Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 20 Aug 2014, 00:57

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

If you got in everywhere where would you go

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Whats your top choice

  • 14% [13]
  • 17% [16]
  • 25% [23]
  • 9% [9]
  • 7% [7]
  • 15% [14]
  • 6% [6]
  • 2% [2]
  • 1% [1]
  • 0% [0]
Author Message
TAGS:
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1467
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 04 Dec 2007, 18:27
Vote for MIT
With engineering and technology background, MIT wins my vote, hands down...
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 66
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 04 Dec 2007, 19:02
Kenan-Flagler, most likely.
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Status: Um... what do you want to know?
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 5464
Location: SF, CA, USA
Schools: UC Berkeley Haas School of Business MBA 2010
WE 1: Social Gaming
Followers: 64

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 14

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 04 Dec 2007, 23:03
I'm surprised Berkeley is so high. Usually people underrate Berkeley all the time. Lepium, I would say UE's first, Ross, Tuck *and* Haas next, then the rest. Tuck may be above Haas, but I wouldn't say Ross is in a different category than Haas. Probably all three are in the Trans-Ultra-Elite category these days.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 1360
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 182 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 04 Dec 2007, 23:22
kryzak wrote:
I'm surprised Berkeley is so high. Usually people underrate Berkeley all the time. Lepium, I would say UE's first, Ross, Tuck *and* Haas next, then the rest. Tuck may be above Haas, but I wouldn't say Ross is in a different category than Haas. Probably all three are in the Trans-Ultra-Elite category these days.


The thing I don't like about Haas is that is an Elite with an Ultra Elite admit rate. Need better odds? Try the other Elites. Are you confident? Aim higher.

L.
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Status: Um... what do you want to know?
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 5464
Location: SF, CA, USA
Schools: UC Berkeley Haas School of Business MBA 2010
WE 1: Social Gaming
Followers: 64

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 14

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 04 Dec 2007, 23:55
lepium wrote:
The thing I don't like about Haas is that is an Elite with an Ultra Elite admit rate. Need better odds? Try the other Elites. Are you confident? Aim higher.

L.


Leaving a good school like Haas out of your discussion of good schools (the three good ones outside of the M7) and not liking it only because it has an acceptance rate like and UE is not really a good reason, lepium. I am actually surprised that you would say something like that, considering your experience in the application process.

People should (ideally) apply to schools based on their quality and the fit with their future MBA plans, not their acceptance rate. Haas recent placement rate, improvements in career services, classes, resources, student support, alumni support, and networking opportunities are no worse than any other Elite, and probably only par with Ross and Tuck, even rivaling some of the M7's depending which field you look at.

Haas will never be a super financial powerhouse like Wharton, Columbia, or Chicago, nor will it gather the clout and brand name of H/S/W. But for the fields that they are good at, like general management, real estate, entrepreneurship, international business, and a few others I can't remember right now, they're right up there in the eyes of big companies (the McKinseys, Bains, Googles, Yahoos, Lehman Brothers, etc...) as any of the other 4 UEs, and this is from first hand experience being there, seeing some of the company presentations, seeing some rough hiring stats, and talking to current 2nd year students.

I know people on this forum see me as a "Haas Fanatic" with a very biased view, but I don't think the school's recent meteoric rise in the respected rankings (US News and BW) is a fluke. Objectively, they've been working on improving themselves and moving up in the Elite cluster since Tom Campbell took over in 2002, and so far have succeeded in putting themselves at the verge of breaking into the M7, along with great schools like Ross and Tuck.

With that said, I do take some offense to your "Are you confident? Aim Higher" statement. I am humbly confident about my chances at Haas, and I consider it one of the most desirable schools for me to go to for the fit in culture, curriculum, resources, and network. I don't plan on "aiming higher" at the Columbias, MITs, GSBs, HBS, and Whartons because I don't see a fit there, nor do I think an education there will benefit me. Thus to me, it's not aiming "higher" if I applied there, just because they have similar acceptance rates. By the same token, why should anyone apply to Stanford since if you're confident about going to Stanford (with a 7% rate), why not "aim higher" and apply to HBS instead? The answer is, because some of us, however few in numbers, do not see HBS as a good fit, no matter how great the school is or how much "better" the acceptance rate is compared to Stanford.

