Columbia vs Chicago MBA (Booth)

Open question as I am in the process of selecting/evaluation possible MBA schools.

What are the direct pro's&con's when comparing the University of Chicago (Booth) MBA to Columbia.
My first impression is that Chicago tends to be ranked slightly higher in terms of academics, yet I have heard that Columbia has an edge in terms of Network/recruiting as well as general MBA experience/lifestyle.

What do you guys think, anyone who has done their Due Diligence on these schools or even attended them. What do you think?

Under the assumption that you where admitted to both, which one would you choose and why?

 

I visited both schools last fall. They are both excellent programs with a wide variety of opportunities. You need to give us more information as @BGP2587 mentioned.

Columbia is an amazing program but I had a negative experience (all related to culture and fit) when I visited Columbia--and, for full disclosure, I was dinged in January. The story is very anecdotal and I'd prefer not to share over here as to not draw the ire of the many qualified CBS students that post on this forum. If your interested feel free to send me a PM.

 

I attend one of the two. I would say that for recruiting there is minimal difference in either direction -- sure, CBS may have an advantage over networking for NYC jobs, but outside of a few industries I don't think this matters (and even in those industries it is a marginal difference at best).

Really the answer turns on qualitative aspects. For instance, CBS has grade non-disclosure which is awesome. CBS is pretty laid back and collegial, less academic; whereas I believe booth is more focused and academic (not a bad thing, just depends on what you want). Do you want to live in Chicago or NY? These are the questions that will have an impact. Reputation and recruiting are marginally (if at all) different between the two.

"They are all former investment bankers that were laid off in the economic collapse that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have no marketable skills, but by God they work hard."
 

Booth also has grade non-disclosure, for what it's worth. I agree with the above that this largely depends on your track. I can't really speak to CBS because I didn't go there (or even apply), but Booth does extremely well in investment management, consulting, banking, and a variety of corporate placements. Entrepreneurship and tech has gotten much stronger at Chicago over the past few years (e.g. see recent ipo, GrubHub). I have lots of classmates at top tech shops and various start-ups around the Valley. I think you can probably get a great education at both places (if you want it), but don't buy into the stereotype that Booth is filled with introverted quants. This is business school, not a phd program...

 
OpsDude:

Booth is considerably better than Columbia, plus Columbia students have much worse opinions about their school. Booth is easy choice unless substantial scholarship from Columbia.

@OpsDude - casually reading your posts, it seems like you have a misguided personal vendetta towards Columbia. Apparently you were denied by Columbia Early Decision, but you're not providing any insight by providing biased comments such as "Booth is considerably better than Columbia". My closest colleague from my BB is currently at Booth and he would not even say that - they are peer schools. Booth clearly has a stronghold in finance in Chicago, but Columbia has a greater alumni base in NYC. Booth offers a peerless academic experience, but Columbia has a greater number of alumni at the PE megafunds (not that this is necessarily the ultimate differentiator). As for MBB, they are equally strong and for hedge funds, Booth has a greater presence in Chicago but Columbia places awesome in NYC (also has the Value Investing Program).

The fact is, outside of H/S/W, Columbia / Booth / Northwestern / Sloan (and Tuck/Haas) all possess competitive advantages. Stop attacking a school because they dinged you (and congrats on Kellogg but please get over being denied by CBS).

Re: the original post, I think @BGP2587 hit the nail on the head - both schools are great in their own right but you really need to specify your career goals / geographic preferences, etc.

I think you inquired which school has the better reputation internationally, and I think they are (as they are domestically) "peer schools". For what it's worth, the Financial Times places CBS over Booth, and FT rankings generally reflect the international perspective (but certainly not 100% accurate - FT has a huge bias for UK schools).

 
misterbearstin:
OpsDude:

Booth is considerably better than Columbia, plus Columbia students have much worse opinions about their school. Booth is easy choice unless substantial scholarship from Columbia.

@OpsDude - casually reading your posts, it seems like you have a misguided personal vendetta towards Columbia. Apparently you were denied by Columbia Early Decision, but you're not providing any insight by providing biased comments such as "Booth is considerably better than Columbia". My closest colleague from my BB is currently at Booth and he would not even say that - they are peer schools. Booth clearly has a stronghold in finance in Chicago, but Columbia has a greater alumni base in NYC. Booth offers a peerless academic experience, but Columbia has a greater number of alumni at the PE megafunds (not that this is necessarily the ultimate differentiator). As for MBB, they are equally strong and for hedge funds, Booth has a greater presence in Chicago but Columbia places awesome in NYC (also has the Value Investing Program).

The fact is, outside of H/S/W, Columbia / Booth / Northwestern / Sloan (and Tuck/Haas) all possess competitive advantages. Stop attacking a school because they dinged you (and congrats on Kellogg but please get over being denied by CBS).

Re: the original post, I think @BGP2587 hit the nail on the head - both schools are great in their own right but you really need to specify your career goals / geographic preferences, etc.

I think you inquired which school has the better reputation internationally, and I think they are (as they are domestically) "peer schools". For what it's worth, the Financial Times places CBS over Booth, and FT rankings generally reflect the international perspective (but certainly not 100% accurate - FT has a huge bias for UK schools).

I got rejected from Booth too, so I'm certainly not being biased against Columbia for that reason. You can look at the rankings, Booth is considerably above Columbia in every single ranking except FT (which has the least validity according to poets and quants):

http://gmatclub.com/forum/all-2014-mba-rankings-99812.html

USNews: Booth 4, Columbia 8

BusinessWeek: Booth 1, Columbia 13

Economist: Booth 1, Columbia 10

Forbes: Booth 3, Columbia 8

Likewise, Chicago has an average GMAT 10 points higher than Columbia, and higher GPA average.

Columbia certainly isn't a bad school, but it's a tier below Booth, and in addition to that, it has the least content student body. Not to mention Columbia is the most expensive school, and in the most expensive city, so total costs are more too.

Some criticism of the FT ranking: http://poetsandquants.com/2014/01/27/the-voodoo-in-the-financial-times-…

P&Q's aggregate ranking, a bit stale, but notice how they give FT the lowest weighting due to its low validity: http://poetsandquants.com/2013/12/02/poetsquants-top-100-u-s-mba-progra…

 

I would go to Columbia. But that is based entirely on personal preference. The value investing part sounds like a dream.

I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player. Or nothing. See my Blog & AMA
 
Best Response

Disclaimer: I'm a Booth student.

Rankings - Sure, in most of the polls, we have an edge vs. CBS. Does it matter? Probably not. As a student, it feels great when we get good press, but rise or drop in the polls, we get the same 2 line email from the Dean, "New [publicaton] rankings were released today. We were #x last year; we're now #y." We all have friends at other MBA business schools ">M7 and other top 15 schools. Most of us would be the first to say there is not a material difference in the quality of the schools at this level.

Recruiting - There is no appreciable difference. Any large firms that recruit at either school allow unlimited geographic flexibility. Booth produces more Chicago consultants (for instance) and CBS more NYC ones because candidates who want to work in a particular city favor local schools.

Bottom-line - Visit both. Choose based on where you feel the best connection with current/incoming students or based on which city you want to live in. I have loved my time at Booth, but you can't make an objective case for it being better with reeking of fanboyism.

If you have any specific questions, feel free to PM me to setup a time to chat.

 

Couldn't agree more. I visited both, and ended up making my decision based on where I wanted to live. Recruiting, academics, quality of classmates, brand, etc. is all very similar. You can't go wrong if you're deciding between these two. Assuming that you've already been accepted, the hard part is over. Visit both, meet as many people as possible, and don't sweat it too much. Once you make up your mind, you can get down to the important issues like finding an apartment and planning pre-orientation trips with your future classmates.

-- sm
 

CBS > Booth no question bc of Value Investing program and NYC. Some would even say CBS > Wharton for certain industries (tech in Silicon Alley/Google etc etc).

Outside of HBS and GSB, each b school offers a different edge and I can't think of a better edge than a uni in the financial capital of the world.

If you want to work in finance, CBS > Booth any day of the week.

 

Jankynoname, brj and ShouldbeStudying are the ones saying the classy, accurate stuff. OP, those are the posts you should focus on.

The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be the shepherd.
 

Hi Doc_Holiday09, I think between these two schools, what you absolutely should not be looking is ranking... Really, no difference.

What you should be looking at is, my personal opinion, the following factors: (ranked in the order of importance)

  1. location. where you want to live/find a job. Sure, you can find a job anywhere, but do not underestimate the logistics when you can easily do a school-year internship versus when you must plan ahead and fly out to do an interview. Choose a city you like with the a lot of job opportunities/things you like to explore.

  2. networking/classmates. there may or may not be any difference. So try hard to find a difference in terms of student background, diversity, experience, personality, etc. Also look up alumni database.

