Okay, wow, there is a ton to unpack here and I will try to do it justice by plucking out the key areas of discussion here.
1. Your list of schools is not too elite, if that is what you are asking. However, your question (along with some other things in your query) represent something that is very common but alas incorrect thinking in the admissions game - you are thinking only of you and not the individual schools. What I mean is: you simply can't list 6-10 schools and say "am I in the right place?" You have to run them down one by one. Every school is different, they care about different things, etc. For instance, your academic profile, goals, and perhaps your essays might all make sense for Kellogg or Haas ... but those school prizes more work experience and will consider you a bit young and perhaps want you to wait a few years. Kellogg and Haas are not "as hard to get into" as Stanford generally speaking, but in your case, they might be harder.
2. You also don't have to worry about being a "career changer" for purposes of choosing a school that can feed you into consulting. Just about all top schools feed into consulting, including MBB, and career switchers are more like bankers going to consulting or consultants going into marketing or something like that. Tech is just an industry or sector and it is a common feeder into consulting, just as consulting is a very common "staging" career choice towards a long-term goal that is entrepreneurial in nature. So don't worry so much about that.
3. As for schools that would be a good fit, be thinking of programs that admit a younger class, that value global thinking (you don't need international WE, just cross-cultural experiences that indicate an ability to work and play well with others), and that skew towards higher GMAT averages (rather than GPA, which I don't think is a huge problem but certainly not ideal). Stanford, Yale, Wharton, MIT, Booth, and Tuck all come immediately to mind.
4. Now we are getting to really important stuff - try not to frame your story and start short-listing content in a vacuum. If there is one mistake that applicants (and, frankly, other consultants) make is that they do everything from a candidate-centric perspective. A "what makes me great/different/qualified?" analysis. That is an okay place to start, I suppose, and certainly a prong that you always go back to, but the analysis ALWAYS need to be: "What does School X value and prize and how can I lean my profile into that dynamic?" For instance, if you applied to Duke, you would probably spend 75% of your essays talking about your international experiences (in the context of your goals, while explaining what they are and why you hold them, in the context of your values and experiences, and in the context of Why Duke), whereas for a school like, say, MIT, you may or may not even spend 10% on that ground (it would depend on whether those stories were the best fits for the very introspective/behavioral questions that school asks). Applying to b-school is extremely contextual and so I would caution you against going into the process focused on your platform to the detriment of really understanding how to score the most points on the board. And again, 99% of people do this, so it's not the end of the world, but if you can avoid being too inward in your positioning, you can really separate yourself from the pack.
5. The guides are a low priority for us, compared to client work, just to be honest. We try to produce one each year, to both help people out, and also show our expertise. However, we mainly focus on helping our clients get that kind of detailed, nuanced insight into all the programs. Rest assured, the knowledge is in our heads!
Best,
-Adam/
Amerasia 
close
09 May 2012, 21:22
