Foster ($$) vs McCombs ($$) vs Marshall ($)

Question

Hi good people!

In a huge dilemma (partly because I'm very passionate about Foster but also looking at brand value). International with a background in tech PMM, looking to continue in tech PMM (or PM). Not a career switcher by any means. At a high level, I'm torn between McCombs and Foster, since Marshall is not really a tech powerhouse and is EXPENSIVE! Is the Texas brand+T20 rank a huge differentiator versus Foster? Also, am I missing something by completely overlooking Marshall? McCombs (net tuition: 67,500) (+) Very strong marketing program/electives/experiential learning, aligns with my career interests (+) UT Austin Brand - Public ivy - Stronger than UW? (+) Higher rank than UW, more consistent T20 than USC (+) Low cost of living, low taxes post-graduation (-) McCombs tech jobs seem to feed mostly into legacy tech (Dell, HP etc.). How strong is recruitment for MSFT, Adobe, Salesforce, Apple etc? (-) Will be stuck in Texas long term - not very passionate about that Foster (net tuition: 55,000) (+)It's the cheapest among the three, will graduate with nearly zero debt (+) Seattle = tech haven, strong PMM hiring from Microsoft, VMWare, Adobe etc. (+) Balanced program with great electives and experiential learning opportunities (+) Have moderate connections among UW Alumni who are now in senior tech positions in the US (-) T25 rank, has the weakest brand among the three within the US and outside it (-) I will have zero recruiting backup options if tech recruitment remains ice-cold until 2025 Marshall (net tuition: 72,000) (+) Strongest parent university brand within the US and back home in India (+) Access to California recruiting scene/Silicon beach (is this even a big deal?) (+) Trojan network seems widest and strongest among the three (-) Weak program in terms of tech focus, experiential learning, and recruiting (-) Extremely expensive due to CoL. Not passionate about attending, only applied for the brand and negotiating power (-) Its California advantage is diluted by much stronger programs (GSB, Haas, Anderson)

bb · Answer

Easy. Foster would be the best and most helpful for tech recruiting. No reason to draw on secondary arguments. I don’t know how it is perceived in India but in the US, Usually foster ranks higher than Marshal. There has been some finagling the last few years in US News rankings that put USC ranked high but I don’t think that is natural or reflection of recruiting strength.

FYI - USC and Marshall are 2 diff animals. USC undergrad is extremely competitive and those graduates get their MBA at M7’s … the business school has been traditionally ranked at around T30.

Posted from my mobile device

FYI - USC and Marshall are 2 diff animals. USC undergrad is extremely competitive and those graduates get their MBA at M7’s … the business school has been traditionally ranked at around T30.

Posted from my mobile device

godhand · Answer

Thank you  bb !

I did not know that Foster was traditionally ranked higher than Marshall. This removes the only block in my mind and Marshall is out of the race for me.

What are your thoughts on McCombs? Would like to know about 
A) Whether the McCombs rank and UTA brand's strength should be of consideration, given the almost identical total cost of attendance with Foster 
B) Austin has been hyped as an up-and-coming tech hub with companies moving there. Does that help its tech recruitment scene in any way to make me consider it equal to or over Foster?

Edit: Curious as to what you would have suggested if it was Foster vs Tepper/Anderson (since I will be applying to those schools in R2)

anirbaan · Answer

Hi,

First of all congratulations on the admits!

I am definitely biased but this is one of those rare places where I would disagree with bb!

Having seen it first hand I can attest to the fact that the Trojan network, even outside of Marshall trojan network opens doors. There has been a concerted effort at Marshall over the last half a decade or so, especially after Dean Garret (former Wharton Dean) took charge to climb up the rankings so Marshall being lower than Forster is a fairly dated take. It has been a solid top-20 program by every metric for a while now, not least of which is the class profile of class of 2024. Every stakeholder in the school from alums, to staff members, and current students all seem bought in and there is a great environment around the school.

Talking of tech recruitments, Marshall has consistently had 25-30% tech recruitments every year and it ranges from every name in big tech to startups in the LA area which are many. Thay said this is a very interesting year for tech recruitment and should be challenging at every school.

I am glad you are clear about what you want, but I have seen a lot of people as sure as you change plans as they were exposed to more options after coming to an MBA and Marshall’s positioning in the B-School space will give you that. I would recommend go and compare every school’s employment reports and the way they are trending. It should answer a few questions for you.