  3. cost. However, it's tough to make a decision based on money. How much is enough for you to choose one school over the other? It's always debatable.

  4. academics. Are there particular classes you MUST take? Any interesting exchange programs? things that you want to learn and can cross-register from other schools? I think this factor is probably the least important.

Good luck!

 
krypton:

Question to those who know about the Columbia MBA: Do their students work during the semesters since they are in NYC? Is this practical?

This is one of the best things about CBS. It is challenging on your time but very feasible to get an internship during the year. If you are trying to switch careers this is a benefit that cannot be overstated. These internships are most common in finance but I also know people working at start-ups, tech companies and fashion/retail companies. The experience is great and it doesn't hurt to be earning an extra couple thousand dollars a month given the cost of living in NYC.

 

I think about 60% of the class receives some financial aid ranging from 5-12K per year. I understand that this is on the low end compared to peer schools. I think they are also on the low end for merit based scholarships - In an interview on poets and quants Dean Hubbard expresses concern that he cannot keep up with fellowships offered my some other school, especially while so much of fundraising effort is toward the new campus.

Also of note between the Booth and CBS is their different perspectives on Asset Management. CBS the home of Value Investing and Booth of the EMH Nobel laureates. Of course their are profs and courses at both that buck the trend but if you are keen on exposure to EMH perspective Booth may be the better fit.

 

I'll put in my two cents on the topic. For full disclosure, I got accepted to both and attended both Welcome Weekends. In my opinion, Columbia has an edge, for the following reasons.

Recruiting Everyone who goes to Booth tells you that people who want Boothies come to campus to recruit. As a result, every blog regurgitates this and everyone believes that recruiting from the two is just as easy. I found that if you plan on conducting a non-structured recruiting process (PE/HF/Non-profit, etc.), then this recruiting argument collapses very very quickly. This is for primarily two reasons: Alumni and Geography (Network).

Network Especially the older Alumni (pre-Harper center) trash talk how unsocial and weak the network is. I spoke to a few pre-2000 Alumni (you know, the successful ones) and they couldn't help but pull out example after example of how they speak to no Boothies because the sense of community is weak. One guy was seeing his "best buds" from school for the first time in 12 years at a cocktail event. Apparently, they're trying to change this, but it's proving difficult. A second year also did some similar trash talking - he was only close with 20 people (out of 600!). Because of the lack of cohort, lack of learning teams, people tend to bond in clubs, and as a result, they end up with small pockets of friends totaling 20-30 people. Also, there is no time spent in Harper Center outside of class (one student goes to campus once a week), meaning the burden of building a network is on you. I will be honest, in 3 days, I got to know a total of 4 people at Booth, and I can tell you, I'm social!

You also have to look at the employment report, and be realistic about where you want to work. When I told a second year I was debating between Columbia and Booth, and wanted to work in the Northeast in PE, he whispered "Go to Columbia then". I also conducted a fairly informal survey on PE firms in the Northeast, and Columbia vs. Booth MBAs, and the former won in many many cases. The importance of this goes back to the Recruiting point - if you want a job not being marketed on campus, you need the Booth network, which unfortunately isn't there on the Northeast. To the extent you find a guy/gal at a place you'd like to work, from Booth, the responsiveness in my experience is nil - I sent dozens of emails for "coffee chats" and the Booth alumni were in many cases unresponsive, even on follow-up. I'm at a 90%+ hit rate for Columbia. Also, everyone brings out the MBB recruiting stats, but fails to bring out where these people end up working - mostly in the Mid-west! I met a few first and second years doing consulting, and guess what - they were working in Chicago!

For all the crap Columbia gets about competitiveness, I think Booth should get for lack of community. In all honesty, I don't think Columbia deserves the competitiveness comment since the Alumni I spoke with were all very open and willing to help and offer internships. Current students also seem very collaborative, do everything in clusters and know far more of their classmates "well" than at Booth.

Now, for these comments, the Boothie horde will come out and defend the school. Yes, the new class at Booth is more concerned about Network and making efforts to strengthen it, but the fact of the matter is, I need a responsive network from both successful older Alumni and Peers.

One more point on Network - ivy league undergrads. Networking is just as much about leveraging the other guy's network, and if they went to an ivy, there is a high probability they know other very successful people. Columbia's MBA program has vastly more ivy league undergrads than Booth and that's visible even when you attend admit weekend. Couple that with a more social group, and I think I've made my point.

Also, I think Columbia Business School has produced more billionaires than Booth :-)

International Presence Academics and Economists know about the University of Chicago. The local regions where Booth has a campus has helped it's international brand, but the fact of the matter is that the world is more and more international (think about where we were 20 years ago) and the brand needs to add credibility. Booth just doesn't have that and I'm not willing to bet they'll get it in the next twenty years. Each MBA graduate over the course of their careers will have to do some sort of business outside of the US, where only a select few institutions are know.

Part-time MBA This just dilutes the Chicago brand in my opinion. Columbia has an EMBA program, but they label their MBAs as such, whereas Booth part time MBAs don't usually make that distinction.

Chicago and NY It's damn cold and as a result, limits networking to the extent that you're willing to mobilize. People trash talk Columbia because it's in NY; a business school's top strength shouldn't be it's location, it should be a top school regardless of that. Deal with it - Columbia is in NY and it's staying. It's leveraging something no other school, outside of NYU, has - location and presence. It brings more impressive people to networking events due to that damn NY location.

Facilities Look, Uris Hall is horrible and there is no denying it. Harper is beautiful, but no one ever spends time there outside of class. Both of these schools are commuter schools, there's no denying that. But, Booth's rise came after a $145m donation to build the Harper Center and a $300m donation by David Booth. Columbia is wrapping up it's own fundraise and the construction of the Henry Kravis and Ron Perelman business school buildings. I'm willing to bet upon the completion of these buildings, the school will rise in rankings and general prestige...

Academia Booth has amazing professors. In finance and economics... Columbia is more diverse in its core competencies. Yes, it is a finance school. But it's Entrepreneurship program is more impressive and in the right location - silicon alley in NY (damn you NY, your location and your VC firms!). I didn't enjoy Booth's lack of focus during Admit Weekend - it had no theme, no one idea or one thought they wanted me to walk away with.

Hubbard vs. Kumar I don't want my dean to be approachable. I want him to be revered, be a great fundraiser, and be a bit pompous. I don't need to have a personal relationship with him. I need to know he will be respected by those with money. Hubbard is more of that than Kumar....

There are other points I can raise, but these are some of the major ones. I just felt the students (current, former and incoming) were sharper at Columbia than at Booth... Especially in terms of PE pedigree, where I work and will continue to work...

Feel free to take my reasons apart and trash talk!

 

It's really interesting how different communities have very different opinions. On WSO, people seem split 50/50 on Booth versus Columbia. On GMATClub/Poets&Quants the communities HEAVILY favor Booth over Columbia. I guess because this site is going to have a heavy Northeast Finance bias, whereas other communities are going to be more diverse.

 

I have no skin in the game as I didn't apply to either as I had no desire to live in NYC for b-school and wasn't interested on schools outside of the East Coast. From my experience, Booth does have a better reputation generally speaking and CBS has a fairly cutthroat reputation traditionally.

With that said, I think this is changing. More recent alumni / current students have said the culture is still competitive at CBS, but not as cutthroat anymore since they got GND a few years ago. Booth also has a fairly blase alumni / student base writ large. It really depends on what you want to do post-MBA and where you want to live / work.

For what it's worth if I had to choose between the two, personally I'd choose CBS.

 

Look, you can't go wrong with either. It's a question of fit. Surprisingly, the recruiting process is a bit representative of the student body. CBS students are more likely to network on their own time, with alumni or others. Boothies rely HEAVILY on the on campus recruiting. I'm not saying all do but for the most part, a majority of networking is facilitated by the school. If you like shopping around for a job on campus, Booth is for you. If you're up for carving your own path, Chicago is too far from NY to make frequent travel feasible and it lacks the depth for broad based networking. Even if you do network locally, you need to realize that it's for a job / personal network in the mid-west. If you're interested in east coast, it's difficult.

I think people know this going in and reflects in the student body. No offense, but Boothies are a bit "quirky". And this has been confirmed by the people who have declined it for CBS or another school... I don't expect a current boothie to tell you this on a forum, because it's a bruise to one's ego. Also, the 60% raises another interesting point of discussion (vs. 75% at columbia).

 
MezzKet:

If you're up for carving your own path, Chicago is too far from NY to make frequent travel feasible and it lacks the depth for broad based networking. Even if you do network locally, you need to realize that it's for a job / personal network in the mid-west. If you're interested in east coast, it's difficult.

