If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! : The B-School Application - Page 3
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 17 Jan 2017, 11:44

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother!

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Status: Current Student
Joined: 24 Aug 2010
Posts: 1345
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V40
WE: Sales (Consumer Products)
Followers: 107

Kudos [?]: 420 [0], given: 73

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2013, 19:28
CobraKai wrote:
Nice - I don't get the part about about MBAs competing with PT and Exec MBAs from the same school. PT/Exec guys are often company sponsored and returning to the same company, and if they're not, I've heard (sorry about the hearsay, I just haven't cared enough to verify it) that a lot of Part-time/Exec programs don't have access to the same career management center that the Full-time students do, and are definitely NOT competing for summer interships that can turn into full time offers, thus doing nothing to decrease the "value" of a full-time MBA.

It depends on the school. At Booth PT and Exec MBAs do not have access to internship recruiting. They can recruit for full-time roles though. However, the majority do stay with their employers through graduation. I have yet to hear any 2nd years in the FT program say they felt at any disadvantage because PT students were also in the recruiting pool.
_________________

The Brain Dump - From Low GPA to Top MBA (Updated September 1, 2013) - A Few of My Favorite Things--> http://cheetarah1980.blogspot.com

Current Student
Status: Too close for missiles, switching to guns.
Joined: 23 Oct 2012
Posts: 788
Location: United States
Schools: Johnson (Cornell) - Class of 2015
WE: Military Officer (Military & Defense)
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 316 [0], given: 175

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2013, 20:16
machichi wrote:
Let's pretend his thesis was this: "If you can't go to one of YOUR top 5 MBA choices. don't even bother." For me there were only about 7 business schools that I would choose to attend. Outside of those (of which only 1 or 2 is "top 5" by his standards), I probably would have decided not to get my MBA. I'm curious if others feel the same way.

Agree 100%. I had a clear pecking order and really didn't want to have to apply to my 5th and 6th choices in Round 2. And now since I'm not stressing about Round 2 interview invites, I can spend my weekends watching cartoons in a forever lazy onesie for adults if I choose to.

_________________
Senior Manager
Status: Now or never
Joined: 07 Aug 2010
Posts: 329
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GPA: 3.5
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 235 [0], given: 27

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2013, 01:40
rhyme wrote:
I actually found this the most telling quip:

"The sad reality is that an MBA is not as valuable today as it was 30 years ago. Stanford University published data stating that from 2005 to 2008, over 94% of graduates had jobs by graduation. However, since then, only about 75% of graduates had jobs lined up at graduation. Stanford is a top MBA program, so you can imagine it being worse at other schools. "

There are a HUGE number of reasons one might postulate for this shift (that have nothing to due with decreased return)

* Stanford has grown in reputation as an excellent entrepreneurial school, perhaps a greater percentage of students are electing not to pursue a job right out of the program
* Perhaps a shift in the reporting methodology (i.e. perhaps its now defined as of the entire class, whereas it may have previously been defined as a % of those seeking employment - which is what most programs do)
* A change in the overall risk tolerance of students
* A change in the definition of "at graduation" (if you read the details of many employment reports you'll find its usually defined as within 3 months of graduation)
* A change in the % of students self-reporting
* The data range he chose seems cherry picked, why 2005 to 2008? Why not 2004 to 2009? Or 2000 to 2010? Or for that matter, compared a decade ago to the current decade? (Edit I now see Optimistic Applicant made this exact argument and actually bothered to look up data... kudos)

You could go on and on and on.... but the most peculiar claim is that since Stanford is "down", then the conclusion one should draw is that its "worse" at other schools. Common, thats just a basic fallacy. Show me aggregated data from the top 20 schools over a long period of time that shows a measured and controlled decrease, normalized against recessionary impacts, and I'll buy the argument. This is akin to the guy who says that school X placed 2 more people at Bain than school Y, thus, school X is better for recruiting.

