Homer4000 wrote:
Hi All,
I work in PE (FoF) in NYC. I applied to four schools this year - HBS, Wharton, Kellogg and UCLA. I was dinged at HBS, waitlisted then dinged at Kellogg, and remain on the summer waitlist (essentially a ding) at Wharton. Got a call last Friday from UCLA with an acceptance and a $70k scholarship. Here's the hard part...
I want to do PE in the LA area after school since I have family in the area and want to be there long term. So Anderson makes sense in that respect, but I also don't want to regret not giving Wharton another shot.
With the relative strength of the two schools in mind (especially in PE), the question I really have is, are there PE funds in the LA area (headquartered or satellite) that would hire from Anderson? Or would it make sense to try to defer Anderson a year and re-apply to Wharton (or maybe Stanford or Haas)?
It is extremely tempting to just take the $, go to Anderson and spend more time with family, but I have to think long-term as well.
GPA - 3.7 from top public undergrad
GMAT - 750
4 yrs WE in banking / PE
Thanks in advance for any advice! Would really appreciate any insight.
If you already work in PE then why even bother going to school just to get back into PE? If you've worked at a legitimate firm then you must have legitimate contacts. Tap into those contacts and get yourself a PE gig in LA and forgo the expense of school.
UCLA is a regional school, for the most part. If you want to work at a small PE shop then your best bet is to go to UCLA because you need that face time with recruiters which you won't get at Wharton because the small PE firm is probably not going to recruit there. Big firm with an office in LA, go to Wharton.
But, that's not to even say you can get into Wharton. Let's say Wharton doesn't work out, then what?