My first post on this topic was pretty balanced and the bottom-line is still the same; you've got great choices and can't go wrong. Go with your gut. Now, I feel the need to address some (overly) bold statements made above.

I definitely can't top @"CompBanker"'s write-up on Booth's social scene, but confirm it is 100% accurate and pretty much par for the course for any 10-day period.

I also don't know a ton about CBS, because I don't go there. I do, however, go to Booth and might have a tad bit more information about it that @"MezzKet" as a result. While I expect Booth's geographic distribution for finance jobs (including IB, IM, PE, PWM, M&A, S&T but excluding corp fin) is less centralized on NY that CBS's, saying that "it's difficult" to get the to East Coast is preposterous.

In line with one of Booth's finer traditions, I thought I'd actually bring some data to the discussion. Below are the 3-year totals of the geographic distribution of Boothies accepting positions (full-time) in finance (categories as above, corp fin excluded): - NY only- 40% - Other East Cost (NJ, CT, MA, etc) - 10% - Midwest (mostly IL) - 16% - CA (tech mostly, some entertainment) - 15% - International (lots of Asia/LatAm, some EU) - 12% - Texas (energy) - 5% - Other - 2%

So, while about half end up on the east cost, many others (esp. tech, energy, and Intl.) end up exactly where they want to be. Also, at least in part because the career interests of Boothies have diversified in recent years (consulting, tech, entrepreneurship, and marketing are all on the rise), 95% of the 1Y bankers received internship offers during the first week of on-campus interviews.

 

Yes, some students are quirky, and that can attributed to how rigorous the course load at Booth is, but the Booth social scene is as great as any other top b-school program. Actually, many student have turned out Columbia for Booth.

Also, you discuss Booth's 62% yield rate to reflect the quality of the student body? Actually, the school with the highest yield is Wisconsin, with a 90% yield rate, this is much higher than Wharton (68%), Kellogg (55%), and Columbia's yield. Does this mean Wisconsin has a much more social and higher quality student body? Nope. If you break down Columbia's yield rate to Jan admits, early decision and 2 year, I am almost certain you will see a lower yield rate for its two-year program.

 

Pretty silly discussion. Booth and Columbia are peers; your preference will hinge upon fit, location preference, culture, etc.

In terms of finance, each school has its strengths. I think Booth and Columbia are equal in banking and S&T. Booth has an edge in quantitative finance and Asset Management while Columbia is stronger in private equity and fundamental equity research. A lot of this is rooted in the school's academic strengths as well as prominent alumni. Booth offers more courses in subjects such as derivatives, financial instruments, and macro, while CBS offers more in value investing, security research, private equity. And some of Booth's most prominent finance alumni are cliff asness and david booth, who work in quant hedge fund and index investing respectively. Meanwhile, CBS has produced Henry Kravis, one of the pioneers of PE, as well as Leon Cooperman of Omega Advisors and Mario Gabelli of GAAMCO.

 

While it's true Booth has produced outstanding quant funds, I thought I'd point out that Booth alumni have created some of the most powerful fundamental investing companies out there -- Howard Marks founded Oaktree, Peter Peterson co-founded Blackstone, William Conway co-founded Carlyle and most recently Herb Wagner (the former head of public investing at Baupost - arguably the most value oriented hedge fund out there) founded Finepoint. To be fair, to get a job at any of these spots, you probably want to be an exceptional candidate at H/S/W, or just exceptional in general, like all these guys were. From a banking perspective, I'd almost rather go to Booth: as an associate/VP, you are going to be a ball of stress sitting in a cubicle in NYC for a good % of your remaining non-retired life ... why not get a change of scenery and enjoy a lower cost of living, higher quality of life, more laid-back experience in Chicago for some perspective, if nothing more... not to mention that Booth is a magic machine pumping out career switching bankers resulting in an awesome network/cohort... That said, CBS' value investing sounds great

 

While I don't have any skin in the game on this question until I find out where I get offers, I have been considering this hypothetically. The biggest influence to me is the much larger cost of going to CBS vs. Booth. CBS is not only more expensive in terms of tuition but also cost of living. The notion of living in a shoebox sized apartment with my girlfriend and her dog is...unappealing.

However, being in NYC would be great for networking. Lot easier to network in NYC from CBS than Booth. Then again, NYC is inherently expensive and I don't know if I want to live there post-graduation vs. Chicago. Seems like the cost of a decent apartment close to work in NYC is inordinately expensive vs. Chicago.

Personally I'm stumped as to what I'd do if I was rejected from H/W and offered at CBS/Booth.

 

Visited Columbia a few months ago, and was left severely unimpressed. Especially by the enthusiasm students have towards the campus - Uris or whatever hall that was absolutely terrible.

 

Uris sucks, no doubt, but the students pick CBS for reasons that are FAR more important than the building. They may be unenthusiastic about the building but are certainly not so when it comes to the school. One of the biggest myths about CBS is that there's no sense of community.

 
snakeoil:

I've probably met people who are or have attended the Top 10 B Schools in the US...and CBS/Stern are the two schools that people are most un-enthusiastic about.

Maybe it's just NYC?

Not true. CBS people are excited about the prospect of studying at NYC and in one of the top finance programs (along with Wharton). Dunno about Stern since I didn't apply there. I see it as a Tier-2 school.

Booth is just marketing, the whole pay it forward stuff and tight community is just a cliche. Its just the same level as any other school.

Having said this, I don't know why this should matter. Just go to the program that will help you more in landing a great job. This is Harvard, Columbia/Wharton and Booth in that order. Columbia has the recruiting and networking advantage which is unique but Wharton has some pretty strong prestige although less than years before since the school has not performed as well as others. Harvard for the connections and brand, but that's not really for finance but to any industry. Apart from that not much more it will offer.

 

The NYC angle is vastly overrated. Poets&Quants had the recent article on job placement, and it shows that CBS' placement in pe, vc, hedge funds, investment management, have steadily declined and are worse than Booth's numbers.

The rise of Booth is not just marketing; it's based on smart strategic decisions made by the school. These include offering very generous merit scholarships to top students (CBS offers little money and are bunch of stingy bastards) who routinely turn down Wharton and other top programs, diversifying into tech, marketing, entrepreneurship, building up the best career services in the country, changing its culture into a more social fun place, etc.

Unless you have a lot of money, being a student in NYC absolutely blows.

 

All of the CBS students that I know love the CBS community and have said they rarely have time to see their NYC friends from before business school. Booth is less prestigious in my view as it has more of a reputation for being quant-heavy and overly academic.

 

Threads like this really challenge the conception of the MBA as a degree that confers "soft skills." Bunch of autists yelling about rankings and prestige.

To potential applicants - This is not an accurate reflection of what most MBAs are like.

To the OP - Both are great schools. I have friends who went to both places and they all did well afterwards. Ranking fetishists will tell you to go to Booth but for probably half of people Columbia is a better fit (depends on what industry/location you are recruiting for, scholarship $$$ etc). You will get a sense for this once you visit campuses and talk to people there.

 

Both great options. Leaving aside personal location preferences and other intangibles (which are probably more important for this decision than any other marginal differences b/w these schools) I would lean Booth if you want to be an investment banker or consultant. You have a lot less networking to do for exact same opportunities and grade non-disclosure (at least CBS didn't have this a few years back) is quite nice especially during first year when all the major recruiting is happening.

 

Wow, people on this thread yelling about rankings and "declines" etc really give us MBAs a bad name. Picking between Columbia and Booth is honestly splitting hairs. Honestly, picking between any school in the top ~15 when viewed through the lens of GETTING A JOB (which is supposedly what bschool is about rankings whores) is mostly about how much easier getting that job will be, not a matter of if you can get it. Let's take MBB for example. MBB recruits on campus at every single school in the top 15. At some schools they take 20% of the class. At others they take 5% of the class. However, if you're GOOD ENOUGH to get an MBB job, you can get one from any of those schools. It's far more about how good YOU are. Once you have access to the info session/networking events/OCR interviews, it's all about how good of a candidate you are, not how good your school is (see the hundreds of M7 students who gasp get rejected by MBB each year). Also very similar in IB recruiting. It varies a bit more here, but at my school (in the 10-15 range) the only BB that doesn't come on campus is MS and we send a kid or two there every year anyway. We also don't have every EB come on campus, but some do and some don't and we still have kids go to those that don't. This is largely true across the entire top 15, even outside of the precious MBA business schools ">M7. Really the only true exceptions to this rule are PE and VC, which both might not look at you if you're not at the right school, but again it's partly self-selection as the candidates they want (previous IB/PE experience) generally only go to the schools they recruit from for post-MBA roles.

