Accepted to Michigan - Ross and Austin - McCombs P/T!!!

Thanks for the responses. I suppose the only think holding me back from Ross is the fact that I am genuinely worried I will not be able to find a job once I get there.

what do you do when one school ranks higher in 1 ranking, and lower in another? do you just flip a coin? do you abide by X ranking since it's the gold standard? life isn't as black and white as the picture you just portrayed.

Do you mean you are accepted to the full time Ross and part-time McCombs? If so I would go with the full-time program.

That aside, I strongly disagree with the "highest ranked you get into advice". If you're talking HBS v. UT, then sure, but Ross/Darden/McCombs/Cornell/Fuqua/UCLA etc are in the same class. Never ignore geographical preference, both short and long term...a Fortune 2 (not 200) exec told me that. By the above logic, someone who wants to work in Los Angeles would pass up UCLA for Darden, which would be pure idiocy. While it is true that you can go "anywhere" with an MBA, it will require a lot more leg work on your part to escape the region in which the school resides.

Texas isn't like going to Indiana, where you would definitely be moving somewhere else post-grad. TX has the most fortune 500 HQ's of any state, a trillion dollar economy, every major consultancy and BB bank have offices, etc. BUT, if you go to UT, you will be interviewing with for the TX offices of those firms, barring some extra effort on your part. If you go to Ross, you will likely be looking at Chicago and some New York. Personally, I have no desire to leave Texas, which is why I chose McCombs. If I wanted to work in New York, it obviously wouldn't have been the best choice.

I'm not sure what you mean about the "major"...is that a part-time limitation of McCombs?

Ross grads supply the entire country with employees. Only 40% of the MBA Class of 2009 stayed in the Midwest and, while I haven't seen the breakdown by specific state, I wouldn't be surprised if there were more placements in Chicago than there were in Michigan. The ones that did find positions in Michigan are highly unlikely to be working in the old economy of Detroit and much more likely to be working in the new economy of the rest of the state.

I couldn't find any timing stats for McCombs but about 80% of Michigan's Class of 2009 seeking employment received an offer within 3 months of graduation, which is standard stuff.

What's the worry?

Yeah, agree with Coakley. I wouldn't worry about the dismal state of Michigan's economy with respect to Ross. You aren't going to end up in a Packard plant.

I think am not being clear. I am going part-time (at least at first, i might decide to switch to full time eventually) and need to find a job in the Ann Arbor/Detroit area while attending school. I am not worried about the post-grad job market.

My mistake for misreading. In that case, it'll definitely depend on the industry and position for which you're looking. That's a very tough choice to make without having a full time position already lined-up. How much time do you have to decide? Any chance you might be able to secure a position before having to make the call?

According to the BLS, there are about 166K jobs in the Ann Arbor area, 733K more in Greater Detroit (drivable for night classes at UM) and 850K in Austin-Round Rock. But if the industry in which you'd like to continue working has a much larger presence in Austin, it seems like a no brainer.

I have worked for years in Real Estate, I am pretty open honestly as to what I do while in school. I have only worked at one company and would like to expand my horizons and leave my comfort zone in every way while attending school. I also have the money to get by 2-3 months after I reach Ann Arbor or Austin to find a job. It thought Austin would be a much better job market, it seems similar with the numbers you gave however.

I didn't portray the picture, a CEO of a Fortune 200 company did. Take it for what it's worth.

My own opinion? Ross is on a different tier than McCombs, and that's what the chairman meant. McCombs is top 10 in none of the rankings, Ross is top 10 in most of the rankings.

True but no one cares about top 10. There's M7, then there's the cluster I mentioned, then there's some after that. If you are that concerned about the marginal difference in rankings then it sounds like your mind is already made up.

Regardless, you are too occupied with the trees at the expense of the forest. Would you rather be in Texas in 5 years or the Midwest (possibly Northeast)? That's the question because, your intentions aside, statistically that is where you will end up coming out of those respective schools.

I would look at it as a choice in geography. You won't find a better MBA to have in Texas than one from UT. It will open a lot of doors in Houston and DFW, which are not bad places to be. Michigan grads tend to end up in Chicago and NYC. If you want to be in an industry like banking that is concentrated in those areas then Michigan is probably the right choice. If you want to work in energy in Houston, UT is the better choice.

Don't forget tech/venture capital. Texas has a good reputation for technology MBAs and Austin is a startup hub with lots of venture capital firms.