So now that I tried to address some of the misconceptions around Marshall that started the post, let me try and address your specific question.

1. Tech is slow this year but if it is slow till 2026 when you graduate then we have bigger problems to worry about. 
2. All of these schools will give you great tech options especially because you come from tech already, you need to ask yourself which geography you really want to be in because most opportunities from Marshall will be in California, from Forster in Seattle, and from McCombs in Houston or Austin. So where you want to start your career should be an important factor.

3. I saw a misconception around not having enough experiential programs at Marshall, I can’t say about Forster because I didn’t research it enough, but Marshall and McCombs both have enough experiential opportunities to keep you engaged.

4. As an international check how you earn STEM certification at all of these programs. I know at Marshall everyone gets STEM because of how the core is designed but do you have to take specific electives at others to drive the certification?

5. Finally, if funding and scholarship is the trump decision making metric then the rest of the discussion is moot and go for the lowest expense option because then you’ll be less leveraged and will have more peace of mind.

Hope it helps! Good luck for your decision making process.

Posted from my mobile device

godhand · Answer

Thank you for your response anirbaan ! To be frank, I am not very hung up on ranking. At the moment I see Foster, Marshall, and McCombs as peer schools. I was more concerned about the prestige of the parent universities. I have a few observations and questions on your insightful points. I would be very thankful if you could give me (more) of your thoughts! 1) I suppose it can't be worse than what the class of 2022/2023 will face. The class of 2025 will have to risk it

2) In the grand scheme of things, as an international student who is concerned with very little about geography other than 'can I get a high-paying job in the US', I don't think it matters where I start my US career. I have heard that Cali/Seattle tech workers make more than Austin tech workers, which is counter balanced by the high COL/taxes of Cali/Seattle. Is this an accurate estimation of the only differences between being a tech employee in each of these regions? 3) Noted. I am aware of the PRIME component - will dig deeper to understand the other opportunities 5) In my case, with funding + scholarship, the total tuition is mostly the same (with a 20K differential between the cheapest Foster and the most expensive Marshall). The CoL in California is putting me off. Do you think being closer to the Bay Area (with the risk of competing with Anderson/GSB/Haas grads) is better than being in Seattle? I know that Seattle is huge on Amazon/Microsoft hiring, but I'm wondering whether Marshall would give me access to a wider range of companies in the bay.

anirbaan · Answer

I hope for the sake of the economy in general that it doesn’t get worse and yeah, you are right class of 2025 will have to risk it.

As for not caring about geography, I am glad if that is the case as it would open you up to opportunities anywhere, but let me share some reasons why I have seen folks care about geography and maybe that would help you make a more informed choice. The first is changing legal and social norms in certain US states over others. The second being weather conditions, so the 300 days of Seattle rain isn’t for everyone is what most people who’ve experienced it say.

About the differences in California and Seattle jobs, this is where talking to Forster folks and Forster’s employment report will come in because they will give you deeper insights on that. The way I see it Forster depends very heavily on Amazon and Microsoft jobs whereas those jobs are still equally open for you from other schools while giving you access to other companies. Your point about having to fight other California school grads, California has enough tech jobs for everyone who really wants it but you got to compete with everyone anyway. Even in that you’ll see GSB students often start their own ventures or Anderson’s performance hasn’t been very strong over the past few years.

PRIME is just the travel experiential component, if you really want to look at experiential learning I’d also encourage you to look at SIF, MLFP, ABAC, Problem Solving and Decision Making among others.

I have not computed the CoL difference between Seattle and LA but I wouldn’t think that the difference would be massive for the two years of MBA, however the sheer width of opportunities that LA and California open for you, in terms of people who come to campus to share insights, smaller firms within the city or state that you probably wouldn’t hear about otherwise, opportunities arising due to the LA28 ramp up happening all make it worthwhile. But that’s in my personal opinion keeping my background and goals in mind. I would encourage you to 1. Go through Forster’s employment report and compare not just the median salary and surface level statistics but the spread of companies available. 2. Make a detailed comparison between CoL differences

Foster ($$) vs McCombs ($$) vs Marshall ($)

Foster ($$) vs McCombs ($$) vs Marshall ($)

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards