one semester, and can do whatever you like in the spring.

2) The professor is better, and absolutely loves his students. George Flynn is still teaching it, right? If he is, he takes a ridiculous amount of his own time doing office hours and explaining things 2 and 3 times.

3) The class is a lot smaller and you get more out of the lectures. Plus he posts the slides online as Powerpoint decks.

4) You don't have to do a retarded research-paper project, it's just 3 tests and a final, plus weekly psets.

5) It's more credits, and the curve is better than G-Chem.

6) Did I mention it's only one semester?

My two cents.

-Steve

[Denzera]

(5) "Please Comment"

Date: 1/26/2008.

This was in reply to an overprotective father, who had PMd asking for my advice on whether he should really push his son to get straight As and hold him to high standards on grades, vs let him get what he wants out of Columbia and find his own path. I think. Anyway, I wrote:

-----------------------------

Hi,

Happy to help, if I can.

Goals are a good thing to have. Goal-oriented people, rather than just maintenance-oriented people, tend to do a whole lot better at columbia and in the business world. But setting realistic goals is an important part. If I have a goal of dating Adriana Lima, that's all well and good, but it's going to end in tears and a lot of lonely nights if I do end up single-mindedly pursuing that goal. In that light, I would argue that getting a 4.0 in an elite school, despite grade inflation, is an unrealistic goal. Let me back that up with a few points:

1) Employers essentially do not care about the difference between a 3.8 and a 4.0. You've proven you're smarter and harder-working than the vast majority of your classmates. Graduate schools are not going to nitpick over that difference either - the difference between a 3.5 and a 3.9, or a 3.2 and a 3.6, sure. But a 3.8 is a reasonable cutoff. The difference in practical terms between that and the 4.14 that my Econ/Math major friend graduated with is purely a function of how much of your life you choose to devote to slavishly over-studying and over-preparing for everything. That's not an attractive attribute when most Columbia students were admitted for the diversity of their interests.

2) There are harsh curves in many classes. Gateway is essentially a crapshoot - an A- shows you impressed Jack McGourty - and Principles has a rather harsh curve for a columbia class. He will find core classes like lit hum and CC basically will give out an A- with hard work but an A is essentially a big luck factor.

3) My father emphasized one point after I brought home a 4.0 my first 2 semesters - if you're getting an A in a class, you are not being challenged. A part of the benefit of columbia is that students who have always been the "big fish in a small pond" and have never really faced down a hard test of their character, well, those students get tested. They get pushed. And if you take classes where you know you can get an A, or worse, actually get an A, you haven't proven anything other than you know how to game the system. Trust me, I did that for the better part of 4 years, and the classes I learned the most about myself were:

- Quantum Mechanics (PHYS 2601), where I'd put in 30 hours a week on problem sets and ended up with a B+, and was happier about that B+ than any A I ever got.
- Ordinary Differential Equations, where I learned that despite skills at math, I could no longer sleep through the class and skip review sessions and still get an A (I got a B+)
- Freedom of Speech & Press, President Bollinger's constitutional law class, where I worked my tail off, got an A-, and had an absolute blast learning from a worldwide expert in a class just as tough as a normal law school class.

Sure, I got some A+'s. Got one in freshman compsci (1007) because if you "get" computers, you should never get anything wrong in that class. Physics lab was trivial, my lab partner and I fudged a few write-ups and I somehow got awarded an A+. Am I proud of that? Nope. You get the idea. Grades do not reflect quality of effort or quantity of learning. And the correlation is pretty weak, if not negative.

Finally,

4) Getting straight A's, or feeling the pressure to do so, deprives you of the valuable opportunity to TAKE RISKS. You're in the (debateable) greatest city in the world, at one of its great universities, surrounded by fascinating people who talk excitedly about any subject under the sun. There are athletics, there are arts, there are interest groups and cultural groups and women and drinking to be done. There are things to be explored. These take time away from getting A's. So what? They're part of what you're paying dearly for, a big part of why so many people try so hard for so long in order to get in. There must be a balance in everything.

I do get that part of the point here is to do well enough that your "exit opportunities" are attractive. That's fine. But setting a realistic goal - like a 3.7 or a 3.8, which easily gets you Cum Laude and possibly Magna Cum Laude (the latter of which is top 10% of the class), would do much for your son's stress levels and enjoyment.

I've never met or spoken with either of you, but that's my advice. My own particular path was similar in some ways - my first 3 semesters, I went 100% on all my classes, fit in other things around the edges, and proved I could get A's whenever I wanted to. And then starting spring of sophomore year, I started to decide whether I wanted to. In most cases the answer was still yes, but I was more in control, and made a bunch of decisions I don't regret in the slightest. No parental pressure to achieve Goal X "or else", so no stress in that regard, just what I chose to do for myself.

Hope that helps in some way. Regards,

Steve

[Denzera]

Freedom of press I say.

Bollinger thanks you.

(6) "Essay Topics"

Date: 9/11/2007, 11:08am. Yeah, I know.

User Undisclosed (see above!) asks my advice about some prospective essay topics. In my reply I sent him my (successful) admissions essay, which I won't reproduce here for obvious reasons. But his (her? it's so undisclosed!) ideas are interesting:

---------------------------

Hi there,

Before getting started on my essays I was wondering what you think about my chosen essay topics. i know its the essay itself that makes an impression but an overalll opinion would still be helpful.

Main: The Idealist. It's basically a stream-of-thought exert on how I see the world and the different branches of education and knowledge and how they're really not seperate from one another and that in order to reach a certain ideal in life you need to learn from all of them, and walk different walks of life, using any opportunity that may come.

(I know it could be a total failure but for some reason I really want to write this....)

#2- How I lost weight and got fit over the course of half a year. I used to be a fattie at 190 lbs and am now at 140. The dicipline and hard work involved, especially since there is no immediate reward involved.

#3- (!!) Fear of being a stereotype. Basically whne I came to Canada from Haiti I was really shocked at the North American black culture (gangs, hip hop, etc..) and tried very hard to completely detached myself from it and embraced american culture fully. It was a trip back to Haiti that showed be that i should be proud of who I am, embrace my own path, regardless of skin color and stereotypes.

#4- (!!) 7 strangers. I had my laptop on while on the bus and suddenly looked up to see that I was surrounded by six people sitting all around me. I started to observe them, opened a word file and stuff just came out. It deals with how I see the world, where I suppose they're going. What links us. What divides us. What they do, etc....and finally about how I imagine they must see me. That one was a bit unexpected.

I would really appreciate your thought on any of this. Like? hate? Would change? Would cut?

----------------------------

My reply:

----------------------------

OK, a few brief things:

- what made the crucial difference in getting in was my work experience (and, partially, the letter of rec that I got from my boss). my essay was small potatoes by comparison.

- yes, i'd like you to email me your final copy. (snip) if you please.

- essays don't necessarily need to make people laugh or cry. a third option is to make people *think*. A fourth is to make them respect you. I went for a combination of those two in my essay.

- In my senior year of HS, I wrote an essay about the fear of failure for my college apps. I think it contributed to an overall negative vibe. When I applied again during my gap year, I went with something I considered more positive about myself.

- Needless to say, my writing style at age 18, in 2001, is different than it is now at age 24.

Here it is:

(snip).

[Ed. Note: the word censor took the word 'distrust-ful' and censored it to distru****l. I'm greatly amused by that.]

[Denzera]

(7) "Applied Math"

Date: 2/4/2008 (received), 4/3/2008 (replied)

This guy, who is now either an entering freshman or rising sophomore at columbia, had just applied when he sent this to me. He still posts here, so that's all I'll say. Here's his PM:

------------------------------

Hey Denzera,

You've probably seen some of my posts around the Columbia forums asking about majors and whatnot. I applied as an OR major and intended to concentrate in FE. However, I am seriously considering AM after reading some of your posts about it.

Here are the pros and cons of each that I can see:

Financial Engineering
Pros:
1. Sort of an advanced finance degree (at the undergrad level), puts you slightly ahead of the competition in terms of knowledge
2. By far the most finance-oriented major at Columbia - signals strong interest in the field and is directly applicable to the job
3. Should probably get you a good finance job (the 2 Columbia kids who got into Goldman TMT last year were IEOR. There were 3 who made it into that group from Harvard, btw.)

Cons:
1. Small sampling of graduate fin.eng classes still puts you behind MFE candidates and physics/math PhDs
2. Highly specialized/narrow for an undergrad degree - may become a disadvantage if I decide I hate banking
3. Limited demand for FE - may become obsolete or saturated in a few years
4. (And this is the most important): I don't want to be a back-office programmer/quant. Although the Goldman TMT anecdote seems to disprove this, I feel that this program mainly prepares you for back-office programming/quant work just by looking at the classes. Hence you only learn specific technical skills and don't get a macro perspective

Now for Applied Math
Pros:
1. Develops rigorous/analytical thinking (Greg Mankiw). "Heavy-lifting", in your words
2. Broad based - skills can be translated into econ grad school or even law school. Can basically go into any field
3. Everything else seems like cake when you're challenging yourself with math. Experienced this in high school when I took Calc 3/Discrete Math together with AP Physics C.

Cons:
1. Much tougher than IEOR, yet IEOR places better into finance/consulting. This is really the dealbreaker. I know it sounds shallow, but I can't help comparing job prospects. I mean, if you couldn't break into banking with a 3.9 in AM and consulting experience, while IEOR kids can waltz right in, there must be something wrong with this picture.
2. Less of a concern than with FE, but I'm afraid AM may also lead into one of those programming jobs. There's an APAM kid on the Morgan Stanley website (the only Columbia undergrad) who's in Technology. I don't think I could stand doing that stuff all day, no matter how well it pays.

Well, I guess I'm just asking you to convince me to do APAM. If any of my assumptions are off, please correct me. Thanks for reading this.

-------------------------

My reply:

-------------------------

Hi (snip), sorry it's taken me 2 months to respond to your PM. Because of the 5000 character limit, I can't quote your post for reference, so let me know if you need me to fire it over to you.

Financial Engineering

Cons 1-3 are essentially non-issues. (1) BS degrees will always be less desired than MS degrees in most cases. (2) Most BS degrees aren't directly applicable to what you'll be doing anyway, unless you're doing traditional engineering and treating SEAS like a trade school. Nobody's going to pigeonhole you on the basis of FE vs AM. (3) There will always be a demand on wall street for quants.

The problem, as you observe, is that with an FE degree they will not view you as a deal-maker, or as someone they can bring as an apprentice to go make deals happen and forge relationships. They will view you as a highly-paid, highly skilled commodity, a set of math knowledge to be used for commercial gain in their asset management department but not that helpful in actual M&A or capital markets banking.

That's not to say that you can't overcome that prejudice. Most people have steep uphill battles to fight to get interview credibility with ibankers. You would be emphasizing that the FE degree has given you (A) markets knowledge, (B) a command of finance lingo, and (C) modeling experience, all of which means that you're already ahead on the technical learning curve so you can focus on the people skills and organization side of the work, since you're confident in the teachable parts. Hint: you would basically be making this same argument from AM, except with a little less credibility.

The real question comes down to whether you come across in interviews as a wonk or overly geeky. If you do, then an FE degree will back up their impression of you as a quant rather than a dealmaker. If not, and you're an alpha-male jock who's very entrepreneurial but are considering FE to shore up any perceived weaknesses in analytical ability, then maybe it rounds you out. It can cut both ways depending on your impression.

Now for Applied Math

Pro #3 can also be said about physics or, probably, FE. Less so with FE, since you won't get into PDEs and the like. But yeah, once you've mastered something of the complexity and abstraction of PDEs, everything else will kinda feel like it's a matter of putting the time in rather than a contest between what you know you're capable of and what you think you might become capable of. AM will stretch you and force you to grow as an analytical thinker. It teaches a way of thinking rather than knowledge (well, moreso pure math than AM, but let's leave that aside...)

As for Con #1... and this is very important... I did not apply to banks as a senior in college. I only started applying last summer, after a year in strategy consulting. At that point I wasn't eligible for their college recruiting, I was referred to experienced-hire recruiting, and thus of course got the swift kick in the ass that I deserved. Had I (A) gotten a finance internship the summer after my junior year, and (B) applied during my senior year of college, I'm quite confident I would've gotten offers. My posts lamenting the difficulty of breaking into ibanking stem from being on the outside. As a senior with proven financial interests and some experience (internships), you're several legs up on my present-day situation.

