<p>puneur – slipper1234 has nailed an important nuance. fifteen years ago, duke did have the clear edge. this on the basis of its network (an aside: frankly, i can’t think of an academic discipline in which i would consider duke to be in quite the same league as chicago – not saying one doesn’t exist; just that i can’t imagine what it would be). a duke bias does still exist in some segments of traditional “street” i-banking, although this advantage, i believe, is rapidly becoming so de minimus as to be, essentially, non-existent. This for two reasons:</p>
<p>1) the culture of traditional “wall street” i-banking is under assault. in such circumstances, old assumptions/preferences/biases feel the pressure.
2) the market (i mean “market” in the sense of certain collective cultural awareness) has begun to correct a persistent underestimation of chicago’s overwhelming intellectual firepower. in other words, chicago’s “q-score,” if you will, has gone parabolic. ($400 million gift to the business school, #1 business week ranking; undergraduate applications up a vertiginous 42% over the past year). duke is respected and, still, well-connected but chicago’s ineluctable ascendancy has become harder to overlook.</p>
<p>Also, I believe this discussion to be pertinent only if we define “wall street” as i-banking. on the other hand, insofar as the hedge fund industry is concerned, chicago is a monster. duke does not rank in the top ten. possibly not even the top 25.</p>