TL;DR: unless you're dead set on being in Chicago or NYC post-MBA, either one of these schools will open up almost exactly the same doors and give you exactly the same opportunity to get the job you want, provided you are good enough to get that job. If you're not MBB material, you could go to the Wharton Graduate School of Business at Harvard University and you still won't get that McKinsey offer.

 

In my opinion they are both great schools but based on what I've read I think Columbia may have a slight advantage just due to proximity to allof teh major banks and many MM shops. Although if you want to be around Chicago after graduation and do banking there, Chicago would probably give you an advantage there...

 

Both are great schools, however Chicago seems to be a more Finance - Strong oriented school; just like how Kellog is for marketing etc. Of course, not taking anything away from Columbia, but something to think about. I think both schools will give you great chances in Ibanking. Chicago is perhaps more geared towards Finance in terms of academics. My two cents.

 

Both Chicago and Columbia are target schools for all the major banks and many of the boutiques.

From a pure recruiting standpoint, it makes zero difference. Your chances of getting an interview at any bank will not be impacted by whether you go to Columbia or Chicago.

And once you get into the interview room for round one, it all comes down to you.

From an educational standpoint, you'll probably have more options at Chicago if you want to really dig deep into finance. If you want real estate finance, Columbia has the edge. From a location standpoint, the "NYC advantage" may help if you're targeting NYC boutiques that don't conduct on-campus recruiting -- but for every major investment bank (or any bank that has an on-campus recruiting process), it doesn't matter whether the school is located in NYC or not. Just because a bank is a subway ride away doesn't mean you can just walk in, get through security, and become a wallflower at a bank -- the recruiting events are organized precisely for that reason -- to allow students to interact with otherwise very busy bankers (who won't appreciate having students show up in their office buildings unannounced). And most of the informal correspondence outside of the recruiting events are via email or phone anyhow -- most bankers don't have the time or won't make the time to have coffee 40 times with 40 different students to just shoot the breeze.

Alex Chu

Alex Chu www.mbaapply.com
 

Good question. Our advice would be to visit both schools, talk to students and alumni and determine which school is your best fit. We've had clients attend both and later successfully transition to corp fin, S&T and probably every other banking field.

Chicago has a great reputation even though its financial district pales in comparison to Columbia's. Additionally, every major bank that needs to recruit more than a small number of new associates will visit both schools. Hence, find the school that presents the best fit as that school will give you the best chance of meeting your full potential and, consequently, impressing the heck out of the banking recruiters.

Best of luck with your applications!

Sincerely,

David Petersam President [email protected]

AdmissionsConsultants, Inc. www.AdmissionsConsultants.com 703.242.5885

 

There definitely is a NYC advantage, which manifests itself in the following manner.

I don't know if Alex Chu has actually been through recruiting yet, but organized events are worthless ... there will be 5-10 students surrounding each banker trying to say something intelligent. The only way they're going to remember you at these events is if you do something stupid.

If you rely on these events and a couple of phone calls you had better have a much better resume than your peers if you want to make the close lists you want.

At Columbia however, you actually can traipse on down to the banks whenever you want, just plan ahead with alumns ... it's absolute BS to say that they won't make time for you, most would rather grab a coffee in the afternoon than talk on the phone, and there is no substitute for face-to-face interaction.

I know guys who did 10-20 face to face informationals at banks they really wanted and guess what, they got summer and FT offers there.

Additionally, more small PE/VC/Advisory shops = more opportunities to work part-time while in school ... it's not going to get you the job, but as a career switcher it can help get you on close lists and give you relevant stuff to talk about in informationals and real interviews.

Finally, you'll have more exposure to banks outside of the BB that don't have offices in Chicago. It's always good to have options and back-ups.

Don't get me wrong GSB is a great school, and they're probably closer to the cutting edge of financial theory, but unless you're getting a PhD that doesn't matter.

At the end of the day banks probably hire close to the same number of students from each school due to the way that recruiting is run from school teams. However, the advantage of Columbia is that it gives you more opportunities to hustle and set yourself apart from your classmates, which is very important for a career switcher.

 

MAdude, it sounds like you go to Columbia.

Anyhow, my main point (even though it was perhaps originally conveyed in a hyperbolic fashion) is that the "NYC advantage" catchphrase overstates the benefit especially when compared to schools of equal or greater renown like Chicago, HBS, Wharton or Stanford. when it comes to finance recruiting.

For plain vanilla investment banking, it really doesn't matter which top school you go to, as long as the school is on the banks' target lists. And for specific jobs in private equity, hedge funds, venture capital, investment management, etc. it's more a function of your prior experience and the alumni networks of the various b-schools -- not whether the b-school is within subway distance (only difference is that aside from Stanford, going to the other schools just involves a more expensive but short trip into NYC).

Don't get me wrong - Columbia is a great school, but the "NYC advantage" is often overstated (exhibit: Stern). It's primary strength in placing grads in finance isn't due to its location, but like Chicago, Wharton, or HBS it's due to its reputation and alumni base who are in these very industries.

The main point is: it doesn't matter because it's all roughly the same. Chicago will likely give you a better academic education in finance, whereas Columbia makes it cheaper and easier to contact recruiters. But neither is so significant that it makes one school better than the other for the practical process of finding a good job in finance (whether it's IB or something else).

Alex Chu

Alex Chu www.mbaapply.com
 

First, full disclosure: I'm affiliated with Columbia. Having said that, MAdude is absolutely correct. There is certainly a significant advantage to being in NY, especially in this difficult job market. It is impossible to overstate the importance of networking in today's recruiting process. Of course, Alex is right that the alunni base is key. Columbia gives you a greater opportunity to take advantage of that network.

Alex: the NY advantage is exactly the reason why Stern IS a better school for banking relative to its academic peers (e.g. schools ranked 10-15 or so).

Author of www.IBankingFAQ.com
 

patek, the handful of chicago grads that i've worked with over the years do support that stereotype. however, i'm not knowledgable enough about chicago's social life to really compare. the best advice is to visit both schools and get your own feel for the people. what i will say is that any of these b-schools are large enough that you are going to find plenty of people that are social and plenty of people that are not. i will say that one disadvantage of columbia (from a social standpoint) is that a pretty high percentage of students were already in new york prior to business school, don't live close to campus and already have their groups of friends outside of school. therefore they tend to do less socially with other students. far and away, imo, the most social groups at columbia were the international students.

please feel free to PM me if you want more insight.

Author of www.IBankingFAQ.com
 

In the interest of full disclosure, I was accepted to both programs and attended CBS specifically because I was a career switcher and wanted the added benefits of the location.

Ex-banker couldn't be more correct regarding Stern: they place very well in banking considering the overall rank of their school, in part because of the NYC location.

Every once in a while you'll also run into someone from Fordham, Baruch, and Hunter running around banks.

Honestly I think both schools are large enough that you're not going to have a problem finding social/outgoing people ... agree that a lot people at CBS already have groups of friends in NYC, but plenty that don't too.

One area of clear superiority for GSB is facilities. CBS is based out of an old building and is way too crowded. I didn't think it would matter and the priority was getting into banking over comfort, but it can be really annoying when there is no place to sit at lunch or you can't find an outlet for your computer cord.

 

I like the sound of New York, but I always wonder about one thing; would someone who wanted a job in plain vanilla investment banking be better off at a reputed bschool where students are more likely to go after other jobs (eg. Tuck, and Kellogg for consulting and marketing)? Basically, do the banks hire so many associates from Chicago, CBS etc. that the fact that everyone else is after the same gig doesn't really make a difference?

 

There should be one substantial factor that adds to the number of rain makers in NYC.

Premise 1- Bankers have been living in NYC for generations.
Premise 2- A lot of bankers' want their kids to become bankers.
Premise 3- Their kids (most) go to a school in NYC but not elsewhere because they cant let go of their social life or whatever.

Premise 4 -These kids get into banking (through their family connection or whatever).

Conclusion: The substantial part of NYC banking pool is retained in NYC not elsewhere.

 

They're roughly equal in terms of prestige and reputation. They should offer roughly equal job opportunities, with Columbia having the slight edge in terms of IB/PE/S&T because of it's location.

Do you have a lot more financial aid/scholarship money from one of the two schools? Do you know some people attending either programme? Do you prefer to live in New York or Chicago?

If you've never lived in Chicago, but have already worked in NYC, then maybe Chicago is a good choice. It gives you a chance to expand your network in a different region, gives you a change of pace, and is a more livable city. It's slightly cheaper to live there, there are great food and entertainment venues, and you're right on Lake Michigan, so you can go sailing on the weekends.

Even better, when you sail past the poorer areas of the city, you can laugh at the impoverished whilst at a safe distance over water (a nearly impenetrable barrier to those who grew up without access to swimming pools).

