First post here, but think I can benefit from some of the great advice this forum offers.
I have recently been admitted to both Stern and Anderson. Along with my admittance, Anderson also offered a sizable scholarship (nearly 2/3 of tuition). My goal post-MBA is to obtain an investment banking position. I was originally leaning towards Stern based on its reputation as a finance school and the fact that it sends a large portion (around 20%) of its graduates to banking every year. However, the scholarship dollars offered by Anderson are very enticing and I know that Anderson also offers an opportunity to reach my goal, if maybe a lesser opportunity. Additionally, I would prefer to end up on the west coast upon graduation, which is another positive for Anderson (location, however, is not a deal breaker).
So, I am trying to weight my options and, to be honest, am having a hard time. It's been a goal of mine to work in banking for years and I don't want to risk sacrificing this solely for scholarship dollars. However, I am also somewhat risk averse and the thought of taking on significantly less debt (due to the scholarship and general cost of living in NYC) is very appealing. Do you think the opportunity offered by Stern is greater than the opportunity offered by Anderson? If so, does the extra opportunity outweigh the scholarship dollars? I realize these are subjective and I need to come to a conclusion I am comfortable with on my own, but any opinions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Note: I've also reached out to current students at both schools to learn more about the ibanking recruiting each, but am still waiting to hear back.
I would also email their respective finance clubs if you haven't already, I find the club listserves have excellent response rates at most schools, especially for questions from admitted students.
NYU Stern has 392 students and UCLA Anderson has 360 students so similar class sizes. Both schools have similar yields at 53% and 51% respectively. NYU has a better job placement track record at 3 months after graduation.
Some quick analysis of the employment reportshttp://www.stern.nyu.edu/portal-partner ... /index.htmhttp://www.anderson.ucla.edu/Documents/ ... Report.pdf
We see that 30% of Stern students go into Investment Banking while 9.1% of Anderson students go into Investment Banking.
We see that 9% of Stern students end up in the West Coast while 69.7% of Anderson students stay in California.
No further breakdown is available for Investment Banking on the West Coast but safe to say more students do Investment Banking in the West Coast from Anderson than from Stern.
Stern Tuition is ~61k Anderson non-resident tuition is ~52k with 75% scholarship that goes down to about ~13k a year in tuition, savings of 48k a year compared to Stern.
NYU estimates all additional costs including rent at ~37k a year while UCLA estimates it at ~30k a year, a savings of 7k per year from Stern.
So now we have some solid numbers to work with for Stern vs. UCLA, a $110k difference between the 2 programs using very rough estimates provided by the respective programs.
If living on the West Coast (especially California) is a big plus for you, I would consider the $110k in savings and a large UCLA network in the region a big plus and I would personally be more partial to attending Anderson.