Background:
I currently work at a FAANG company in a decent role. I like the company, but it is not what I want to be doing long term. Short term goal IB or Consulting. Long term I would like to be in PE/VC. I am located in Los Angeles.
Situation:
I received an admit to both UCLA Anderson FEMBA and Harvard MBA, and am stuck on what to choose.
UCLA:
Pros -
UCLA is here in LA, where I want to be.
FEMBA gets me the MBA and would allow me to grow within the company.
FEMBA allows me the opportunity to transition out of FAANG into a different industry.
Maintain salary throughout.
Cons -
3 years
Less Recruiting exposure being a PT program
Weaker recruiting than Harvard
Lesser experience overall being PT
I don't want to be in FAANG and this locks me there for longer
Harvard:
Pros-
Harvard brand name
Will allow me to make the transition I desire (amazing recruiting)
Harvard brand name
2 years
Cons-
More $$$
Have to move across country
No job throughout
I am just super stuck on which to choose. Harvard is a dream!! But will UCLA FEMBA give me the same end result (IB or consulting on west coast) for less cost?
My biggest fear with UCLA is the inability to leave FAANG with the PT status (not getting the day to day exposure with recruiters), and less strength of UCLA recruiting in general... but it's still UCLA! Great school....
Turning down Harvard? Am I crazy?
These are my only options on the table...
Help me make up my mind please!