 

I've been to a couple "invite-only" events for Booth & really enjoy the professors I've meet and people. Both programs are fantastic & I honestly think when added all up you won't gain an advantage of one over the other in the long run. They're both in cities with tons of finance opportunities and MBB loves taking people from both. Lugi Zingales at Booth teach's one of the best courses in the US on private equity and venture capital & was one of the first classical economists to publish academic work on both fields.

Also Columbia is in lower Manhattan, surrounded by the best bars and restaurants in the world; and Booth is in the south side of Chicago which completely surrounded by some of the gnarliest gang bangers in the US. I had a friend from hs go to ug there and was mugged 4 times and stabbed once. He told me later that U Chicago is where the smartest kids in America go to get murdered academically and physically.

Ace all your PE interview questions with the WSO Private Equity Prep Pack: http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/guide/private-equity-interview-prep-questions
 

Dude, Columbia is in Morningside Heights on the far Upper Westside of Manhattan, not exactly downtown. I lived there for four years, I can tell you it is not tough to get downtown, but downtown you are not.

 

first of all columbia is in uptown manhattan, in morningside heights, which is not a great neighborhood. it's pretty safe though, as crime is no longer a major issue in manhattan that it once was (thanks to conservative policies by Rudy). And it's pretty easy to take the train to downtown manhattan where most of the cool bars and restaurants are. CBS students go out a lot, there is an active social scene, and virtually everyone i've met who went there absolutely loved it.

Uchicago is in hyde park, a miserable neighborhood. Dangerous and just downright depressing. However, you could live in a nice area like the downtown neighborhoods and commute. Only like a 15 minute train ride from the downtown station to hyde park.

Academically, uchicago is stronger in finance but both are pretty comparable. If you really want to work in NYC go with columbia. I think for consulting columbia has better recruitment numbers.

 

1) LOL at whomever said Columbia is in a nice area of Manhattan..... it's by the ghetto foolz

2) U Chicago is in the ghetto too, but fuck it, you are going to be living in downtown Chicago and commuting to class just like the other students . 3) Ranking-wise, they are separated by 2-3 spots with Chicago being higher (per US News) so prestige-wise they are even, slight edge to Chicago

4) At any MBA program you are going to learn the fundamentals of financial theory- time value of money, discount rates, DCFs, FCFs, CAPM, how mergers are structured, maybe a little portfolio optimization(maybe). Unfortunately, most MBA programs don't go much further than that. You know what I say? Fuck that! People learn that stuff in undergrad these days. Go where you are actually going to learn something new, and learn it in-depth, which leads to my next point:

5) Chicago is a big time finance school, if you want to be taught by some of the best finance professors out there, paralleled only by Wharton and MIT, go to Chicago. Also, keep in mind that Chicago is the university where a LOT of the seminal and groundbreaking research on financial and econometric theory took place (Eugene Fama, Merton Miller, Milton Friedman, Fischer Black, Myron Scholes). Fama still works for U Chicago, but I don't know if he is still teaching... Basically, the professors in the economics/finance department there are fucking smart. For me, that's very exciting and would have me sold on the university right away. You will be very prepared for a job in finance after a U Chicago MBA, and recruiters will recognize that.

5) Yes, Columbia is in NYC, which makes it better for east coast recruiting, but plenty of U Chicago grads also get offers in NYC (look at the employment report). Also, Chicago is a very cool place to live. Personally, I would prefer living in Chicago to NYC b/c it has a friendlier atmosphere than NYC and plenty of culture/entertainment to offer. But I am from the area so I am likely rather biased....Of course, for working in finance, NYC is the place to be- so maybe you can do both- spend two years studying at U Chicago and then work in NYC afterwards.

6) Also, I happen to think that Columbia grads are tumbling tumbling dickweeds

 
Affirmative_Action_Walrus:
1) LOL at whomever said Columbia is in a nice area of Manhattan..... it's by the ghetto foolz

2) U Chicago is in the ghetto too, but fuck it, you are going to be living in downtown Chicago and commuting to class just like the other students . 3) Ranking-wise, they are separated by 2-3 spots with Chicago being higher (per US News) so prestige-wise they are even, slight edge to Chicago

4) At any MBA program you are going to learn the fundamentals of financial theory- time value of money, discount rates, DCFs, FCFs, CAPM, how mergers are structured, maybe a little portfolio optimization(maybe). Unfortunately, most MBA programs don't go much further than that. You know what I say? Fuck that! People learn that stuff in undergrad these days. Go where you are actually going to learn something new, and learn it in-depth, which leads to my next point:

5) Chicago is a big time finance school, if you want to be taught by some of the best finance professors out there, paralleled only by Wharton and MIT, go to Chicago. Also, keep in mind that Chicago is the university where a LOT of the seminal and groundbreaking research on financial and econometric theory took place (Eugene Fama, Merton Miller, Milton Friedman, Fischer Black, Myron Scholes). Fama still works for U Chicago, but I don't know if he is still teaching... Basically, the professors in the economics/finance department there are fucking smart. For me, that's very exciting and would have me sold on the university right away. You will be very prepared for a job in finance after a U Chicago MBA, and recruiters will recognize that.

5) Yes, Columbia is in NYC, which makes it better for east coast recruiting, but plenty of U Chicago grads also get offers in NYC (look at the employment report). Also, Chicago is a very cool place to live. Personally, I would prefer living in Chicago to NYC b/c it has a friendlier atmosphere than NYC and plenty of culture/entertainment to offer. But I am from the area so I am likely rather biased....Of course, for working in finance, NYC is the place to be- so maybe you can do both- spend two years studying at U Chicago and then work in NYC afterwards.

6) Also, I happen to think that Columbia grads are tumbling tumbling dickweeds

As a city, Chicago is definitely more livable and cheaper than NYC. People are much less pretentious and don't care as much about your pedigree and which firm you work for. Having said that, I've been living in Chicago for about 5 years and have sort of gotten tired of it. Definitely want to try out NYC next.

 

Thanks everyone. It sounds like CBS is the school for me. My spouse and I want to live and work in NYC, and CBS allows her to start her career instead of a 2 year job. Chicago sounds great, but I didn't learn that stuff in undergrad as an engineering major, and I don't really have the desire to learn that most in-depth parts of finance and economics. I would rather learn what I need to know to be a good banker, successful business person, and live in the same city that I want to intern in so I don't have to rent a 2nd apartment in the summertime in NYC. Plus, Columbia sounds like its more fun.

 
Killer_Queen:
Thanks everyone. It sounds like CBS is the school for me. My spouse and I want to live and work in NYC, and CBS allows her to start her career instead of a 2 year job. Chicago sounds great, but I didn't learn that stuff in undergrad as an engineering major, and I don't really have the desire to learn that most in-depth parts of finance and economics. I would rather learn what I need to know to be a good banker, successful business person, and live in the same city that I want to intern in so I don't have to rent a 2nd apartment in the summertime in NYC. Plus, Columbia sounds like its more fun.

Great choice. Columbia is definitely more fun than uchicago; the school is a total blast. And despite its costs, NYC is superior to Chicago as a city.

 

Chicago B-School Location is awesome I know UChicago main campus is in south chicago near/in hyde park. But when I last lived in chicago I remember seeing a beautiful building right next to the chicago river, just north of the loop (downtown for non-chi people). The building location couldn't have been better- between the parties at gold coast and the business hqs of the loop. The building said "University of Chicago Graduate School of Business" so I don't know.

 
ReadLine:
Chicago B-School Location is awesome I know UChicago main campus is in south chicago near/in hyde park. But when I last lived in chicago I remember seeing a beautiful building right next to the chicago river, just north of the loop (downtown for non-chi people). The building location couldn't have been better- between the parties at gold coast and the business hqs of the loop. The building said "University of Chicago Graduate School of Business" so I don't know.

The building you're referring to is the Gleacher Center, which services the part time MBA program and the executive program. The regular full-time MBA students take all their courses at the hyde park campus.

 

from your previous posts killer_queen clearly you had unconsciously already made up your mind and just wanted some opposing views to reject (which included my own). im guilty of doing this from time to time too however so no bones! lol.

jjc1122, youre right it is the Gleacher center, but many full time students (particularly the ones who live downtown) take classes and study there w/ the part time students for the convenience and expansion of their network. i thought of it as another bonus of the school.

anyhow, good luck to you and your wife in new york killer_gueen. columbia is a great school. congrats.

 
 You are asking what the school is going to do for you. This is a close tie, so you have to look at it from a different angle. A better question goes a longer way: What can you do to the school that will set you apart?   

It is a close tie, so your question should be more precise, because only "Strong Reasons Make Strong Actions".
What do you want to do after school will determine the big part of question. I would request more info from each school and require them to connect you with a person who could show you how a student like me/you can get into IB in Central Asia natural resources group in my case.