And of course, the idea that the top 5 is all that matters seems pretty silly. The average staring salary at Booth this year for Chicago based job is $130,000. That hardly seems bad. Even so, why the elitism? For someone making$40K a year and going to $80K a year at a 2nd or 3rd tier school, the benefits are just as tangible. My conclusion is that he's entire article is myopic, poorly researched platitude intended to garner discussion by putting forth an unpleasant and theoretically controversial view. You have ripped the assumptions apart rhyme and for that sole reason this should be the top post of this month . Having read the headlines of the articles on few occasions I was convinced that the article is bound to be hollow. I somehow felt that the author has an entrepreneurial bend and is having hard time using his Wharton credentials to enter the start up arena. I also believe that his batch mates at Wharton were disillusioned by "What a MBA prepares for" v.s " What one aspires to be" and hit the ground reality when switching jobs. _________________ Please press KUDOS if you like my post Moderator Joined: 02 Jul 2012 Posts: 1231 Location: India Concentration: Strategy GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42 GPA: 3.8 WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities) Followers: 115 Kudos [?]: 1385 [0], given: 116 Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink] ### Show Tags 21 Jan 2013, 02:11 rhyme wrote: I actually found this the most telling quip: "The sad reality is that an MBA is not as valuable today as it was 30 years ago. Stanford University published data stating that from 2005 to 2008, over 94% of graduates had jobs by graduation. However, since then, only about 75% of graduates had jobs lined up at graduation. Stanford is a top MBA program, so you can imagine it being worse at other schools. " There are a HUGE number of reasons one might postulate for this shift (that have nothing to due with decreased return) * Stanford has grown in reputation as an excellent entrepreneurial school, perhaps a greater percentage of students are electing not to pursue a job right out of the program * Perhaps a shift in the reporting methodology (i.e. perhaps its now defined as of the entire class, whereas it may have previously been defined as a % of those seeking employment - which is what most programs do) * A change in the overall risk tolerance of students * A change in the definition of "at graduation" (if you read the details of many employment reports you'll find its usually defined as within 3 months of graduation) * A change in the % of students self-reporting * The data range he chose seems cherry picked, why 2005 to 2008? Why not 2004 to 2009? Or 2000 to 2010? Or for that matter, compared a decade ago to the current decade? (Edit I now see Optimistic Applicant made this exact argument and actually bothered to look up data... kudos) You could go on and on and on.... but the most peculiar claim is that since Stanford is "down", then the conclusion one should draw is that its "worse" at other schools. Common, thats just a basic fallacy. Show me aggregated data from the top 20 schools over a long period of time that shows a measured and controlled decrease, normalized against recessionary impacts, and I'll buy the argument. This is akin to the guy who says that school X placed 2 more people at Bain than school Y, thus, school X is better for recruiting. And of course, the idea that the top 5 is all that matters seems pretty silly. The average staring salary at Booth this year for Chicago based job is$130,000. That hardly seems bad. Even so, why the elitism? For someone making $40K a year and going to$80K a year at a 2nd or 3rd tier school, the benefits are just as tangible.

My conclusion is that he's entire article is myopic, poorly researched platitude intended to garner discussion by putting forth an unpleasant and theoretically controversial view.

This post should be moved to the AWA section... This is how you take apart a flawed argument..
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Aug 2012
Posts: 454
Location: United States (WA)
Concentration: International Business, Entrepreneurship
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 6

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2013, 07:59
rhyme wrote:
cheetarah1980 wrote:
I have yet to hear any 2nd years in the FT program say they felt at any disadvantage because PT students were also in the recruiting pool.

Give it time. You will.

And that's what kills me. There seems to be this idea that PT students are somehow inferior to FT students because they decided to keep their jobs while going to school. While looking at PT programs, I immediately knocked any program that treated PT students differently off the list.
Intern
Joined: 18 Oct 2012
Posts: 33
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 1

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2013, 08:46
rhyme wrote:
...entire article is myopic, poorly researched platitude intended to garner discussion by putting forth an unpleasant and theoretically controversial view.

