Do true superstars go to business school?

yes it's very true in trading. makes no sense to go.

I have wondered about this too. I mean, from my perspective, every engineer basically thinks that an MBA is a downright silly degree.

And yes, many of us have them, but I have never met a single one (and I have probably known perhaps 50 MBA-ed engineers) who didn't think that it truly and honestly was a waste of time and money.

But, I guess if you have to get one, so be it, although I would tent to agree.

If your making very high 6 (850K+) or low 7 figures by the time you are in your late 20's (which is the average age of a Top 5 MBA program student) it really makes no sense to go to business school. You are already a superstar in the ranks considering to earn that much money you would have to be at least at the VP/Diretor or MD level.

Think about it, the average starting salary coming OUT of a Top 5 MBA Program (Harvard, Wharton, Kellogg, Sloan, Columbia etc..) is $150,000 give or take a couple grand. People from Top 5 MBA programs enter banks at the associate level and $500K is probably the max that any associate can think of getting.

If your earning anywhere near 10x that amount why go if you know your going to stay in banking, PE, HF or VC.

theres no real point unless you want to switch careers. majority of b school kids are people who did something else (PR, advertising, marketing, etc) and want to get into consulting or banking.

but then again it is a 2 year (possibly three) vacation. that being said, its a $100,000 (up to $500,000 with opp. cost) vacation where you end up having to interview for your old job back again at the end.

still worth considering though.

Every second MBA here is an Indian Engineer.

True Ballers don't go to B-School.

Oh god Sean, I know what you mean!!!!!

ANd don't even get me started about north campus and those freaks that would basically LIVE in those little cubby hole room thingies. I mean, they would have sleeping bags in there!

Oy! Makes me sick just remembering it, thinking, dear god, my competition is not even HUMAN!

I think that north campus is at SERIOUS risk of becoming the next VT!

I mean, have you MET these people??? Yikes.

Just, yikes.

"Do you know traders who turned down offers to top business schools? If so, what type of money were they making to say no to a prestigious MBA? "

well it's kind of a fallacy b/c you have to apply to bschool, and most don't apply in the first place...so it'd be something like you want to exit trading, apply to bschool, then get some big bonus or something and decide to stick it out. so it's not really like that. but i know plenty of guys with mid 700 gmats, good gpas, who won't even consider it.

think about it. you're likely giving up say 300-500k a year, you're losing career advancement (at least in the short term) and paying out 60-70k a year. that can be a million dollar opportunity cost.

Exactly, it isn't even fair to Americans to compete with that kind of bullshit. Those guys are machines.

The concept of a social life is alien to them. Trust me, I never see them leave the B-School either.

But hey, you must've been a bit of a geek yourself right..?

Well, I was exaggerating of course, B-Schools produce a lot of ballers. I just feel that I won't really feel like going back to school after being in the field for 3-4 years. Plus I'm not the academic kind, I don't enjoy going to classes and working on projects, that kind of stuff is essentially what MBA programs are about.

"You have to be a huge star not to go. In my mind, anyone who doesn't go, is an idiot - a two year vacation polishing a fun skill set that will help you land a monster job. "

Disagree completely if you are in sales and trading and like what you do. In that case, I think you are an idiot to go.

Your right, and I didnt think I would either, but wait for about 5 years, and see where you are. If you feel like getting an MBA could help (even in the slightest way) advance your career,...you'll do it. B/c its fun and there are hot chicks at the right place! Your back in an environment where its socially acceptable for girls to randomly hook up with guys they dont know well. In the "real world," while its not mandatory, its a whole lot easier to take down betties if you have legitimacy (ie friend of a friend, co-worker, etc...) At school, everyone is just a dumb student again. Besides that, you make money contacts and after two years, you are all of a sudden well qualified to do cool shit. It rules. I am so psyched.

"Your back in an environment where its socially acceptable for girls to randomly hook up with guys they dont know well"

this is true in nyc my friend.

are you going to bschool bucs? where and what are you currently doing?

Well I mean, ppl always ask me if I love calc. Hell no! Upper calc is a bitch and a half, but you have to take it so maybe you just get through it with a B.

See, the real value in engineering is not your quant skills, it is the fact that you have been to hell and back and lived to talk about it. I don't know anyone who hasn't cried their eyes out at 3AM in engineering school. and i am talking about large, tough men, I even knew one ex marine who I once saw sobbing in the media union.

