Resipsa1
I'm 32 and after graduating an OK law school (top 30 but nothing special) I decided to go into finance in an area I had studied significantly in law school (dodd-frank and otc derivatives). Decision not to practice law was largely due to the fact that I would have ended up in commercial litigation, which I didn't enjoy, rather than finance law. Ended up with a BO job with a BB in OTC space, but got promoted in 1 1/2 years to FO--while it was trading, it just was basically reinvesting client collateral and managing some FX exposure, nothing very complex/interesting. Spent a couple years there, earned my CFA charter, and then left that for a risk job at another BB, again in the OTC space. Now thinking about going back to get MBA. Would like to stay in OTC space but hopefully on a good trading desk, but have also heard great things about management consulting and would consider that. From Chicago and have family so thinking Booth or Kellogg. I'm debating between the full time and part time programs. I would prefer the PT, but hear it has a terrible stigma(basically it is for those who couldn't get into FT). I was wondering about my chances at FT as an older candidate and what's the true difference between PT and FT in terms of job prospects.
Stats
-GMAT:770 (49q, 45v)
-UGPA: 3.67 in Econ from an ok flagship state school(3.45 when considering grades from the school I transferred in from)
-Law School GPA: 3.35 from top 30.
-CFA Charter
-Published paper on OTC derivatives regulation
-Volunteer: Just now starting tutoring in an adult literary program.
-Nothing to add from a diversity point of view (White Male from US)
-Leadership: Only work related. Just developing and taking ownership of different initiatives at work. No direct reports. Letters of rec will emphasize this.
Posted from my mobile device
Hey there,
First of all, sorry for the delay in my answer, I was on the road for two weeks, and haven't been able to post as regularly as I would like.
Now to jump into your question. there is no doubt that the Full-time program is more prestigious. And that you will get more networking and career services out of it.
However, (and you probably knew I was going to say this) it's like comparing apples and oranges. Is a part-time better for you? Do you prefer to continue working? Would you be able to land that job through your own efforts and Chicago network? The part-time program is of course easier to get into, which is why it might suffer from prestige. But can it be a better choice for you? Sure. There are many factors to consider, including time invested, money invested, what your needs are, and so on.
I think it boils down to what you want and need. do you want to take the time off to study full-time for two years? Do you want to make a big industry jump? Or would you rather work and study?
It's up to you dude,
If you can explain your reasoning and your thoughts, I might be able to advise you further, so don't hesitate to write.
Best,
Jon