Comments (77)

Apr 27, 2010

ucb if you work hard, ucla if you wanna have fun. dont go to usc lol

Apr 27, 2010

UCLA as a econ major? UCLA doesn't have a business school... you might get some LA recruitment.

Apr 27, 2010

There's a bunch of factors to consider. Are you Asian? Do you mind being surrounded by Asians? Are you from California? Do you mind most of your classmates being from California? Would you prefer a public or private school? How important is stuff outside of academics (campus life, surrounding area, etc.) to you? Are you a NorCal or SoCal kinda person?

If you're dead set on banking, Berkeley's probably wear you want to go. It's still got the best recruiting of those three. California's broke though, so the public school system is gonna feel the hurt for at least the next few years.

    • 2
Apr 27, 2010
icebox712:

There's a bunch of factors to consider. Are you Asian? Do you mind being surrounded by Asians? Are you from California? Do you mind most of your classmates being from California? Would you prefer a public or private school? How important is stuff outside of academics (campus life, surrounding area, etc.) to you? Are you a NorCal or SoCal kinda person?

If you're dead set on banking, Berkeley's probably wear you want to go. It's still got the best recruiting of those three. California's broke though, so the public school system is gonna feel the hurt for at least the next few years.

You are in CA man... that means you will ALWAYS be surrounded with Asians regardless which school you go! You can't escape!! lol

Apr 27, 2010
icebox712:

There's a bunch of factors to consider. Are you Asian? Do you mind being surrounded by Asians? Are you from California? Do you mind most of your classmates being from California? Would you prefer a public or private school? How important is stuff outside of academics (campus life, surrounding area, etc.) to you? Are you a NorCal or SoCal kinda person?

If you're dead set on banking, Berkeley's probably wear you want to go. It's still got the best recruiting of those three. California's broke though, so the public school system is gonna feel the hurt for at least the next few years.

jesus christ, you're an immature racist fool. who cares if there are a lot of asians at the school?

    • 2
Apr 27, 2010
icebox712:

There's a bunch of factors to consider. Are you Asian? Do you mind being surrounded by Asians? Are you from California? Do you mind most of your classmates being from California? Would you prefer a public or private school? How important is stuff outside of academics (campus life, surrounding area, etc.) to you? Are you a NorCal or SoCal kinda person?

Which school has the most asians? I love asian women.

    • 1
Jul 13, 2018

What a racist! Nowadays and in the next decade, you should beg for building Chinese connections.

Apr 27, 2010

berkeley hands down. most top financial firms recruit actively at berkeley, especially the SF and LA offices of bulge bracket banks. UCLA recruiting is horrendous for finance, and USC isn't that much better. the latter is a waste of money.

Apr 27, 2010

I went to UCLA and had friends at Cal and USC. No one I knew chose USC over UCLA or Cal, unless they got a full ride. I do not see the point of going to USC over those two. Its reputation is not as great (even though its been improving in the rankings, VPs, MDs, etc only remember it from yesteryear), the tuition is about 6 times that of the UCs and yet its student body is just as large as are the classes. The USC connections are a myth as well. I don't know anyone that received a job from the "USC connections". Why pay substantially more for a worse product.

Now between UCLA and Cal. Both schools academically are basically the same. While most non california kids automatically think Cal is superior, this is not true. They are just as difficult to get accepted into. I know just as many kids that got into Cal and not UCLA as the reverse. Berkeley has Hass for undergraduate which UCLA does not have for Andersen. However, you can get a minor in accounting and those classes are taught by Andersen faculty. Berkeley probably places more kids into finance, as San Francisco is more of a financial center than Los Angeles. That being said, UCLA still receives its fair share of recruitment. I, as well as my friends, got banking jobs in all the buckets, GS/MS, ML/DB/CITI/LB/BS/HLHZ etc. I also knew kids that got jobs in trading and moved to New York. All off the top consultant firms recruit at UCLA as well, MK/B/BCG/Deloitte as well as others.