Re: Con #2, that's only if you're a programmer. If you don't give people a reason to think of you as a techie, i.e. don't take pure-IT jobs, then there's no reason they'd consider you different from all the other econ majors. Remember, as a college-graduating applicant, you're selling yourself as a prospect, not a finished product. IT employees are hired because they can contribute immediately with proven skills that they've already accumulated. That's why they pay a ton right away; I guarantee you new Human Resources hires at Morgan Stanley are not making the $90K that my (Elec E) friend of mine makes at Goldman doing desktop IT procurement and network troubleshooting. The problem, as you identified, is that you are again viewed as a commodity - a highly compensated one, but fundamentally you are an expense to them, rather than a revenue-generator.

If you want to be a revenue-generator in finance, i.e. front-office, which is where all the big bucks are, then never give them a reason to think of you as anything other than (1) a strong analytical thinker, (2) a people-person, someone they'd want to spend 14-hour days in a conference room with, and (3) someone with strong interests in finance and the beginnings of knowledge in it. People who take IT jobs make #s 2 and 3 suspect immediately. That was my 2nd mistake.

Anyway, hope this helps in some fashion. Best,

Steve

[Denzera]

(8) "Stanford vs Scholars Program"

Date: 4/9/2008

This guy got into both Stanford and Columbia, the latter as a Scholar of some sort. Trying to evaluate what to do. I don't have his message, but I have my reply:

-----------------------------

The Scholars program, as nice as it is, will only make a sizeable difference to you if:

(1) You expect to need a lot of financial aid (which it will help with), or
(2) You love economics and/or international relations and want to hear (And even meet) a bunch of fascinating speakers and foreign dignitaries in those disciplines. They also have a bunch of scientists, inventors, literary types, etc, but it won't be that different from the atmosphere at Stanford.

I'd say it probably made my undergraduate experience 5-10% better, all told. Measurable, but not earth-shattering.

You have an extremely enviable choice. I've said before on the board that Stanford is probably the only school that could've talked me out of attending Columbia. That said, the prestige difference between the two is small and depends largely on what coast you're living on. Substantial reasons to choose one or the other include:

(1) Do you prefer a city atmosphere or a suburban atmosphere? Palo Alto is a decent town, but it's a suburb. Most of the really exciting stuff (i.e. concerts, or other major events) will go in San Francisco. That's an hour's drive. Which brings up another point - you'll have to keep and drive a car, pay for parking, gas, and insurance. At Columbia, you're absolutely crazy (or crazy-rich) if you have a car, because it's unnecessary and a liability.

(2) Do you prefer having 4 seasons, or "warm and mostly dry" 365 days a year? I actually like the weather and seasons of the northeast. Right now all the cherry blossoms are in bloom, and the city is covered with flowers. In the fall, central park is awash with leaves changing color. In the winter, you actually get real snow, can take buses to day trips to go skiing, etc. At Stanford, it's basically always going to be between 50-80 degrees, sunny 80% of the time, except in the winter when it rains a bit more. That's either a major plus or a bit of a downer depending on how much variety you like to have in your life. Personally I find having all 4 seasons makes me appreciate the others more; others simply hate the cold, and that overrides anything else they might think.

(3) Are you looking for a career in any of the industries that NYC specializes in? Banking, management consulting, journalism, TV/media, publishing, private equity, etc. The exposure you get here to those, and the alumni connections for them, are marginally superior. Stanford is superior in any research capacity, especially in engineering, and its connections to technology startups (like those Google guys you might have heard about) are unparalleled. Stanford created silicon valley. Now, that's not a black-and-white issue - plenty of Stanford kids join investment banks, and more than a handful of Columbia kids join tech startups or go get a top PhD in physics. But the after-graduation opportunities differ in what the school does best. Both will get you into med school or law school or Teach For America and the like just as well, but they both have their specialties.

