Why HSW and not HCW?
(Senior Baboon, 232
Points)
on 6/23/10 at 2:04pm
For business school why is it H/S/W and not H/W/Columbia?
Does Stanford really have that many grads on the street?
I personally would take Columbia over Stanford every time- especially to work in NYC.
“Does Stanford really have
“Does Stanford really have that many grads on the street?”
There are probably way more CBS grads on Wall Street. However, the goal for many MBAs is to avoid the sell side and land a HF or PE job. Stanford is superior to CBS for the big HF/PE shops.
Not to mention VC, start-ups,
Not to mention VC, start-ups, the Google, MC.
While it's definitely H/S...it's probably a 4 or 5 way tie for the third letter.
Cartwright So who would you
Cartwright
So who would you say is in the 4to 5 way tie after H/S...?
suchislife
Cartwright
So who would you say is in the 4to 5 way tie after H/S...?
after HBS, Stanford, and wharton, the other top schools are not in a specific order. It really depends on what you want to do. For instance, kellogg is better than booth for marketing, consulting, and private equity, while the latter is stronger in banking, trading, and hedge funds.
Hi guys, a couple of
Hi guys,
a couple of comments.
To Johnny Cage: a vanilla investment banking job is one of the easier ones to get if you're attending a top 10-15 business school. The four powerhouses of sell-side finance are Wharton, Chicago, Columbia and NYU Stern. However, you're perfectly likely to get interviews coming out of MIT Sloan, Northwestern Kellogg, Cornell Johnson, Tuck at Dartmouth, UVA Darden, UMichigan Ross, etc. As Buyside CFA and Cartwright mentioned, people at Stanford are much, much more interested in private equity, venture capital, hedge funds, and investment management. And FYI, just about everyone who already works on the sell-side is too. Only a minute percentage of Columbia/Chicago/Wharton grads who are going into banking post-MBA already have a pre-MBA banking background: these guys are scrambling to work at PIMCO or KKR, not Goldman or MS.
As for ranking these things... who are you asking? This honestly depends on the eye of the beholder.
- For the general population (which doesn't give a rat's ass about MBAs, to put it charitably), they will all know about Harvard and Stanford, and most know about Wharton. After that, it gets pretty random. I acquired a pretty good impression of Columbia Business School when I was a teenager because my next-door neighbors were a suave, sophisticated couple who met at CBS: both worked in the asset management branches of GS/JPM/Citi/take your pick. Mainly, though, I thought THEY were the ballers, so CBS looked good because of them, rather than them looking good because of CBS. And THAT is the cornerstone of the admissions game: you're supposed to make the school look good, not vice versa.
- Who takes that third spot after HS? It's generally accepted that it's Wharton, but the only people who argue vigorously that it's another school are people who spend a lot of time thinking about business schools.
- Personally, I think Wharton occupies an intermediate step between HS and "the rest of the Top 10". I say this based on recruitment prospects, and the caliber of the people who attend, as well as the strength and depth of the alumni pool. They're a pretty accomplished bunch.
- Which are "the rest of the Top 10?" I'm not going to enter in this BS "Top 5 vs M7 vs top 8 vs Top 10 vs Dirty Dozen vs Fantastic Fifteen or Sweet Sixteen". For most people, it USUALLY goes something like this after Wharton: Chicago and Kellogg (one for finance, the other for marketing, one for geeks, one for partyers); MIT Sloan is pretty much the same; and hot on their heels are Columbia, Dartmouth, Haas Berkeley... and then it's NYU Stern, Yale, UCLA, etc... Bla bla bla yawn yawn yawn. As someone put it to me, after HSW, it's about "the 15 or so schools that claim to be Top 10".
- Johnny Cage, you seem to really like Columbia. I like it a lot too, although 90 per cent of that was colored by the first two CBS grads I met. Since, I've met plenty who were a lot more pedestrian in their accomplishments, but pushy in their attitudes. I still like CBS, but it's lost a bit of its romance in my eyes.
- Why? Above all, its absolute BULLSHIT ED yield-management ploy. They're trying to game the other schools. I think just about everyone believes that if you game them back, FAIR GAME. Apart from that, it's a bit crowded, and some people describe it as a factory. Still, if what you want is to land that JP Morgan, BarCap or Deutsche Bank interview for M&A, it'll serve your purposes beautifully.
Hope this helps. Anyone going to any of those schools I mentioned is IBD Associate material.
jjc1122 wrote: suchislife
Cartwright
So who would you say is in the 4to 5 way tie after H/S...?
after HBS, Stanford, and wharton, the other top schools are not in a specific order. It really depends on what you want to do. For instance, kellogg is better than booth for marketing, consulting, and private equity, while the latter is stronger in banking, trading, and hedge funds.
You'd say Kellogg is better than Booth for PE?