There is nothing quite as scary as a competitor (well, let me be honest and say enemy), who you do not understand. Those people who walk around without looking at you or saying a word. Those expressionless looks, the way they describe the VT guy is exactly like half the people I went to school with, and yes they creeped me out the entire time.

You know what though, I make more money now at 27 than those kids will at 40.

And no, I am not the social butterfly of the century, but I can tell a joke and crack a smile, I have been drunk blind and woken up the next morning happy about it, I love football, and I had sex in high school instead of playing computer games.

Heh. Perhaps that is the key to success!

You and I sound like a match made in Heaven ChemE.

I'm going (UChicago) and I'm such a tool for doing so - I'm just going to treat it like a vacation b/c the degree is next to useless, but everyone requires it. It's kind of like a BA.

B-school is a waste of time unless you are switching careers.

I agree. Did the b-school thing to switch careers and get a fresh start. Otherwise, hell no, I wouldn't have gone to B-school. All that freakin' debt and now the golden handcuffs. Argggghhh.

for trading doesn't make much sense unless you are looking for a career change or someone is getting into trading from another industry.

But there are plenty of well known superstar traders, Hedge Fund Managers etc, who went to do MBA's.

bschool allows you to gain connections as well, which is what most people here are forgetting. your network after bschool will be unbelievable and if you choose to go back into banking/PE, these connections will prove to be very valuable

the fact that bschool is not required for advancement is one of the factors the led me to trading btw.

Why is it that in the states the banks only hire analysts for 2-3 years and then turf them all out to go to get an MBA when in Europe if you are a good enough analyst you can go straight to Associate? There is definately no difference in the job in London vs NY therefore I really don't get why MBAs are so de rigueur. To me it seems it's just this bullshit degree culture where you have to have one more piece of paper than the next guy in order to get on in life. Fortunately in europe it hasn't gotten that bad yet but it's definately going the way of the US with the whole glass ceiling thing for those in decent jobs without an MBA.

My dad doesn't even have a degree and he's senior management at a major multinational. He always moans about mid level people they get in who have all this shit on paper but barely any business know how or common sense when it comes to doing the deals.

I totally disagree. You can advance to Associate without an MBA but that's just short-sighted because your long-term options will be better with a strong MBA. It will most certainly be easier to build a strong network as a VP if you have gone through the ranks with your bschool buddies together.

in trading though you don't need it in the least though. it's not like banking.

This seems to depend a lot on your specialization.

I'm currently interviewing at a Tier-1 PE shop for an RE analyst job, and having looked at the backgrounds of literally everyone in the fund, only a small percentage have MBA's, even at the VP/Principal levels.

Very few of the younger people have them, most only have undergrad degrees.

I'll probably go get it anyway, but it does really make me think twice about it. I'd also almost certainly have to get mine part-time, as I'm married and my wife wouldn't react well to 2 years of "poor student life" in our late-20's.

Interestingly, many of you will do the B-school thing out of peer pressure. Always happens.

I'd rather take a year off and go live in Australia after 3 years of working to be honest.

just do this for a few years then retire to australia forever

After reading this thread, I would caution that you should be careful from whom you are seeking advice. Do true ballers get MBAs? Damn right. Look at your associate class; the percentage with and without MBAs. Then look at your MDs; the percentage with and without MBAs. Skewed ratio, right? There are tons of associates without MBAs but few MDs. What does that tell you? Associates directly promoted from analyst are great associates but they tend to not be as good at VP and above because they don't have the educational grounding (this is broadly speaking of course; there are tons of an non-MBA MDs and so on). Frankly, directly promoting analysts to associates provides great firepower while maintaining the option to have them continue on in the business but often results in a “weeding out” at the VP / Director level. This is just good business and maintains the pyramid structure of the industry.

Getting an MBA has a great deal of value, not only for the obvious contacts, but also for the depth and breadth of theoretical knowledge. I’m glad engineers think that an MBA is a useless designation. That’s why I make six times as much money.

Getting advice from college kids speculating on a chat site is dangerous. Be careful to whom you listen.

nayls makes some good points, but again in s&t you do not need an mba.

Jimbo- you have made 9 comments in this thread, not a single one is worthwhile.