I apologize about my rant, but your comment hit a nerve that has been bothering me this entire application season. People keep on saying, "rankings do not matter as much as the fit and what you can get out of the school." Yet when it comes down to it, your simple comment pretty much tells any new GMATclubber who reads this thread that rankings is what matters. If you have the goods to get into Haas, why not apply to some other school with equal or higher admission rate instead, even though their fit might not be as good.

That may not be what you were intending, but unfortunately that is how I (and probably some others) will read it. Hope you understand where I'm coming from.

thanks, K.
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 22 Apr 2007
Posts: 1097
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 00:09
kryzak wrote:
I know people on this forum see me as a "Haas Fanatic" with a very biased view

Who? :roll:
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Status: Um... what do you want to know?
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 5464
Location: SF, CA, USA
Schools: UC Berkeley Haas School of Business MBA 2010
WE 1: Social Gaming
Followers: 64

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 14

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 00:11
guilty as charged :wink:
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2007
Posts: 505
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 00:27
I agree when looking at schools it should be about fit. I didn't apply to any schools on the west coast because I don't want to live there. Sorry kryzak but I guess I'm way too east coast biased (plus I guess this balances you out j/k). As long as the school has a strong brand name then you should pick the schools you like (whatever your criteria may be) and chances are you'll be happy. On a side note, this has been a day of incredibly long posts...I guess everyone has too much time on their hands :wink: .
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Status: Um... what do you want to know?
Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 5464
Location: SF, CA, USA
Schools: UC Berkeley Haas School of Business MBA 2010
WE 1: Social Gaming
Followers: 64

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 14

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 05:28
to each their own shmegs, which is why I'm glad there are many schools to choose from.

I wish I had too much time. Just too passionate about a subject. :) Now I'm severely lacking sleep and need to survive a day of meetings... I guess I call it "B-school training" :wink:
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
avatar
Affiliations: HHonors Diamond, BGS Honor Society
Joined: 05 Apr 2006
Posts: 5925
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2009
GMAT 1: 730 Q45 V45
WE: Business Development (Consumer Products)
Followers: 252

Kudos [?]: 1528 [0], given: 7

GMAT Tests User Premium Member
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 06:46
gmatclb wrote:
Chicago vs Columbia would be hard for me. I think for finance people, this would be a very hard decision.


Really? Granted, I've obviously got some bias, but even before I set foot here, I would never have considered Columbia even remotely comparable to Chicago.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 469
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 07:35
kryzak wrote:
I'm surprised Berkeley is so high. Usually people underrate Berkeley all the time. Lepium, I would say UE's first, Ross, Tuck *and* Haas next, then the rest. Tuck may be above Haas, but I wouldn't say Ross is in a different category than Haas. Probably all three are in the Trans-Ultra-Elite category these days.


I think Berkeley's high rating (in rankings and also this poll) is not surprising at all. I think Haas is firmly in the top 10, and starting to distance itself from the other "Elites" that it is previously compared to such as Duke, Ross, and Tuck. In fact Haas is at least on par with Columbia, even beating it in recent rankings. The proof is that they have a Berkeley-Columbia EMBA program, i don't think it would exist if people think Haas is below Columbia. Haas' low acceptance rate is definitely an indication of the quality of students, not some fluke stat.


Let's take a look at Duke, Ross, Tuck vs Haas:

Duke - class size almost 2X that of Haas, yet top IB/MC placement worse than Haas, which means by % it is MUCH worse. International rep much worse. Can't even compare in tech/vc placement.

Ross - class size same as Duke, almost 2X that of Haas. About same placement into top IB/MC as Haas, but consider class size, by % it is worse than Haas. Also weaker in international rep, and cannot compare in tech/vc.

Tuck - Same class size as Haas. Edges Haas slightly in NYC IB/PE jobs. But Haas is much stronger in ALL other regions in the US, international reputation much stronger, tech/vc much stronger, etc.

Not to mention the SF Bay Area is MUCH better and more appealing than any of the other 3 locations. Location does matter, just imagine if Columbia is not in NYC (might not even break top 10)

Other than a slight funding disadvantage in being a public school, Haas has everything else the other M7 has and maybe more. I am positive you will see Haas firmly among the top 8 business schools, sort of like a M8.