I think you if work hard and set your goals you will do well at either school. To me its more of a fit decision. UCLA is in SoCal, the weather is better, the girls are hotter and youre in LA. However, in some respects it lacks the college town environment you may find at Cal. Cal has shitty weather, ugly girls and youre in Berkeley and right next to SF. It definitely has much more of a college town vibe than westwood and your really close to SF. I just boils down to being are you a SoCal guy or a NorCal guy.

Apr 27, 2010
ke18sb:

I went to UCLA and had friends at Cal and USC. No one I knew chose USC over UCLA or Cal, unless they got a full ride. I do not see the point of going to USC over those two. Its reputation is not as great (even though its been improving in the rankings, VPs, MDs, etc only remember it from yesteryear), the tuition is about 6 times that of the UCs and yet its student body is just as large as are the classes. The USC connections are a myth as well. I don't know anyone that received a job from the "USC connections". Why pay substantially more for a worse product.

Now between UCLA and Cal. Both schools academically are basically the same. While most non california kids automatically think Cal is superior, this is not true. They are just as difficult to get accepted into. I know just as many kids that got into Cal and not UCLA as the reverse. Berkeley has Hass for undergraduate which UCLA does not have for Andersen. However, you can get a minor in accounting and those classes are taught by Andersen faculty. Berkeley probably places more kids into finance, as San Francisco is more of a financial center than Los Angeles. That being said, UCLA still receives its fair share of recruitment. I, as well as my friends, got banking jobs in all the buckets, GS/MS, ML/DB/CITI/LB/BS/HLHZ etc. I also knew kids that got jobs in trading and moved to New York. All off the top consultant firms recruit at UCLA as well, MK/B/BCG/Deloitte as well as others.

I think you if work hard and set your goals you will do well at either school. To me its more of a fit decision. UCLA is in SoCal, the weather is better, the girls are hotter and youre in LA. However, in some respects it lacks the college town environment you may find at Cal. Cal has shitty weather, ugly girls and youre in Berkeley and right next to SF. It definitely has much more of a college town vibe than westwood and your really close to SF. I just boils down to being are you a SoCal guy or a NorCal guy.

If you look at any academic department, there is not one area that i can think of where UCLA is better than berkeley. And the recruiting numbers are not even close. berkeley places much better into finance than UCLA.

Apr 27, 2010

Berkeley is by and far superior in everything except maybe climate and partying.

ke18sb clearly is still insecure about where he got his degree from, seeing as how he's on here making shit up to make UCLA seem better.

Apr 27, 2010
ke18sb:

I went to UCLA and had friends at Cal and USC. No one I knew chose USC over UCLA or Cal, unless they got a full ride. I do not see the point of going to USC over those two. Its reputation is not as great (even though its been improving in the rankings, VPs, MDs, etc only remember it from yesteryear), the tuition is about 6 times that of the UCs and yet its student body is just as large as are the classes. The USC connections are a myth as well. I don't know anyone that received a job from the "USC connections". Why pay substantially more for a worse product.

Now between UCLA and Cal. Both schools academically are basically the same. While most non california kids automatically think Cal is superior, this is not true. They are just as difficult to get accepted into. I know just as many kids that got into Cal and not UCLA as the reverse. Berkeley has Hass for undergraduate which UCLA does not have for Andersen. However, you can get a minor in accounting and those classes are taught by Andersen faculty. Berkeley probably places more kids into finance, as San Francisco is more of a financial center than Los Angeles. That being said, UCLA still receives its fair share of recruitment. I, as well as my friends, got banking jobs in all the buckets, GS/MS, ML/DB/CITI/LB/BS/HLHZ etc. I also knew kids that got jobs in trading and moved to New York. All off the top consultant firms recruit at UCLA as well, MK/B/BCG/Deloitte as well as others.

I think you if work hard and set your goals you will do well at either school. To me its more of a fit decision. UCLA is in SoCal, the weather is better, the girls are hotter and youre in LA. However, in some respects it lacks the college town environment you may find at Cal. Cal has shitty weather, ugly girls and youre in Berkeley and right next to SF. It definitely has much more of a college town vibe than westwood and your really close to SF. I just boils down to being are you a SoCal guy or a NorCal guy.