It is quite a phenomena how people just assume that you will succeed in the school of their choice just because you got into a school. I am not saying that you are going to struggle big time but ask yourself is there anything that can screw up my focus in recruiting, because that is the more important part. I remember Warren Buffet was the only student to get an A in the <span class="keyword_link"><a href="http://tinyurl.com/3nunsmz" target="_blank">Security Analysis</a></span> class back in 19something. So do you know what professor you are gonna take?    
 

Booth (Chicago) is more laid back, lots of people from Midwest, probably best finance program in the world as far as theory goes - more academic than other b schools. Columbia more hip crowd, you are in NYC, very solid program with a particular strength in value investing. Both are great but Chicago is better regarded and is easier to recruit from.

 
ILOVENYGUY:
Booth (Chicago) is more laid back, lots of people from Midwest, probably best finance program in the world as far as theory goes - more academic than other b schools. Columbia more hip crowd, you are in NYC, very solid program with a particular strength in value investing. Both are great but Chicago is better regarded and is easier to recruit from.

From what I've observed, columbia gets a lot more east coast ivy league folks while booth has tons of midwestern big 10 alums. So that will probably make a difference culturally and socially, but both schools are awesome for finance. in banking they're about equal while booth has an edge for hedge funds.

 

I'm currently an energy analyst at a BB. Obviously, this places me in Houston. Love the city and have a lot of connections here. I've done some limited analysis with associates in my firm from Chicago and the alumni who've interviewed me for Chicago/Columbia. It appears the energy network from Chicago is slightly stronger than from Columbia. If anyone can confirm this please let me know.

I am considering UT, but this is whether they offer me a substantial scholarship. Thanks all for your opinions.

 

I chose Columbia over Booth, but I want to do Banking in NYC, so different goals. One thing I would say is don't let prestige/ranking make your decision. They are essentially the same. Go where you fit and you think you will enjoy the experience more. I just hated Hyde Park, and Chicago (the city) in general when I visited. What ultimately made my decision was the fact that I am not the academic type. Booth made the point that recruiters understood because of your location you don't have to attend every little on-site networking event, and that they did on-campus recruiting mostly. One thing I have learned is that its the little things you do to get remembered by important people that get you where you are in life. I am a hustler who likes meeting MDs for coffee. I don't care about getting a PhD level education in finance. If you want to be a quant trader for Citadel, then Booth is probably the better choice. If you want to be a plain vanilla banker in NYC, Columbia may make that easier (but still just as achievable from Booth). Probably equal recognition form both schools in Texas. Overseas, Columbia is more widely recognized. The biggest thing that made my decision though is something I think get very underrated--the adjunct professors at Columbia. Yeah, there are a bunch of Nobel Laureate academics at Booth, who probably care about research more than teaching. That's great to be able to say you studied under them. But for me, I want to learn about an industry from someone who spent 20 years working and hustling like I want to. I want to work in M&A. It just so happens Jonathan Knee, author of the Accidental Investment Banker and alumni of GS, MS, and currently Senior Managing Director at Evercore teaches a course in Media M&A. It's being able to learn from current day practitioners that made my decision on top of location and lifestyle.

 

Forget about UT. It's a good school and scholarship money is nice... but I don't think you want to pass up on Booth / Columbia to go to UT --- especially since you're a finance guy so making the money to pay for school isn't (probably isn't) going to be a major issue for you.

In my mind, it really comes down to whether you prefer Chicago or New York... and what kind of people you get along best with. Having been in Houston I'm guessing that might be Chicago, though that's just based off generalization.

I think you should be SURE to make a visit to both schools and give each one a real 48 hours of your full attention. The choice will likely become clear for you. The above poster is certainly right that you don't wanna let the prestige of one vs. the other decide for you as they're both basically the same.

 
International Pymp:
Forget about UT. It's a good school and scholarship money is nice... but I don't think you want to pass up on Booth / Columbia to go to UT --- especially since you're a finance guy so making the money to pay for school isn't (probably isn't) going to be a major issue for you.

In my mind, it really comes down to whether you prefer Chicago or New York... and what kind of people you get along best with. Having been in Houston I'm guessing that might be Chicago, though that's just based off generalization.

I think you should be SURE to make a visit to both schools and give each one a real 48 hours of your full attention. The choice will likely become clear for you. The above poster is certainly right that you don't wanna let the prestige of one vs. the other decide for you as they're both basically the same.

I agree that UT isn't really on par with Booth/CBS. That said, I know a couple people in my group who passed up this tier of schools to go to UT full ride (but this is several years ago). I guess it depends on how much emphasis one places on loans etc. I personally agree with your opinion that either of those schools are better in the long run than UT.

 

^I also agree that it depends on your financial situation, etc... but I'd say if you are under 30, not married, no kids and planning on working in IBD afterwords.... the debt burden shouldn't bother you if you are going to columbia/booth as you'll pay it off very quickly with an IBD salary. Your employment prospects are pretty rosy coming out of those schools.

 

Mossy,

I would say it doesn't matter. Booth and CBS will both get you exactly the same sell-side BB job. I think it depends what you want for an experience. I care more about networking, partying, and getting coffee with MDs and VPs I know at banks in NYC. If you care more about becoming an expert in finance from studying under Nobel laureates, and depending solely on on campus recruiting rather than informal meeting with bankers in your spare time, than Booth is your best bet. I personally think CBS is more fun and better structured for career switchers with a desired end state in NYC, but that is just me.

Bottom line: go where you fit and will enjoy yourself

 
jc100021:
Mossy,

I would say it doesn't matter. Booth and CBS will both get you exactly the same sell-side BB job. I think it depends what you want for an experience. I care more about networking, partying, and getting coffee with MDs and VPs I know at banks in NYC. If you care more about becoming an expert in finance from studying under Nobel laureates, and depending solely on on campus recruiting rather than informal meeting with bankers in your spare time, than Booth is your best bet. I personally think CBS is more fun and better structured for career switchers with a desired end state in NYC, but that is just me.

Bottom line: go where you fit and will enjoy yourself

Don't think you can say that columbia is more "fun" than booth. I know the stereotype is that booth kids are quant nerds who don't party, but that's nowhere close to the truth. The booth people go out a lot, and Chicago is an amazing city. On a student budget, it's much better to live in Chicago as opposed to NYC. You can get a sweet apartment in downtown for like $1200/month while as a columbia student you'll be living in an awful dingy apartment in morningside heights or upper west side.

When it comes to finance recruiting, booth is second only to the likes of HBS and Wharton. Amazing school.

 

Okay, I don't want this to be a shouting match on who is a better school. I guess I touched a nerve for a few people. Let me clarify: after visiting both schools, Columbia seems like more fun FOR ME--I can say that because that was my impression. IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, not a declaration of fact, I think NYC is a way better place better than Chicago, and the added cost is worth it for me (espcially since my spouse will be bringing in an income). I hated Chicago. Also, in my particular situation, it is better for my wife's career so she can start her career in NYC rather than work for 2 years in Chi-town and move again. I was wrong to say you would be depending solely on on-campus recruiting at Booth. That was wrong. I will Say though it is a lot easier to have informal meetups with people in NYC if you already live in NYC, and want to end up in NYC for your job. That, at the end of the day, can make a big difference.

I think Booth is an amazing MBA program--but so is CBS, and I think that any full-time MBA experience in the top 10 will be enjoyable and have the right crowd for you to find your clique of friends. Columbia just matched up with me more and I chose it because I liked it more.

The main thesis of my argument is that both schools have a lot to offer, are on the same tier of MBA rankings, and you should go where you fit and what will make you happier. I struggled turning down Booth because of the rankings, but the fact is you will not have any branding advantage coming from one school or the other.

I have a lot of potential banking contacts in NYC through my undergrad alumni network, and the fact I can shoot one of them an email and grab coffee that same day to talk about summer internships is priceless.

Booth fans on here really tout recruiting, but if you analyze the employment reports for both schools, they are pretty much the same.

Booth does not have complete statistics for 2010 yet, so here is a side-by-side comparison for 2009:

http://www.chicagobooth.edu/employmentreport/docs/2008-2009%20Employmen… https://www4.gsb.columbia.edu/null?&exclusive=filemgr.download&file_id=…

Columbia Job Offers 3 months after graduation: 85.3% Booth Job Offers 3 months after graduation: 85.4%

% of Booth class going into finance: 48.4% % of CBS class going into finance: 48%

The major employers list, and # of hires for each are pretty much the same for both schools (though I did notice 8 Columbia guys went to Goldman Sachs, while they are not even listed on the Booth report.

Conclusion: two great schools, same great outcome--go where you think you fit and will be happy. Either way you will turn down a great school and accept an offer from a great school.