True story.
Current Student
Status: Too close for missiles, switching to guns.
Joined: 23 Oct 2012
Posts: 788
Location: United States
Schools: Johnson (Cornell) - Class of 2015
WE: Military Officer (Military & Defense)
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 316 [0], given: 175

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2013, 06:36
AbhiJ wrote:
Princeton is still highly regarded because it has not climbed up the MBA bandwagon. The closest thing it offer is Masters in Finance and the program has around 25 students every year.

Princeton is highly regarded because it's Princeton. Not climbing onto the MBA bandwagon is irrelevant. Harvard graduates 900+ MBAs a year and I think they're doing just fine.

Master of Finance is a much different degree than the MBA. Harvard has 9000+ applicants a year, Princeton's M.F. program has under 900.

_________________

Last edited by CobraKai on 22 Jan 2013, 09:12, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Joined: 26 May 2010
Posts: 719
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: MIT Sloan - Class of 2015
WE: Consulting (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Followers: 18

Kudos [?]: 204 [0], given: 642

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2013, 11:25
packet82 wrote:
AbhiJ wrote:
Part of the reason MBA brand is getting diluted is because of the several programs offered by 1 school. If they want to create PT MBA then they should decrease the number of FT enrollment. Imagine 2000 Booth MBAs graduating every year, won't that dilute the brand. Princeton is still highly regarded because it has not climbed up the MBA bandwagon. The closest thing it offer is Masters in Finance and the program has around 25 students every year.

The MBA as a whole is getting diluted because every two-bit former community college has one now and they accept anyone with a pulse, not because Booth graduates a lot of students. As long as the school allows only qualified students in to their program, it will remain highly regarded. Haas for example is working on an expansion to bring their full time class from 240 to around 300 students. I highly doubt they're going to drop in the ranking as a result.

As long as the students are qualified, a larger program can be an advantage since the network will be larger.

Not disputing any of your points, but do you have a source for Haas' plans to expand? I had heard Yale SOM was planning to expand, but hadn't heard the same of Haas.
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 549
Followers: 72

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2014, 06:30
Hello from the GMAT Club MBAbot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 549
Followers: 72

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2015, 17:46
Hello from the GMAT Club MBAbot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 337
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 92 [0], given: 25

Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother! [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jul 2016, 08:35
UTMPA2011 wrote:
I am still stuck on how this guy earned a Wharton MBA. The poor logic and reasoning skills demonstrated by this article remind me of USA Today reporting.

The content is poorly supported with unverifiable facts. There are also many inconsistencies throughout the article regarding the "value" of the MBA, which is not clearly defined. The broadness of the discussion of the value of an MBA as a whole only serves to weaken the overall argument because it undermines the statement that top 5 programs are still valuable.

The startup focus of the article is way off in left field and is very limiting in support of his conclusion. I was also surprised to read the statement: “However, most MBA programs do a poor job of preparing students for the uncertain economic reality we live in today, which makes an MBA a poor investment.” What? There is no support for this viewpoint. I am shocked that he does not provide a concrete example with a more realistic time horizon for evaluating “value”. Laughable. The scariest part of this article is that he was part of the adcom. Yikes.

I want to include this article as support for an application to Wharton. I would include an analysis of the logical errors and a statement that I would never embarrass Wharton like this guy.

An AWA-6 quality analysis indeed.
Re: If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother!   [#permalink] 05 Jul 2016, 08:35

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 51 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Is Business School Worth It If You Don't Get Into a Top MBA Program? 0 23 Jun 2015, 07:33
1 770 GMAT, 2.6 cgpa, should I even bother with top 10 programs? 5 07 Jun 2015, 13:57
Should I even bother? 4 13 Jun 2009, 18:47
You dont even know what you are in for... 19 06 Sep 2008, 15:49
Getting into a Top 5 MBA Program 17 21 Dec 2007, 22:09
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# If you can't get into a Top 5, don't even bother!

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.