I'm curious as to why they prefer the target kids. Any more color you could provide on their reasoning?

I go to a target and am in the process of recruiting and would choose the non-target in two seconds so long as he/she also fits (behaviorally) within the firm

How bout this? Target kids with IB experience.

During the superday I just had, each of the MDs I met with asked how I received my previous jobs. For each of them, I researched and networked extensively until I was able to get in. I think this shows more initiative and drive than someone who simply applies to jobs via their OCR, etc...

I think this applies to this non-target vs target argument - if a non-target has gone out of their way to get their application in front of you, whereas targets go through the motions of OCR and check all of the boxes to get their application in, which shows they want it more? Not discounting the initiative shown by the target students, but at that point, I think both applicants should be viewed equally and given interviews or offers based on their experience, fit, etc...

FWIW, the kid with experience will likely be less of a pain in the ass to work with for about 6 months.

Going to a target vs. non-target comes down to way more than intelligence. Some people can't afford top notch private schools even if they get in and many kids at 17/18 do not understand how much people care about prestige.

Go with the experienced non-target.

Double post

I think many people on this board underestimate how hard it is to land an offer even if you are at a target w/ OCR...we network just as hard, if not harder. Students spend the entire semester attending each information session, reaching out to alums, scheduling informational interviews, just for those 20ish interview spots chosen out of the entire class.

Information sessions at targets are not used to "get ahead", you go to them so you don't fall behind with the rest of the campus (who are all competing for the same interview slots).

You can always find alumni on the street, and those from non-targets are actually more receptive since it's not like at a target where 50% of the entire class is trying to go into finance and spamming simultaneously.

I'm not saying non-targets don't have it tough, but it gets old reading the same thing over and over on this board as if targets have a silver spoon handed to them when they work just as hard for an interview spot.

Many non-targets have absolutely no alumni. All target school have a plethora of them working in the financial industry, which gives kids going to a target school a huge advantage. I agree with you that the whining from non-target kids is too much most of the time, but let's be honest, going to a target puts you at a HUGE advantage over those who go to non-targets.

HIRE ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JWR I couldn't agree with you more.

I do have sort of a response to this thread though: are any kids from targets with 3.6 GPA's and no finance experience getting interviews?

At my school, which i believe is a target, this year has been incredibly competitive and without a 3.8+ GPA (exception for heavy engineering/quant majors) not having any experience seems to mean not being competitive...no?

One of the places I interviewed in the Fall for FT was an an accelerated superday.at an elite botique. Managed to line it up since I had an exploding offer. At the end of the superday the head recruiter asked me "how would i compare to the wharton kids that they'd be interviewing, who, once starting FT, would show up to the office with a sleeping bag in hand and ready to crank?" Coming from a semi-target and going up against that mentality is pretty brutal.

Another thing I've heard from a number of buddies at BB's is that many of the target kids (probably an over generalization) have a major sense of entitlement, and once they get in their FT, they feel like they don't have to earn shit.

I say if it comes down to the scenario in OP, the experience of the non-target and having his resume get in front of you in the first place represents hussle and initiative, and that's probably pretty representative of how badly that dude wants it.

I go to a semi target so I'm biased (or regional target I guess), but I don't think some targets understand how much more work it takes for us. Everything I've gotten (or any of my friends have gotten) we have WORKED for. That means we've spent hours cold calling, emailing, harassing people, following up, until we were finally given a chance. And even then..no one expects us to succeed. We have to do well. My current boss literally told me I'm fired if I fuck up, even once, because he has no reason to expect I will succeed/I can complete work. I think a semi-target with IB experience has a much much stronger work ethic than a target (in general). And that means that getting IBD means so much more to us, and we won't stop working just because we're there.

I lol'ed at the Target kids thinking that the effort they put into recruitment is even close to that of the Non-Target. Finance is all about connections, your target school may only recruit students with above a 3.8 GPA but one of my younger friends has a 4.0 (not rounded) and can't get anyone to give him a chance. I applied to 300+ places, only received 4 interviews, and luckily received an offer. I have no complaints about how much of a challenge it was, but give me a fuckin' break, "it's just as hard for us," do you really believe that?

It's a difficult market out there and OCR has actually become a challenge - go figure, meanwhile the non-target kid can't even land an interview.