 

No, I stayed the the ritzy area at a really nice hotel and went to some nice resturaunts/bars. I just felt like it was missing something. I can't put my finger on it. Hate may be a strong word, but I didn't feel happy there. The whole time I was thinking "NYC is way better than this."

Hey, I am sure there are people out there who like Chicago more--and that is great, but I am a NYC kinda guy and think its worth the rent.

 

I think this is an interesting discussion mainly because you are basically comparing a top business school with a top ten business school. I am biased, I go to Booth. That said, I also did my undergrad at Columbia. Between the two, the reputation of Booth has opened more doors for me than Columbia. I am a pretty loyal undergraduate alum of Columbia, and I will likely send my alum money there if I ever make any. But that said, this is like comparing apples and oranges. Booth arguably the top finance program in the world, maybe one other school can claim a challenge; while Columbia is simply put just another business school that happens to be located in NYC. If you were to have NYU Stern and CBS fight it out, that is an interesting argument. Both have about equal rep on the street, but the advantage likely goes to CBS. I honestly love Columbia and Morningside Heights, but I did not even consider applying to the business school, because it is simply not on the same level as the top five or even really in striking distance of the top finance programs.

I have a bunch of buddies who go to CBS, and I wish them all well. But most of the guys who ended up there made the choice based on location or lack of better admit options. If a slice of pizza is the metric by which you grade your school, Koronet's is a great slice and the Pizza in Chicago really does suck, I will admit that. But if you are choosing a b-school based on your desire to start a banking career, this is a no brainer. Really wish I could pull for Columbia on this one, but it is not really an argument, Booth takes this by several miles.

 

The pizza in chicago sucks?!??!?! who are you?!?!

I have mad respect for the Pizza in NYC... mad respect. That said, the pizza in Chicago is also THE CHRONIC!

Try going to Giordanno's (deep), Edwardo's (deep), Gino's East(deep), Carpi (thin) or Bricks (thin)... and tell me that's bad pizza!

 

Admittedly, I'm no expert on this but wouldn't the preponderance of the 'difference' between the 2 schools really come down to geography more so than the marginal difference in rank? Particularly in light of the fact that people constantly tell you that its not necessarily what you learn in BSchool but rather the connections, network, etc. Please feel to correct me if I'm wrong on this one.

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford
 

If you like thin slice (i hate deep dish) and you are in Chicago try out Cafe Luiges (i'm butchering the spelling of that). No one speaks english so it's pretty frustrating when you order delivery from there but it is dank as shit, located in Lincoln Park so i feel obligated to tip the shit outta the guy. Sorry i have nothing to contribute on the b-school front but thought i'd offer up my 2 cents on pizza.

 

B school bound. You seem like.a nice guy, and respect your opinion, but just because you went to Colukbia undergrad don't mean you are an authority on the business school. I am currently in the hospital recovering from surgery so forgive poor grammar. Columbia is just as good.es booth for recruiting. Look at the reports.

 
jc100021:
B school bound. You seem like.a nice guy, and respect your opinion, but just because you went to Colukbia undergrad don't mean you are an authority on the business school. I am currently in the hospital recovering from surgery so forgive poor grammar. Columbia is just as good.es booth for recruiting. Look at the reports.

Thats some dedication to WSO dude...

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford
 

B-school Bound, sitting here and thinking about your comment that Booth is a no-brainer for banking makes no sense after the at length discussion on this board. CBS is not just another business school. It is unique in many ways and is ranked the same as Booth in terms of prestige for investment banking recruiting. Stop trying to sell people the idea that it is leaps and bounds over CBS. You chose Booth over HBS because you wanted a technical education and they offered you a scholarship. It would make no sense for you to go to Columbia for an MBA because you got your undergrad there. I didn't, as many others haven't. I went to a service academy. I want to work in NYC. The recruiting at both schools are equal. You seem to ignore this despite the very clear statistics, and countless people who are bankers that even give CBS an edge over Booth for select NY boutique.

 

You also might want to check out some of Booth's criticisms from graduates on Businessweek's ranking profile. Many people felt they did not fit there and did not enjoy the experience. CBS had criticisms as well stating an overabundance of alchohol-laden networking events and an un-challenging core curriculum, as well an an over-emphasis on banking. Ironically, these are all things I like about the school. I can't stress enough how great I think Booth is, but it isn't for everyone, and despite being accepted there I felt CBS was a better fit and would provide an equal, if not better path to NYC i-banking (and the numbers prove this). Telling people on this board that it is a no-brainer as if Booth is a golden ticket above all others is doing them a disservice and is untrue. I want to do Media M&A, and Jonathan Knee (author of Accidental Investment Banker and SMD at Evercore) teaches 2 courses on the subject at CBS. There are a multitude adjunct professors who are current day practitioners, and to me this is another reason why CBS wins for me. It is also the best school for value investing; and though that is somewhat unrelated to banking, I want to learn how to invest for my own satisfaction. These are iust a few examples why I like CBS more. That brings me to one other point; I can study more if I want to; the single most important factor in one's learning experience is the individual's work ethic. I don't need to study under Eugene Fama to learn Efficient Market Theory; that is what books are for. I can learn a great deal by reading Basic & Applied Economics by Thomas Sowell, and Stanford University professor who I admire greatly.

 

I saw that report and wonder if its adjusted for class sizes and % of people who recruit into a program. Columbia accepts more people than Booth and sends a higher % into banking so naturally you would assume they'd send more individuals into IB. NYU has a smaller class than Booth and Columbia, but sends the highest % by far of any school into banking.

I wonder if there is a way to adjust for programs that are different sizes and send different % of their class, naturally, into banking...

 

I think the overall point to be made is that BSB's comment about the decision being a no-brainer is false. I guess I am silly to care, but I was slightly offended as if he claimed my school is inferior to his. It may have a better finance academic program, but on the big picture level they are equals because there is more to an MBA program than academics (most would argue it has very little to do with academics). It is actually harder to get into Columbia's regular decision round than Booth in the 1st or 2nd round. Also, if you poll most people on what their 4th choice of school would be after H/S/W, most on here tend to say Columbia (I am going off of anecdotal evidence). You can say they choose the school out of convenience and not quality of academics, but that still makes much more people want to go there and that much harder to get into. I should also mention that Columbia has a much larger military network, and since getting accepted have already reached out to and met with dozens of grads from all of the BBs and top boutiques, and already have my first 10 informational/informal meetings with Columbia and Military guys when I get in town to help chart my approach for summer internships.

Okay, I am done posting on this subject, I am starting to annoy even myself.

 

I am trying to help the OP and people in a similar position to the OP realize they should consider all factors. But since this is falling on deaf ears I give up and don't really care. I got in to Booth and turned it down and gave clear reasons why to help others consider the same factors. I am up at the wee hours typing this because I am recovering from surgery and in some serious pain.

Look at the kitty and forget I said anything.

 

Hey jc100021, relax, I am not trying to put down Columbia, I think it is a great school and as I said I really love that University. I just don't think that its b-school is on the same level as the places it likes to think of as its peers. This is just one man's opinion. At some point we very likely could be working on the same floor if your career aspirations take you where you want them to (mine already have). Happy to buy you a beer if that day ever comes. Best of luck as you start your program.

 

Goddamn. This shit is ridiculous. Look, here's what it comes down to, the difference between the two places in negligible. If you want to work in NYC why the fuck wouldn't you go to Columbia. If you like Chicago, go to Booth. To argue the merits of one school over another is silly in someways. I get that there are differences (Booth is more academic and Columbia is more centered around the Wall Street set) but the reality is, you can't make blanket statements like 'this is a no brainer' because it isn't. There are VERY few things in life that are no brainers. HBS v. Phoenix online? Yes, THAT is a no brainer. This is not. Make the choice that works best for your goals and your family. Don't try to foist your views on the topic onto other people and tell them that their choice in graduate school is stupid and a no brainer. That makes you a cunt.

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford
 
happypantsmcgee:
Goddamn. This shit is ridiculous. Look, here's what it comes down to, the difference between the two places in negligible. If you want to work in NYC why the fuck wouldn't you go to Columbia. If you like Chicago, go to Booth. To argue the merits of one school over another is silly in someways. I get that there are differences (Booth is more academic and Columbia is more centered around the Wall Street set) but the reality is, you can't make blanket statements like 'this is a no brainer' because it isn't. There are VERY few things in life that are no brainers. HBS v. Phoenix online? Yes, THAT is a no brainer. This is not. Make the choice that works best for your goals and your family. Don't try to foist your views on the topic onto other people and tell them that their choice in graduate school is stupid and a no brainer. That makes you a cunt.

This might be a record for most words Happy has ever used in a post.

looking for that pick-me-up to power through an all-nighter?
 