Last edited by aceman626 on 05 Dec 2007, 07:43, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 147
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 07:42
rhyme wrote:
gmatclb wrote:
Chicago vs Columbia would be hard for me. I think for finance people, this would be a very hard decision.


Really? Granted, I've obviously got some bias, but even before I set foot here, I would never have considered Columbia even remotely comparable to Chicago.


Well, from a neutral perspective, while Chicago may outrank Columbia in terms of academic reputation and perceived quality, Columbia has an advantage over Chicago because of its proximity to Finance employers.

This reminds me of when my wife was in law school. She used to get pissed because tier 2 or 3 schools would get more love from employers than hers just because they were in bigger metro areas (such as NY, Washington DC, etc.)
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 469
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 07:48
rhyme wrote:
gmatclb wrote:
Chicago vs Columbia would be hard for me. I think for finance people, this would be a very hard decision.


Really? Granted, I've obviously got some bias, but even before I set foot here, I would never have considered Columbia even remotely comparable to Chicago.


I agree with Rhyme. Chicago is a much stronger school, and Columbia (while still good) is appealing mainly because of NYC. I know MANY people who apply to Columbia only because of NYC. Not even for the job opportunities, but because NYC is an exciting city and would be fun to live in for 2 years.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 147
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 07:56
Like one of my Egyptian friend's dad would say, "evribody needs to live at least once in newyork" (roll the r's for more effect)

Last edited by CerealsMBA on 05 Dec 2007, 07:58, edited 1 time in total.
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 4320
Location: Back in Chicago, IL
Schools: Kellogg Alum: Class of 2010
Followers: 78

Kudos [?]: 692 [0], given: 5

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 07:56
CerealsMBA wrote:
rhyme wrote:
gmatclb wrote:
Chicago vs Columbia would be hard for me. I think for finance people, this would be a very hard decision.


Really? Granted, I've obviously got some bias, but even before I set foot here, I would never have considered Columbia even remotely comparable to Chicago.


Well, from a neutral perspective, while Chicago may outrank Columbia in terms of academic reputation and perceived quality, Columbia has an advantage over Chicago because of its proximity to Finance employers.

This reminds me of when my wife was in law school. She used to get pissed because tier 2 or 3 schools would get more love from employers than hers just because they were in bigger metro areas (such as NY, Washington DC, etc.)


The location can be polarizing, some people would choose NY of Chicago any day of the week while other people would much rather live in Chicago. NY is a love it or hate it city...you either want to live there or have no desire too. Both have undesirable locations within the city (Harlem vs Hyde Park)...if only GSB put their campus downtown where the PT program is. I personally would go with Chicago over NYC but thats me.

At times I think Columbia relies too much on its NYC location and Ivy League rep. A lot of people consider it the weakest of the M7s. Still its a great school but I think a lot of its draw has to do with its location.

That said if I wanted banking it would be a tough choice, since I would be a career changer I think GSB gives more options since so many bankers head to Columbia because of its finance rep and location. A family friend of mine went there, he picked it over other schools because it was easier for him to maintain his network by staying. If I worked in finance on Wall Street already I would choose Columbia just for that reason, so I could keep my connections strong and build more. You already have links in the industry and could build them easier by staying in NYC than moving. It makes the schmoozing much easier if you are 120 blocks away not 1200 miles.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 707
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 08:01
rhyme wrote:
gmatclb wrote:
Chicago vs Columbia would be hard for me. I think for finance people, this would be a very hard decision.


Really? Granted, I've obviously got some bias, but even before I set foot here, I would never have considered Columbia even remotely comparable to Chicago.


When I applied last year, I didn't even look at Columbia. It sort of has that reputation among b school applicants as that school that just squeeked by to make M7. I applied to Chicago because of all the token reasons.

I'm targeting positions that don't really have an on-campus recruiting presense. If I was targeting positions that do have on-campus hiring (i banking, consulting, sell-side finance), I would no doubt choose Chicago.

But for trading positions, finance roles on the buy-side, the NY advantage seemingly outweights Chicago's advantages. I haven't visited Columbia, and I've probably spent 5 mintues at most researching Columbia, so I'm mainly talking about the location of Columbia.