Hope that helps,
Steve

[Denzera]

Hehe... just came across a message where one guy, a frequent Columbia board poster, discovers that his RA is also a frequent Columbia board poster. I've met these two jokers, I've served them booze I think, but that's just coincidence squared right there.

If someone came up to me in the street and said "Hey, are you Denzera? From College Confidential?" I'd probably give them a look of horror and disgust. The disgust, mostly with myself

[Denzera]

(9) "Gap Year"

Date: 7/10/2009

This post is actually the reason I thought someone else might benefit from reading all of these. Anyway, the guy is considering a gap year, despite strong objections from his parents. He's considering doing some work at an inner-city school before going through the real application process, and hopes it'll help inform his essays and make them stand out. He somehow knows that I took a gap year between HS and Columbia, and so asks me a couple questions. And I fire back:

--------------------------

C,

My parents were very encouraging about my decision. They tend to think that far too many people go to college because it's "the thing to do" rather than go when they're ready. They encouraged me to only go when I was ready, and frankly (as I said), I'm glad I waited.

I think working at an inner-city school will be a fantastic experience for you, and there will be some things that will be obvious to an admissions officer. Firstly, they'll know that you graduated in 08 rather than 09. But I do have some specific info:

- They'll ask for your work experience, somewhere in there. Make sure you put down that position, 40-50 hours a week.
- Under major extracurricular activities, the job should be the first one you list. Except, for activities, you'll want to emphasize the IMPACT you've had, so talk about the leadership work you've done there, initiatives you've undertaken, etc. They want to hear that you're not just doing this because it "looks good" but that you're emotionally invested and have achieved something real.
- Unless you have a particularly powerful story to tell involving your work at the school, and it conveys something unique about your character, personality, outlook or values, I wouldn't necessarily devote the essay to it.
- For example, my (successful) essay was on how much I valued honesty, and why, and why I thought it was lacking in the world, and how it had influenced a few decisions I had taken, with my friends, school, coworkers, etc. Very simple, didn't try to be too profound, just communicated how much I cared about honesty above nearly everything else (And what trouble that got me into sometimes). My unsuccessful essay was about overcoming fear of failure, through directly engaging with the real world (via my job), in which I tried to excuse some past failings evident in my application - chiefly my poor grades at various times.
- What made the real difference was an additional recommendation from my boss. Recall that you're only supposed to drop additional recommendations (beyond the academic ones) when they have an ability to illuminate who are you from a different perspective. If they say largely the same things as your teacher ones then it's worthless or even counterproductive, but if it speaks to your maturity, or your work ethic, or your values - telling stories (within the letter) that are unique and interesting - then it's very powerful. That is the way I think you can use your job in the best fashion, via an additional recommendation.

As for your last questions, yeah, it was a little difficult in some respects. When I went to my senior prom, well, I hadn't seen much of my classmates in 10 months, and if I hadn't known this one girl who had graduated the year before, I might've gone stag. At graduation itself there were a bunch of people who I had never seen before. It was a little disconcerting. But then again, there were only a handful of people that I thought were worth much as human beings coming from my high school anyway, so I didn't want to stay in touch with a lot of them in the first place. Your mileage may vary

I did live at home while taking the gap year, and my relations with my parents was not great as a result. Basically - and this is true of ANYONE - as soon as you move out of the house, and are gone for more than 6 months or so, your relationship with your parents improves HUGELY. They start to miss you, you start to miss them, they start to see you more as an adult and an equal, you start to see the real value in having an anchor in this world, and suddenly all the little BS that caused arguments doesn't seem so important to anyone anymore. It really is magic, coming home from that first year at college and seeing how much better you get along. But while I was living there and working, yeah, I was saving a lot of money on not paying rent and not buying / making my dinners, but there were stresses associated with it. Whatever, I'm still glad I made that particular choice, too - the stress was worth all the money I ended up saving.

I think the only real advice I can offer beyond that is to demonstrate clear passion in your work at the school, that will come through on any interview, in any recommendation from bosses or coworkers, and give you lots of stories to tell. Any leadership you can demonstrate, any people you can say you mentored or influenced, will speak to your character, your maturity, and your prospects at being a leader at a place like Columbia.

Best of luck,

Steve