Tough choice: Booth and Columbia

Looks like the poll is strongly in favor with Booth. I much appreciate everyone who has voted.

I visited both schools, and I came out impressed. Student bodies are great. The only clear difference is that the Booth facilities are outstanding, whereas Uris is average. I spoke with a variety of people in my group and current students, it appears that the ties to Houston are perhaps stronger at Booth, and many Booth students argue that the school has an edge in finance related recruiting such as PE. I think the energy groups at both are strong, both have treks, but the feeling I got from the officers of the Booth club is that it is more active in trying to get placed into desired firms.

To complicate matters, I got a small fellowship from CBS. When speaking with Booth admissions I don't believe I am strongly considered or will receive any scholarship. Not that the money matters to me (it will be made up for long term) but it does make me feel a little bit more "wanted" per se at CBS. What are your thoughts?

First, CONGRATS on both Admits!

While I'm not comparing schools, you could probably find an insight or two in the thread on eskimoroll's quandary between Booth w/$$ and HBS. The thought process seems to be analogous.

I think you're right--money (especially considering your career plans) doesn't matter in the long run. And since you're (rightly) thinking long-term, my advice would be to go for the school which will be the best in helping you get to where you want to go down the road.

I think Booth vs Columbia comes down to Chicago vs New York. The differences in finance recruiting are marginal at best. You could make the case for CBS having better recruiting, you could make the case for Booth. That being said, if you want to make Manhattan your home post-grad, I think CBS is the clear winner. If saving cost on your final MBA bill is your priority, Booth is the winner.