This is dumb as hell. You knew kids that got hired at all those places and didn't hear about kids at USC getting hired because of alumni connections. I'm sure this is a huge surprise to all of us, since you WENT TO UCLA. Wow...who did you spend most of your time talking to? I know you're inclined to support the school you went to, but don't spout bull****. As far as cost goes, USC hands out more financial aid than any school in the country. As I said before California is broke right now...everyone knows tuition just spiked at all the UCs. Chances are good the costs will be around the same to go to any of these places, especially if you're coming from out of state.

In the end, all 3 are great schools. I picked between these 3, and in the end the one that was most likely to get me a job was probably the least important factor. When I was applying to school a few years ago Berk and UCLA were where they are now in the rankings and USC was in the 30s. Berkeley will probably always be the best public school in the country and will maintain its high rankings, USC is shooting up the rankings faster than any other school, and UCLA...I mean it's holding position for now, we'll see how things go in the next few years.

Also, I didn't make the Asian remarks to be racist. The student body is more diverse at USC than it is at Berkeley and UCLA. That's a fact and should be a major consideration if you're concerned about student life in college. USC also has more international students than Berkeley and UCLA.

Apr 27, 2010

Berkeley, but I would still root for USC's football team. Everyone likes a winner.

Apr 27, 2010

UCB is a better school than the other two sure.

But between USC and UCLA I don't agree with the previous posters who say recruiting is stronger at UCLA. All the BB and MM banks come to USC to recruit and they hire a good amount of kids, particularly this year. At the bank I am working at, for every UCLA grad there is at least one if not more USC grads. Also in terms of social scene USC completely eclipses UCLA.

I have friends from UCLA who are trying to transfer to USC because of both the lame social environment and the budget cuts that have deprived them of classes they need to graduate.

For those of you who say go to UCLA to have fun, visit the USC campus sometime, you'll figure out pretty fast which ones more fun and which has hotter girls.

Apr 27, 2010
kuf135:

UCB is a better school than the other two sure.

But between USC and UCLA I don't agree with the previous posters who say recruiting is stronger at UCLA. All the BB and MM banks come to USC to recruit and they hire a good amount of kids, particularly this year. At the bank I am working at, for every UCLA grad there is at least one if not more USC grads. Also in terms of social scene USC completely eclipses UCLA.

I have friends from UCLA who are trying to transfer to USC because of both the lame social environment and the budget cuts that have deprived them of classes they need to graduate.

For those of you who say go to UCLA to have fun, visit the USC campus sometime, you'll figure out pretty fast which ones more fun and which has hotter girls.

No doubt that USC has a better social scene and hotter girls, but the campus is in the middle of a ghetto. UCLA easily wins out in that category.

Apr 27, 2010
theflyisnothing:

College choice: Berkeley, UCLA, USC. Which one should i go for business. I like all campuses. I realize Haas is no guarantee, but it's good. Marshall is good for networking. UCLA is straight up a chillin place. give me your advice

whats you career goal? investment banking? then go to cal. for everything else, it doesnt really matter anymore. if i had the choice again, i may have gone to cal. but a big fat fin aid package, the fact that i wanted to work in la, usc's social scene and usc's football team all kind of persuaded me otherwise.

youve already know you should get into haas, but the same applies to ucla's biz econ. in oc recruiting, employers can screen for haas-business and ucla-bizecon majors. econ majors at both cal and ucla usually get the short end of the stick in relation to their haas/bizecon peers. same for usc marshall. just keep this in mind.

usc's network is for real, but only on the west coast. this is an indisputable fact. anybody who says otherwise is misinformed.

man made the money, money never made the man

Apr 27, 2010
mr1234:
theflyisnothing:

College choice: Berkeley, UCLA, USC. Which one should i go for business. I like all campuses. I realize Haas is no guarantee, but it's good. Marshall is good for networking. UCLA is straight up a chillin place. give me your advice

whats you career goal? investment banking? then go to cal. for everything else, it doesnt really matter anymore. if i had the choice again, i may have gone to cal. but a big fat fin aid package, the fact that i wanted to work in la, usc's social scene and usc's football team all kind of persuaded me otherwise.

youve already know you should get into haas, but the same applies to ucla's biz econ. in oc recruiting, employers can screen for haas-business and ucla-bizecon majors. econ majors at both cal and ucla usually get the short end of the stick in relation to their haas/bizecon peers. same for usc marshall. just keep this in mind.

usc's network is for real, but only on the west coast. this is an indisputable fact. anybody who says otherwise is misinformed.

What type of financial firms recruit at USC during oci? is it just the L.A. offices of bulge bracket banks and a bunch of small L.A. firms? so cal doesn't have too many elite hedge funds/PE/AM, except oak tree, canyon ranch, and PIMCO.

Apr 29, 2010
jjc1122:
mr1234:
theflyisnothing:

College choice: Berkeley, UCLA, USC. Which one should i go for business. I like all campuses. I realize Haas is no guarantee, but it's good. Marshall is good for networking. UCLA is straight up a chillin place. give me your advice

whats you career goal? investment banking? then go to cal. for everything else, it doesnt really matter anymore. if i had the choice again, i may have gone to cal. but a big fat fin aid package, the fact that i wanted to work in la, usc's social scene and usc's football team all kind of persuaded me otherwise.

youve already know you should get into haas, but the same applies to ucla's biz econ. in oc recruiting, employers can screen for haas-business and ucla-bizecon majors. econ majors at both cal and ucla usually get the short end of the stick in relation to their haas/bizecon peers. same for usc marshall. just keep this in mind.

usc's network is for real, but only on the west coast. this is an indisputable fact. anybody who says otherwise is misinformed.

What type of financial firms recruit at USC during oci? is it just the L.A. offices of bulge bracket banks and a bunch of small L.A. firms? so cal doesn't have too many elite hedge funds/PE/AM, except oak tree, canyon ranch, and PIMCO.

There is GS, MS, JPM, Barclays, CS, UBS, Jefferies, HLHZ, BOAML, Citi to name a few...

Smaller shops recruit there too, but the san fran, palo alto and LA office all recruit @ SC

Apr 29, 2010

Is this a serious question Berkeley>>>>>>>>>>>>>others

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

is this a serious question...who cares

Apr 29, 2010

Based strictly on econ programs.. Berkeley > UCLA > USC.

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

Berkeley > UCLA = USC

Berkeley is a significant level above the other two.

    • 1
Best Response
Apr 29, 2010

i go to UCLA and I agree with the above Berkeley>UCLA=USC

but USC sucks so don't go there

"I may be drunk, miss, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly" -Winston Churchill

    • 2
Apr 29, 2010

USC alumni network seems to be more fanatical, so for socal it seems to have a regional edge

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

If you're Econ at Berkeley, you can relatively easily blend in with the Haas kids (i.e. take business classes, etc.) and you might get a leg up in the interview process compared to UCLA. At the end of the day if you do well as Econ grad, banks won't really care if you're Econ or Haas.

UCLA's standalone Econ program I would argue is just as strong as Berkeley's (b/c they don't have a business undergrad - this makes all of their strongest business-related students major in Econ). Berkeley Econ has got an unfair reputation of accepting people who got rejected from Haas, and it's a little bit of a disorganized major, unlike Business - so I wouldn't be surprised if the morale overall will be higher at UCLA - but UCLA can't compete with Berkeley it terms of recruiting. If you're a strong Econ candidate at Berkeley, you'll do well.

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

I am a UCLA alum, but I'd rank them Cal > UCLA > USC.

Granted USC has come up in the world in the past few years and probably has recruiting on par with UCLA but from a cost perspective I think its a silly choice. UCLA, and Cal for that matter, is a fraction of the cost of USC. So why pay more for basically the same product.

Another piece of advice would be not putting on your resume that you transferred, especially if its from a CC. When I screened resumes I never considered interviewing CC transfers, yet had they just put the school and their graduating year I would have never been the wiser.