If someone describes their
If someone describes their school as the top ranked school, they go to HBS or Stanford
If someone says they go to a "Top 3" school, they go to Wharton
If someone says they go to a "Top 5" school, its either Chicago, Kellogg, or MIT Sloan
If someone says they're in the "M7", they go to Columbia
If someone says "Top 10", they mean Tuck, Ross, Haas, or
http://forums.businessweek.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?ts...
I'm not saying this is true by any means; im just throwing it out there
looking for that pick-me-up to power through an all-nighter?
jtbbdxbnycmad: That was one
jtbbdxbnycmad:
That was one of the best posts on MBA programs I’ve read here.
To the OP: A lot of the younger people don’t realize that Wall Street isn’t THAT desirous a career route for MBAs. Wall Street is a great stepping stone but it is a tough long term career. I won’t even consider banking after I get an MBA.
Hey Buyside CFA, thanks for
Hey Buyside CFA, thanks for that. I hope it's useful to people. Yeah, I guess it's obvious that I'm looking into b-schools.
Omg jtbbdxnycmad that was a
Omg jtbbdxnycmad that was a beast of a post! Major props. I will reply to the inquiries in a few hours. ( I'm at central park watching Merchant of Venice!)
I would mostly agree but you
I would mostly agree but you can't discount where you want to live. I want to be in TX, so McCombs was a natural choice for me (over darden, yale, ross, that ilk that i consider even par with McCombs). All of the BB and MBB's of the world recruit there and Austin is badass so perfect fit. If I wanted to live in LA, or NY, wouldn't have made as much sense obviously.
As for Wharton being some "purgatory" between elite and semi-elite, I disagree for 2 reasons. One, that's only if you're talking finance and two, even within finance, Booth is a worthy adversary. My rankings (in no order within tiers)
H/S
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wharton/Booth/Kellogg/Columbia
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sloan/Tuck
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haas/McCombs/Ross/Darden/UCLA/YSOM/Cornell/Duke/Stern
Bottom line, you can get almost any job at any firm from any of the above (named) schools, though some (like consulting) will be a sliding scale as you decline, and others (like BB IB) will be regional offices unless you are at one of the top 2 tiers.
After that...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rest of the top 50 (aka hope you want to live in that city and they gave you a full ride)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you even going
As for the rankers themselves, I think it's apparent that BusinessWeek is full of shit and USNews is the only one close to accurate.
jtbbdxbnycmad wrote: Above
Above all, its absolute BULLSHIT ED yield-management ploy. They're trying to game the other schools. I think just about everyone believes that if you game them back, FAIR GAME.
Is CBS a lot easier to get into if you apply ED? Is there a noticeable difference in the quality of ED and RD acceptances?
I don't think there is a
I don't think there is a noticeable difference between the RD and ED candidates. It was put to me like this: If you don't meet CBS's standards, it doesnt matter what round you apply--you are not going to make it in at the ED round with a 650 GMAT, 3.1 GPA, and plain vanilla work experience. The fact is less people are inclined to apply ED because they want to keep their options open, but CBS is more interested in recruiting students who really want to be there--not just the kids who didnt get into Harvard or Wharton and look at CBS as a silver or bronze medal--which makes sense because it makes for a more tight-knit class.
Does applying ED increase your chances if you are a strong candidate to start with? Yes, because they have more seats to fill with a smaller applicant pool at that point (comprised completely of people who have CBS as their first choice--except for a small % people who plan on taking a $6K loss is HBS comes calling).
People cite the NYC location as the reason for it's low acceptance rate, but the same "hail mary" applicant pool argument can be made for the other top schools. I know plenty of people who "take a shot" at H/S/W etc. Bottom line:its a hard school to get into, especially in this economy. My buddy who worked for Mckinsey w/ 3.5 GPA from a target, 750+GMAT did not get accepted to CBS in the RD round.
I don't think that ED admits less-qualified cadidates; I think the better way to look at it is that a greater number of qualified applicants are dinged in the RD round, making it more of a game of chance (applicant A gets in over applicant B because applicant A's application was reviewed by someone having a good day).
HBS is guilty of the same yield-management tactics with HBS 2+2. Tuck has "early action." CBS might be the most aggresive with their ploy, but I can see the result of having a class filled with people who really wanted to be there as a great way to ensure a strong alumni network later on.
Ranking schools by prestige instead of by desired exit industry & location is stupid. For buy-side finance on the east coast, I find it hard to argue that the best schools are not HBS (for brand++++), Wharton (for brand+++education+++), Columbia (for brand++, education+, and location++++), and Chicago (for brand++ education++++), in that order. The "+" are my relative weightings for each category. The HBS brand trumps everything else, imho.
A lot of people will place Booth over CBS, but every single person I talk to at the top banks tell me CBS hands-down. "Chicago Booth sucks for lifestyle, and you will get exactly the same opportunity, easier access for informal recruiting (which is more important that OCR they tell me), better branding & larger network, and more fun out of CBS" is what they tell me...paraphrasing. Ofcourse, this is if you want to work in NYC.