Nayls makes a very good point on the direct to associate guys; one of my friends works in BB IB and she tells me there is not a single person above VP who does not have an MBA. Anyone who tells you that having HBS on your resume is worthless is full of shit. Yes, 100k + no salary for 2 years is heavy but that brand name is priceless.

Like it or not, clients will ALWAYS be shallow enough to prefer the guy who went to Harvard Business School over some direct promote (all else being equal). For some the tradeoff is not worth it but for MOST people in business, taking those 2 years off will more than pay back later.

People on this board will always talk about "Oh I know some guy who got GS w/ a 2.9 from Michigan State" but the bottom line is almost every top guy at every top PE/VC firm is HBS or Stanford Business School. The business school brand name is better marketing than almost anything you can do personally.

thanks for your tremendous insights boozer. how much time have you spent in the trading environment?

.

Why do people insist on asking strange questions and citing hyperbolic examples?

Most "superstars" started in finace at the tender age of ten or so. Buffett? Owned property at 12. Lampert? Started at 10. Steinhardt (to a lesser extent) started investing at 13. And that Eric Mundick guy or whatever worked at GS in high school and all throughout college. Most people just have no chance to reach that kind of success by 27 regardless of how smart they are because the opportunities are not there. You graduate at 22 and spend 2-3 years doing crappy work (which is usually glorified administrative work) and have to work your way up from there. I don't care how prestigious your firm is or how cool you think you are because you're an ibanker. It's bitch work. An MBA is a perfectly respectable way to try to boost yourself up and out of the grind (I don't have an MBA).

Jimbo, you're clearly biased and have demonstrated little understanding of how the game really works. Go ahead and cite examples from some scrub firms you found on Google. If you look at real firms, like Blackstone, Carlyle, etc. almost everyone has an MBA, and almost everyone went to Harvard. Referencing trading is also irrelevant, because it's not really a valid comparison. Most "trading" has little to do with the fundamental analysis of a business and a lot to do with quant skills and looking for "double lucky left rabbit foot patterns" or whatever garbage people are looking at on their charts. Big surprise that a business degree is not required for something that has little to do with business.

Hummer Winblad and Kleiner Perkins aren't major VC firms? That's news to me. I'd wager I've been in this game longer than you have so I think I have some idea of how it works.

And of course I speak specifically to trading. I've been very clear about that all along and the OP specifically asked about trading in his question. You think coming up with bs terminal values to make your DCF work shows your business savvy? Buffett and Munger have bought firms and specifically asked not to see the garbage the ibankers put together for previous potential buyers.

Jimbo - you shouldn't get an MBA. Seriously. It would be a complete waste of your time and mine to try to convince you otherwise. Good thing nobody in S&T ever gets fired or downsized, because I would have thought the ability to get a good job in a downturn market would be advantageous. Maybe that's just me.

I know Nayls, I don't intend to. It makes sense for some people. For others it doesn't and it's certainly not required for all career paths. that's all i'm saying.

and if you're fired from your job in s&t, an mba will help to some degree, but ppl without the designation land new jobs just as easily. it's about the skillset you bring. and the mba in s&t isn't nearly as valued in other fields.

I suppose my point is more this; superstars at 26 are a dime a dozen and none have MBAs. Superstars at 40 are few and far between and a lot have MBAs. Whether it is trading, banking, CEO, COO, CFO whatever. You can point to all the successful non-MBAs that you want - the bottom line is that those without fade into obscurity while those who do it tend to rise above the pack.

I'm not trying to convince those that are arguing against it on this board, I am trying to convince the person who is thinking about it and hearing bad advice from people who may not be in the industry in five years.

And by the way - if you are worried about some random young hotshot taking your place, you probably are not a superstar.

i assume you are talking about business school if you are already in the field of banking or trading. if that is the case, i agree that it is pretty dumb to get your mba becuase you can get into PE if you are an analyst or just stay a trader if you are a trader.

A top mba program is good for (like some have mentioned) someone who wants to switch careers from PR, marketing, sales, accounting, and get into banking or consulting. You can get sometimes get into the fields without an mba, but its much easier with that mba and you pay for the contacts and recruiting power of the top school. In that situation, it is worth it. You go from a modest salary to an associate level salary after 2 years of school. After that, you can do whatever you want. Go into industry, PE, stay at the bank, you name it.

A non-top mba program is only useful if you do it part-time and you do it at a state school. In that case, most people work for a company where they will be capped without the mba certification. But thats another story.