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

No wonder I barely got any interviews then.

ke18sb:

I am a UCLA alum, but I'd rank them Cal > UCLA > USC.

Granted USC has come up in the world in the past few years and probably has recruiting on par with UCLA but from a cost perspective I think its a silly choice. UCLA, and Cal for that matter, is a fraction of the cost of USC. So why pay more for basically the same product.

Another piece of advice would be not putting on your resume that you transferred, especially if its from a CC. When I screened resumes I never considered interviewing CC transfers, yet had they just put the school and their graduating year I would have never been the wiser.

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

Come on bro..this is easy. Like ^^^ said, you can take Haas classes, attend all the Haas events and you're good to go.

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

I still can't believe it, but I got accepted into Haas! Do you guys have any advice on succeeding while I'm there (like maintaining a 3.5+ gpa while landing BB IB offers? I'm hoping I will have time to refresh on the financial modeling course I have. I also need to network and study the 400 ib interview questions I laminated into a booklet at home. I'm really worried because I know it's so competitive up there!

P.S. Sorry I couldn't respond to you guys back in October. I totally forgot I had an account on here. But I'm glad to be back.

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

Read the Art of War

    • 1
Apr 29, 2010

..

Apr 29, 2010

Good job on getting into Haas man, I know it's hard work. Feel free to send me a message if you have any specific questions.

Apr 29, 2010

Michael Grimes from MS is from Berkeley.

Apr 29, 2010
jgx101:

Michael Grimes from MS is from Berkeley.

That list is too long buddy

Apr 29, 2010

)

^There! That was bugging me. Parentheses are a tool of great power, don't abuse the shit out of them like you just did MikeSolieman. Rudimentary word processing is a fundamental necessity to breaking into finance, never forget it.

Apr 29, 2010

Good tips. Thanks, everyone. :)

Apr 29, 2010

Congrats on Berkeley! Berkeley > UCLA > USC. Even though I may be biased.

Apr 27, 2010

cal > usc > ucla
at ucla you'll get lost amongst the 60m kids, and waste your time trying to find a seat in the auditorium
at cal, you'll have to put up with mediocre facilities
at usc, you'll have to put up with douchebags and their reputation

Apr 27, 2010
LAWM:

cal > usc > ucla
at ucla you'll get lost amongst the 60m kids, and waste your time trying to find a seat in the auditorium
at cal, you'll have to put up with mediocre facilities
at usc, you'll have to put up with douchebags and their reputation

Ugh. I feel sorry for california kids who can't get into stanford or an ivy.

Apr 27, 2010

Mediocre facilities doesn't apply to Haas. The rest of the students have a grudge against Haas students for how good they have it.

And if you have the gpa and internship track for IB, you'll get into Haas.

Apr 29, 2010

Repost this once you get accepted to one or the other as haas is difficult to get into and getting into biz econ isn't a sure thing either.

UCB Haas > UCLA Biz Econ > UCB Econ=UCLA Econ

Apr 29, 2010

Berk then UCLA

Berk is THE target school for SF and also a much well respected school for LA recruiting. Also reaching to NY is not that difficult either, but SF is their biggest hub

UCLA is THE target school for LA w/USC, and places extremely extremely well in LA and some SF as well. Reaching NY is more difficult but can be done w/good networking

Both are fantastic opps, comes down to where would you feel you'll have a better college experience/have more fun honestly. If you're motivated, network, have work experience, have a good gpa and are not socially awkward/uncomfortable while networking/in interviews, you can place equally as well from either of these two schools at top firms in SF and LA (ex- Goldman SF, Moelis LA, Qatalyst etc)...great problem to have if you get accepted to both! :)

Apr 29, 2010

Really no point in trying to compare the two and rank them until you get your admissions decisions.

Apr 29, 2010

You have the right idea. Berk then UCLA.

Gotta break in first though.

Apr 29, 2010

Admission decisions won't be released until late April, but I will come back again once I have more steady answers. Just trying to get some perspective.