Stern also has that advantage, but eveerything being equal, I think employers would rather hire a columbia guy over a stern guy.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 2137
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 84 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 08:56
rhyme wrote:
Really? Granted, I've obviously got some bias, but even before I set foot here, I would never have considered Columbia even remotely comparable to Chicago.


CBS and Chicago have long been considered rivals.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Posts: 589
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 10:06
kryzak wrote:
With that said, I do take some offense to your "Are you confident? Aim Higher" statement. I am humbly confident about my chances at Haas, and I consider it one of the most desirable schools for me to go to for the fit in culture, curriculum, resources, and network.


I'm not confident. I think a 14% admit rate or whatever it was last year is enough to make almost anyone wonder about their chances. With that said, I am hopeful, and I fully agree with you on all of the above reasons for going to Haas. It is definately one of my favorite schools.
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
avatar
Affiliations: HHonors Diamond, BGS Honor Society
Joined: 05 Apr 2006
Posts: 5925
Schools: Chicago (Booth) - Class of 2009
GMAT 1: 730 Q45 V45
WE: Business Development (Consumer Products)
Followers: 252

Kudos [?]: 1528 [0], given: 7

GMAT Tests User Premium Member
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 10:21
CerealsMBA wrote:
rhyme wrote:
gmatclb wrote:
Chicago vs Columbia would be hard for me. I think for finance people, this would be a very hard decision.


Really? Granted, I've obviously got some bias, but even before I set foot here, I would never have considered Columbia even remotely comparable to Chicago.


Well, from a neutral perspective, while Chicago may outrank Columbia in terms of academic reputation and perceived quality, Columbia has an advantage over Chicago because of its proximity to Finance employers.


Based on the gajillion and a half finance recruiters on campus these days, I can't possibly fathom how there might be any real difference between Columbia and Chicago in terms of finance opportunities ... but I might be wrong.
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 4320
Location: Back in Chicago, IL
Schools: Kellogg Alum: Class of 2010
Followers: 78

Kudos [?]: 692 [0], given: 5

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 05 Dec 2007, 12:23
rhyme wrote:
CerealsMBA wrote:
rhyme wrote:
gmatclb wrote:
Chicago vs Columbia would be hard for me. I think for finance people, this would be a very hard decision.


Really? Granted, I've obviously got some bias, but even before I set foot here, I would never have considered Columbia even remotely comparable to Chicago.


Well, from a neutral perspective, while Chicago may outrank Columbia in terms of academic reputation and perceived quality, Columbia has an advantage over Chicago because of its proximity to Finance employers.


Based on the gajillion and a half finance recruiters on campus these days, I can't possibly fathom how there might be any real difference between Columbia and Chicago in terms of finance opportunities ... but I might be wrong.


I haven't looked at the numbers but I would say GSB may get a lot of the big name big buck shops. But Columbia might get the smaller companies in NY who dont recruit as heavily...not talking the small HF and specialty shops since they obviously really dont need to "recruit." Also anyone look at the number of hires into the big banks. I have no idea since I am not going into finance but Goldman may hire at GSB but may take 50% more from columbia meaning Columbia is the place to go.

Then again going to Kellogg which is not a "financial powerhouse" but still gets the big names recruiting there may be a better choice since a much smaller percent of the class goes into banking so there will be a lot less competition. I would much rather compete with 150 people at Kellogg going for the same jobs than the 350 at Chicago...just a thought.

Rhymes list of recruiters is probably going to hold true across the board at all M7 schools from Harvard to Columbia...so you have a chance for them at all those and probably at most of the schools in this vote.
  [#permalink] 05 Dec 2007, 12:23
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
If you got 530,what would you do? fatihaysu 9 14 Sep 2010, 09:37
1 Experts publish their posts in the topic Where would you like to travel? BM 24 26 May 2010, 17:44
6 Experts publish their posts in the topic GMATCLUB '09 where you are going... riverripper 27 06 May 2009, 13:28
Going back in time - What would YOU change? dalexc 13 26 Jun 2007, 15:19
where would you go??? LolPwn3d! 7 04 Oct 2006, 13:31
Display posts from previous: Sort by

If you got in everywhere where would you go

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4    Next  [ 61 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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®.