B-School Bound is a nice guy, I've chatted with him in the past, and he actually knows my real identity. I think this whole thing has gotten out of hand. I would definitely like to take any of you guys for a beer sometime so we can talk war stories (all 3 of us are military, in case we didn't all know).

BSB later mentioned "this is one man's opinion." That is fine, but if you are going to make those kinds of statements you should emphasize it is opinion up front, because the whole point I was trying to make in this thread is that a decision like this should be made based off many factors, not the Businessweek ranking.

I posted a similar thread when trying to make this decision last year, and if everyone had told me Booth hands down because of a ranking, I may have made a poor decision; luckily I spoke with enough MDs and guys in industry to realize both schools would get me where I wanted with equal probability, and now life will be a lot easier since I chose the school I fit with more.

Let's all get along and stop talking about top 5 vs. top 10 because as the numbers show, the schools have the same outcomes in both Banking and Consulting.

 
jc100021:
B-School Bound is a nice guy, I've chatted with him in the past, and he actually knows my real identity. I think this whole thing has gotten out of hand. I would definitely like to take any of you guys for a beer sometime so we can talk war stories (all 3 of us are military, in case we didn't all know).

BSB later mentioned "this is one man's opinion." That is fine, but if you are going to make those kinds of statements you should emphasize it is opinion up front, because the whole point I was trying to make in this thread is that a decision like this should be made based off many factors, not the Businessweek ranking.

I posted a similar thread when trying to make this decision last year, and if everyone had told me Booth hands down because of a ranking, I may have made a poor decision; luckily I spoke with enough MDs and guys in industry to realize both schools would get me where I wanted with equal probability, and now life will be a lot easier since I chose the school I fit with more.

Let's all get along and stop talking about top 5 vs. top 10 because as the numbers show, the schools have the same outcomes in both Banking and Consulting.

You sound very satisfied with your decision, which is good to see, happy for you. To be honest, I'd also take Columbia over Booth.

May I ask what your career goals are?

 

Since we pretty much ended the debate of schools I motion that we move the conversation strictly for pizza.

I think Deep Dish pizza is great. The problem--it isn't pizza. It is a bunch of meat, cheese, and sauce in a bread bowl made of pizza dough.

NYC pizza is superior because you can get it pretty much every other block, its awesome, and you can get a slice to go and eat while you walk.

 

I've lived in Chicago for 12 years, and when I've had a craving for pizza, it's always been for thin crust and never deep dish. Deep dish pizza is good, but I don't really consider it to be "pizza" -- it's a different category entirely, probably closer to lasagna than to traditional pizza.

What's truly an abomination is the variety of thin crust that places like Giordano's or Gino's East serve. They put the toppings underneath the cheese (what's the point of getting pepperoni if it isn't browned and a little crispy) and default to a rectangular cut instead of a pie cut.

 

I have to dig up my thread since I'm still a little stressed about choosing between these schools, and the deposit deadline is coming up (next week). I visited both schools and came out impressed. I believe the student body at both are superb, Columbia being more NY centric, and Chicago definitely has its fair share of NE folk. The only clear difference is that the facilities at Chicago are out of this world. I feel like, though, for Houston that Chicago has a stronger alumni connection there, but correct me if I am wrong.

To complicate matters, I received a small fellowship from CBS and when I asked Booth what the possibility of receiving one is, and I don't believe I will. However, the fellowship amount will be cancelled out by the higher cost of living in the city. That being said I'm not considering money because that is a short term issue. As for UT, the school offered me a decent scholarship but I'm already writing it off because of the more powerful brands of CBS/Booth.

 

Dude you've gotten as much out of people here as you're going to get. The house is clearly divided but luckily you cannot go wrong with either. Just sack up and pick one. The pros and cons are above. Godspeed.

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford
 

Ea dolorem vel quia ullam vel. Animi voluptatem repudiandae expedita ipsa quae expedita.

Sed blanditiis inventore qui exercitationem asperiores cumque est. Nemo magni occaecati pariatur harum praesentium enim corporis totam. Aliquid est minus voluptas nam minima ex. Autem sint dolorum ut est exercitationem.

Rem et sit tempora et eius. Et praesentium dolorum veritatis nesciunt voluptatem ea. Harum temporibus quia rerum aspernatur quas tenetur. Blanditiis unde dolor veritatis doloribus recusandae.

Quis et alias hic dolorem doloremque voluptas aliquam quia. Ipsum ea nostrum tempore voluptatem eius eligendi esse. Fuga inventore rem voluptatem veritatis eligendi et temporibus saepe.

 

Vel placeat libero quos molestias necessitatibus voluptas fugit illum. Eveniet aperiam earum eos numquam facere qui minima. Qui doloribus eos consequatur aut. Ut dolorem et repellat dolorum.

Voluptatem et quam laudantium maxime aliquam et adipisci. Fugit iure omnis velit et adipisci quas unde libero. Temporibus culpa ad aliquid odit aut rem. Odio autem eum ut et enim. Harum consequatur repellendus assumenda autem aliquam. Rerum repellat maxime velit placeat consectetur.

Architecto animi illum velit dolor. Modi sunt sit sed esse reprehenderit ex.

Qui qui pariatur et sit aliquid dolorum. Qui tenetur sunt velit libero perferendis optio nulla enim. Dicta maxime a minus quia modi. Aut ut facilis voluptas. Omnis eum quam tempora assumenda sit culpa qui atque. Quibusdam esse aspernatur quia necessitatibus at voluptates ratione. Rerum quas unde ut mollitia placeat.

 

Est magni sed vitae delectus. Aperiam esse harum unde earum ea minima consectetur dolor. Beatae corrupti impedit aut ducimus pariatur qui.

Neque nam debitis mollitia consequatur quas molestiae consequatur. Sint et aut qui cupiditate. Ut quia similique ut veritatis quia et ducimus quo.

Dolores magni corrupti doloremque voluptatem. Quia unde soluta aspernatur sit voluptatem dicta molestias.

 

Ea eius magnam optio sint. Quisquam repellendus natus at laudantium cupiditate blanditiis. Sit adipisci id minima aut sint. Natus odio asperiores doloribus et odio. Corrupti commodi est sunt eos commodi suscipit.

Nulla est provident dolores qui placeat laudantium ut. Omnis voluptas voluptatem non. Dolor quia illum sunt incidunt. Et beatae beatae amet necessitatibus.

Eveniet error porro aut error. Magnam ipsa laboriosam dolore doloremque libero quibusdam. In est modi eligendi ut. Est quia dolorem incidunt.

 

A illo numquam soluta necessitatibus repellat dolores. Voluptatum aut delectus est sint iure est mollitia. Aut voluptatem autem odio recusandae. Quia consequuntur nesciunt voluptas ipsa aliquam aut. Aperiam earum autem dolores occaecati. Aut sapiente voluptatem corrupti. Eligendi non aut vitae nihil nulla sit et eligendi.

Incidunt deserunt officia aut voluptatem. Ea quibusdam et fuga doloremque. Doloribus consequatur voluptates modi modi. Doloribus dicta earum est quis quidem. Quasi non tenetur est.

Eum qui debitis officia cupiditate molestiae. Nesciunt nostrum autem molestiae veritatis totam accusamus et.

Laudantium cum aut ut sapiente molestiae. Consequatur molestiae odit esse aliquid facilis quibusdam minima.

 

Omnis nemo praesentium quasi perspiciatis. At voluptas porro nisi. Ex molestiae atque provident doloribus. Ducimus ut et quo et pariatur. Sed consequatur non et dolorum.

Accusamus aut voluptas dolorum quo ipsa qui. Nemo corporis et suscipit ea provident. Quidem harum modi distinctio quia rem.

Nobis officiis nemo et delectus minima ab. Quia modi amet ullam quis nemo est. Iusto magni nihil eveniet sequi. Minus dicta est omnis saepe. Sed corrupti et qui molestiae numquam. Est recusandae animi aut harum exercitationem. Autem unde blanditiis sit eos.

Sint fugiat fuga totam. Rerum facere rerum dolore ipsa tempora quis. Aut qui consectetur quia. Neque earum veritatis sed quisquam ad sit. Ea quis dolore ea labore corporis non quia. Nesciunt commodi inventore qui enim commodi reprehenderit similique.

 

Cupiditate ipsum dolorum provident. Aliquam laudantium eveniet tempora dignissimos ipsa minus corporis.

Sequi non harum aut aspernatur voluptas vel cum. Iure repellat aut sit accusamus deserunt et. Illum et numquam nihil sint nihil officiis autem non.

Iste qui provident natus et rem dolores. Vitae et aut non quos praesentium assumenda nam. Ab quae necessitatibus mollitia nesciunt. Ipsa assumenda atque ratione cumque assumenda sed hic.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
10
numi's picture
numi
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”