Poor GMAT - 640, World's poorest profile - Indian Male IT - Page 2 of 2

Poor GMAT - 640, World's poorest profile - Indian Male IT

0 1

Posted Apr 17, 2013 11:58

Enough with the negativity!!!
You want to get better with Verbal, just get down to the exercise of doing it!!
Not so long ago, even I had turned into a whining moron, while being under the impression that I was no good.
What's not in ur profile that's good..?
--> IIT- damn good
--> IT exp- 8 years, great, and being someone who has something in his upper story[Given that you're an IIT product], u must have learnt something at least in these 8 years
--> Global exposure- Good
--> Recos from a VP and AVP- Great!
And finally an admit to Queen's!
Stop fishing for compliments on this post!!
And so what if you haven't got funding/scholarships yet, worst case, you'll recover the investment and will get good returns in a maximum of 5 years!
And let me tell you, even I was ranting this 'you should be done with all this before 30' nonsense..all that is crap..do it when you can and it'll definitely give you a fillip!!
Phew!! That said, I have to get back to studying for the GMAT :)
Good luck and best wishes for your stint at Queen's!!

Regards,
Mallika

Hi tammy,

Thanks for the confidence boost.
I formed this opinion after many schools (Rotman, Hass etc.) asked me not to apply with this GMAT score.

Not only me, but anyone can get admission with this score, but cannot get scholarship.

Cheers
GM

quote

nanand1977

0 57

Posted Apr 17, 2013 12:44

Mangalassery, It appears that you created profile just to respond to my post to targetmba.

By the way for how long you know Targetmba.

Regards
Nirmal

I would strongly suggest nanand to go for some personality development courses first !

Yeah i would second that your profile is really pathetic for any good business school. The worst part is decline in your GMAT score which would be the most negative point in your application to any of the top business schools.

I can't even suggest you to retake GMAT becasue if trend persists you probably will come up with score of 560 this time.

I second the suggestion given by Mr. Duncan that you should look for 2nd / 3rd tier schools that would more suitable to your profile.

Thanks for your encouraging words nanand.

Mangalassery, It appears that you created profile just to respond to my post to targetmba.

By the way for how long you know Targetmba.

Regards
Nirmal

<blockquote>I would strongly suggest nanand to go for some personality development courses first !

<blockquote><blockquote>Yeah i would second that your profile is really pathetic for any good business school. The worst part is decline in your GMAT score which would be the most negative point in your application to any of the top business schools.

I can't even suggest you to retake GMAT becasue if trend persists you probably will come up with score of 560 this time.

I second the suggestion given by Mr. Duncan that you should look for 2nd / 3rd tier schools that would more suitable to your profile.
</blockquote>

Thanks for your encouraging words nanand.</blockquote></blockquote>

quote

targetmba

0 8

Posted Apr 29, 2013 00:01

Hey friends,
Sorry for being dormant for a long time.

I did not join Queen's MBA (joined a prestigious school in Europe) and now regretting because the job market is really in a turmoil in Europe. Here, most of the companies have two big requirements - work permit and local language skills. The name of the B. School does not matter in Europe.

My suggestion to all non-European students is to apply for MBA in USA, which a big country and, hence, finding internships and jobs (leveraging the name of your B.School) is much easier. Also, the job market is improving in USA.

Good luck guys. Hope all your dreams come true.

Cheers.

quote

ralph

150 1126

Posted Apr 30, 2013 08:17

Here, most of the companies have two big requirements - work permit and local language skills. The name of the B. School does not matter in Europe.

I agree in essence; but potential applicants should keep in mind that a school's prestige influences placements: better business schools build more substantial relationships with good employers and thus can help land their graduates better jobs. Going to a "no-name business school" will not do you any favors.

My suggestion to all non-European students is to apply for MBA in USA, which a big country and, hence, finding internships and jobs (leveraging the name of your B.School) is much easier. Also, the job market is improving in USA.

Good advice, if you want to work in the US. For Europe, go to the best school you can get into in the country where you want to work.

<blockquote>Here, most of the companies have two big requirements - work permit and local language skills. The name of the B. School does not matter in Europe.</blockquote>
I agree in essence; but potential applicants should keep in mind that a school's prestige influences placements: better business schools build more substantial relationships with good employers and thus can help land their graduates better jobs. Going to a "no-name business school" will not do you any favors.

<blockquote>My suggestion to all non-European students is to apply for MBA in USA, which a big country and, hence, finding internships and jobs (leveraging the name of your B.School) is much easier. Also, the job market is improving in USA.</blockquote>
Good advice, if you want to work in the US. For Europe, go to the best school you can get into in the country where you want to work.

quote

Duncan

3060 12371

Posted Apr 30, 2013 09:41

If you look at the rankings you can see that outcomes for students are strongly aligned with the the quality of the business school. The top European schools (IE, IESE, IMD, Insead, LBS) have great outcomes and very high salaries: 90+% employment within 3 months. Even in the second tier, Cambridge and Strathclyde have 97% employment within three months; Smurfitt and Bath report 95%; Warwick and Mannheim have 94%...

I wonder if the key issue for this person is language and business culture. The answer is really "caveat emptor". If you study at Lisbon, Vlerick, Bocconi, St Gallen, (Hult - for different reasons), then these schools have 80% or less placement. The reasons are obvious: these are schools in countries with rather closed national or regional business cultures and knowledge of the local language and business culture is key.

Hult is an exception: it has a very low GMAT and seems to have no really strong hiring relationships. Outcomes rarely inline with the networking power of the student.

If you only speak English, and have no interest in learning the language of a country where you plan study, then the US is absolutely a great idea.

quote

WanttoRock

0 36

Posted Apr 30, 2013 18:40

Would Manchester Business School, Strathclyde and Warwick belong to the same tier (i.e. below LBS, Cambridge and Oxford)?

quote

Duncan

3060 12371

Posted Apr 30, 2013 19:46

Take a look at the FT rankings: the data are there.

quote

ezra

180 770

Posted May 03, 2013 11:21

Would Manchester Business School, Strathclyde and Warwick belong to the same tier (i.e. below LBS, Cambridge and Oxford)?

Maybe a few years ago. But I think that today, the lines between Oxford/Cambridge and Manchester/Warwick are starting to blur; and I expect that in the next few years they'll get closer in terms of salary data. I still see about 5 tiers of ranked UK MBA programs:

1. LBS.
2. Oxford/Cambridge
3. Manchester/Warwick
3. Cass/Cranfield/Imperial
4. Strath/Lancaster/Bath

That's solely based on the last couple years in the FT, not taking into account geography/industry specializations, etc.

<blockquote>Would Manchester Business School, Strathclyde and Warwick belong to the same tier (i.e. below LBS, Cambridge and Oxford)?</blockquote>
Maybe a few years ago. But I think that today, the lines between Oxford/Cambridge and Manchester/Warwick are starting to blur; and I expect that in the next few years they'll get closer in terms of salary data. I still see about 5 tiers of ranked UK MBA programs:

1. LBS.
2. Oxford/Cambridge
3. Manchester/Warwick
3. Cass/Cranfield/Imperial
4. Strath/Lancaster/Bath

That's solely based on the last couple years in the FT, not taking into account geography/industry specializations, etc.

quote

Duncan

3060 12371

Posted May 03, 2013 12:32

Cranfield is well above Warwick and Manchester on salary, and Cass is above Manchester, so I would put those four schools on a similar level: the difference is really in the students.

Imperial's a curious school: salaries are lower than at Strathclyde despite the London location.

quote