At UCLA would their biz econ be a better target major than their regular econ major? I figured both would do the trick.

"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win" - Sun Tzu

Apr 29, 2010

Haas is where it's at. It will also position you well for MBA in the future

Apr 29, 2010

PS: I only have like a few days to make the switch to any advice is very much appreciated!!

Apr 29, 2010

Berkeley and Stanford are the core targets for nearly all firms on the West Coast. Though Berkeley does make it a little bit more competitive with all the students (Seems to be a formula at Berkeley for recruiting), UCLA will largely be limited to LA recruiting and major networking will be needed to recruit for the Bay Area. I would recommend just sucking it up and going with Berkeley not only because the name will be a long term thing, but also because there are more opportunities there just because its Berkeley. Tech firms come on campus in addition to the usual banks. And plus, the campus (and concrete) is only one part of the college experience. Also consider the people, student life, career opportunities, classes, professors, etc.

Just make sure that you are confident you can make Haas, and can get into one of the feeder "clubs/biz frats" that has alum on the street.

Apr 29, 2010

I don't know too much about these schools, but I can offer you an objective view: UC Berkeley hands down has better exit opp from what I have seen so far in the west coast recruiting. My school places a sizable amount of people in west coast and it is pretty much dominated by Stanford and Berkeley grads. Take it with a grain of salt and again ,it comes down to the individual.

Apr 29, 2010

While Berkeley does have a slight edge, you can still get anything out of UCLA. The primary difference is Berkeley with be for SF and UCLA will be for LA. Non-California people don't realize that they are essentially equal schools and Californians view them as interchangeable (basically everyone that gets into one gets into both). That said, Haas will provide a broader exposure to finance classes. It's really your life and you should go where you want to go not because one school might have marginal better recruiting than the next. Either way you will have a good experience at a good school.

Disclosure: I went to UCLA.

Apr 29, 2010

Berkeley has far better exit opps, but if you're going to be miserable there, you can still get a good IB job from UCLA.. will definitely be tougher though

Apr 29, 2010

Thank you everyone for your responses.

The main 2 types of advice I've been getting from various people are either "Berkeley is far superior for recruiting in every single aspect and you must go there" and "go where you want and you can get anywhere you want at either place"

My mind tells me to stay at Berkeley, yet my heart tells me to go to UCLA. I would still want to get internships in the bay area during my summers, and would probably rather work in the bay area at first. Is that going to be extremely difficult for finance or consulting positions? I'm also considering majoring in computer science.

Thanks

Apr 29, 2010

If you're from NorCal and are plan on staying in SF for the first few years of your career, there is pretty much no reason to go to UCLA. Recruiting for SF firms is extremely easier at Berkeley and it's considered a more "prestigious" school than UCLA. I'm not talking about recruiting for the big names as they have the resources to recruit anywhere, but you'll definitely be able to have more access to smaller firms in the area.

That said, if you think you'll have a much better college experience at UCLA, go for it and just be sure to start networking early with SF firms. However, the efforts gone into networking may be noticed and get you a leg up (worked for me).

Apr 29, 2010

I currently go to UCLA and intend on going into finance so maybe I can help you out a little. There are definitely IB opportunities at UCLA, you just have to work a little bit harder for them. There are a few undergraduate business clubs and programs through the Economics department that help place people pretty well into BB firms. I'd say its split between SF and LA and a handful of people head off to NY and its definitely realistic for you to get a summer IB internship in SF. Sorry I didnt see this a couple days earlier and good luck with the decision.

Apr 29, 2010

Thi higher you go up the food chain (more prestigious & competitive-entry firms), the better you'll be off with staying at Berkeley. UCLA, as someone mentioned above, will give you almost no problem for SoCal recruiting, but for NorCal & National purposes, stick with what your mind tells you. At the same time, I do agree that UCLA's campus & environment is more pleasant & there are plenty of Anderson School grads working on the buyside on the West Coast.

