BrusselsToBoston wrote:
RHB wrote:
Steve2014 wrote:
dude, forget about HBS, it's not for you. try other schools! you can do very well in life with an MBA from 2nd-3rd tier school.
What an awful thing to say to somebody!
I say apply to your dream school but at the same time be realistic and apply to schools where you feel you have a chance and that you would be happy to attend.
No, that's OK
heard it many times already...
So, I understand you recommend Tuck? Why?
Well my main reason for applying to Tuck, Yale, and HBS is that they are all within driving distance of Boston which is where my GF lives. Beyond that, They are all great schools so the academics will be good, they all offer great employment opportunities post MB, and the students from each school are incredibly enthusiastic about them.
What differentiated Tuck for me was the following:
- You hear a lot about the community at Tuck but I can't comment on that because I am not yet there. What I can say is that in every interaction I had with Tuck I was made to feel welcome. The adcom always had time to answer my questions, as did current students and alumni. On my visit day the students that I had had correspondence with went out of their way to spend time with me and introduced me to everyone we passed in the corridors, who were in turn gracious and welcoming. You just don't get the same feelings from other schools.
- I'm an outdoors enthusiast, Tuck's location is beautiful and there are many clubs and orgs that take advantage of it. I feel like I can live in cities for the rest of my life.
- There is a big focus on ethical profitability which I am interested in.
- I prefer a small class size. I want one on one time with professors who know who I am.
I think that I was most excited about attending Tuck and this came through in my app, which is ultimately why I got in.
And Just so this post isn't completely off topic.
Quote:
Well, I disagree. MBA education is a winner-take-all world, just like technology or art, or as Nassim Taleb would put it - it is the domain of Extremistan. So the fundamental thing that is wrong with lower ranked schools is that they are ranked lower.
That is why there is Wharton, Stanford and Harvard, and three thousand + "lower ranked" schools in the fat tail of the distribution.
Go for the top 3 no matter what. The upside is almost invariably tremendous, and the downside is virtually zero. With lower ranked schools the downside can be tremendous, and the upside - questionable.
What a load of old bollocks.
Sure if by lower ranked you mean "lower than rank 100" then you may have a point. But to suggest that, for example, Booth, Kellogg, Tuck, Ross, Darden and twenty other don't have tremendous upsides and that they're not worth the money is rubbish. And even schools lower down the list than that are fine as long as you know what your getting and the ROI is right for you, Krannert (#38 on the P&Q rankings) costs less that 50% of the top ten and yet the median base salary is $85,000.