Fact: I'm a non-target school EECS graduate.

Question: Do you really need to possess the higher intelligence of the target school kids in order to excel in what most entry level IBD analysts do in their 2 years stints?

Opinion: I think most IBD analysts can't do what entry level engineers do at Raytheon, Google, QualComm and Intel, even if they get trained for 12 months. My non target school sends a lot of them to these companies.

This.

I sent out well over 1000 resumes, including OCR, online drops, cold emails, and as followups to cold calls.

Albeit, I had a 2.3gpa from a super-nontarget. I still managed to get into a sweet bank (but I hate Charlotte)

Oh please, don't give the old "I couldn't afford to go to a target" excuse. If you actually worked your ass off starting from high school, any top tier institution would have paid for your way to go; many come from underprivileged backgrounds at targets and have their tuitions covered 100% because they've worked hard their entire lives. We earned these "silver spoons" you keep alluding to, stop whining and grow up.

i've been on both sides of the fence (i transferred to a target from a non-target, so I can understand their "pain" and the difficulty). some of my early internships were secured via intense networking/cold-calling as opposed to now where i still have to network my a$$ off but still have OCR.

tbh, if it were me, it rly comes down to personality, which in most cases would mean going with non-target kids. it may be my experiences of being at a target and the type of people that go there, but i found people who go 2 my school to b extremely rude, deceptive and just flat out vicious and evil. not to say non-targets kids can't be this way or that everyone who goes to a target is a giant rich doucehbag. i, myself, am from a working class background.

ultimately, this isn't rocket science, it's really a popularity contest and those who are well liked/popular/social get ahead while those who look perfect on paper yet have terrible interview skills or just flat out of unlikeable get shafted. i have friends who have astronomical GPAs, amazing internship experiences and frankly are beyond brilliant, but screwed the moment they open their mouth.

so yea, in a nutshell, i guess i'd pick intelligent hard working kids who are humble, which tends to be non-target students.

Good point. Important to remember though that a very small portion of high school students like yourself are on forums like this and are aware of the differences in recruiting/OCR/interviewing, let alone the full scope of jobs in finance, at the time of university/college applications. At that time, there are variables that are of much higher priorities to a lot of students than their school's exit ops.

Looking back, I doubt that many people would choose a non-target over a target given the knowledge they have now. I know I certainly wouldn't have. Hindsight is always 20/20.

Target school's actual numbers from this recruiting season:

436 applications for Goldman Sachs investment banking
15 summer analyst positions available

u do the math. Going to a target school is not a a guarantee. Plenty of friends in the 3.8-4.0 GPA range that literally have nothing right now and are reconsidering their career choices.

Therefore, you take the target school kid. It's a filter system. Sure you might get a couple screw balls that fall through the cracks, but in general, you get a solid group of smart, capable, and hard-working recruits.

15/436 = 3.4% guaranteed rate. That's higher than 0%.

First of all, you're probably not gunna get much love on here with that kind of post.

My 2 cents: As someone just now wrapping up my college w double major in end and business, gunna have to say that I thought this too... until I spent 10 weeks as an SA. And yes, the summer before I had an internship in industry related to my engineering degree.

The content in the business classes doesn't hold a candle to lots of the more abstract eng classes, or higher level physics/dif eq's. Business classes present their own challenges. W/ the content being easier to grasp, everyone kills it, so unlike a physics class for ex, where 55 = B+, you need a 95 to get that B+. And once you get into things like presenting a marketing plan, making an articulate argument for a business idea, etc... some kids in the eng classes would rather die than have to write and present a marketing pitch.

Same things hold in internships, it's an entirely different ballgame. Can just anyone make a powerpoint slide? Sure. But can they use their creativity and put together materials at the level of perfection you see in a pitchbook? Can they handle coming in to work every morning after having gotten home like 4 hrs ago from the night before, and happily stand in front of their associate listening to them bitch about how crappy their work is and that they aren't dedicated? Don't think so. Yes, coding is hard, it takes a special skill-set to be a legit code money. But so is the level of discpline needed to be an analyst, like working til 5 am, and then acting mr. chipper and being spot on in the client meeting 3 hrs later.

No one said the work is rocket science, because it isn't. But having the character to climb your way up and be able to put on the charm and sell ideas is no less difficult.