Apr 27, 2010

I don't know why anyone would ever want to live in LA

it's not like you are going to be on the cast of the hills

it's just a tacky strip mall full of idiot celebrities and clueless people. and don't get me started on the trashy nouveau riche fashion and lifestyles prevalent there.

at least SF is a real city- real downtown, culture/arts, beautiful scenery, never too hot, never too cold.

also SF is way better for finance than LA. I think it's safe to assume that since the OP is asking for advice on WallStreetOasis, he is interested in investment banking as a career and wants to maximize his opportunities.

Apr 27, 2010

Thanks for the feedback. It's hard for me to say where I am leaning at this point. My plan (as of now) is to go into finance. Berkeley seems like a good option but I recognize that there is no way I want to live in Norcal after college. Southern California is simply too great (weather, girls, beaches, culture). Having said this, during the time of recruitment, can you request to work in a firm's LA office or would going to Berkeley direct me into working in SF? My brother went through the UCLA Bus/Econ program and landed a job with a good firm, so it is still doable to get into finance from UCLA. I think UCLA campus location is the best of the three choices. You are surrounded by Bel Aire and Santa Monica. USC does seem like the best school socially (incredibly good looking girls, a good Greek scene, most business minded kids). Their business program also seems well designed (business case studies, Golf 101-sooo sick, etiquette courses, small classes, etc.) However, the cost is pretty absurd when you could land the same job from the other two schools. Maybe a scholarship could pull through there (doubtful at this point)? So overall, pretty tough call.

Apr 27, 2010
theflyisnothing:

Thanks for the feedback. It's hard for me to say where I am leaning at this point. My plan (as of now) is to go into finance. Berkeley seems like a good option but I recognize that there is no way I want to live in Norcal after college. Southern California is simply too great (weather, girls, beaches, culture). Having said this, during the time of recruitment, can you request to work in a firm's LA office or would going to Berkeley direct me into working in SF? My brother went through the UCLA Bus/Econ program and landed a job with a good firm, so it is still doable to get into finance from UCLA. I think UCLA campus location is the best of the three choices. You are surrounded by Bel Aire and Santa Monica. USC does seem like the best school socially (incredibly good looking girls, a good Greek scene, most business minded kids). Their business program also seems well designed (business case studies, Golf 101-sooo sick, etiquette courses, small classes, etc.) However, the cost is pretty absurd when you could land the same job from the other two schools. Maybe a scholarship could pull through there (doubtful at this point)? So overall, pretty tough call.

the L.A. offices recruit at berkeley as well. on-campus recruiting at UCLA for finance is horrendous, even for biz econ students. for the top jobs in california, you have to compete against stanford, berkeley, claremont mckenna collges, USC. and for the NYC bulge bracket and hedge fund jobs, it will be nearly impossible to get unless you have a virtually perfect resume and/or have connections.

yes, UCLA campus is really nice, but we're talking about your future. i HIGHLY recommend berkeley if you're sure that you want to go into finance. now, if you weren open to other venues like consulting or law school, then UCLA makes sense. but for finance, berkeley all the way.

Apr 28, 2010

Reading comprehension.

I never said USC didn't place or wasn't a good school. I was merely providing insight to my experience at UCLA to display that good firms do recruit there, as previous posters had stated they didn't. I made no reference as to whether USC placed better, on par or worse than UCLA. While I did say the reputation of USC wasn't as good, in my experience this has proven true (although I am merely one person that worked at one firm); again no reference was made saying they did not get jobs. I also stand by my USC connections statement. I have tons of friends that went there an no one said the "connections" were of any value. Often when people speak of USC they talk about these mythical "connections" but to get a job in finance you go though the recruitment process just like anywhere else. This isn't to say there isn't support from the alumni but rather its no different than what one would encounter at Cal or UCLA.

The basis of my argument cost. The price of tuition. If both schools yield the same placement results, have similar class sizes, equally valued degrees, and similar connections yet the tuition at one is 10k (UCLA 2010) while the other is 42k (USC 2010), it kinda seems like a no brainer. Clearly paying the premium for an ivy or stanford is justified but an annual 32k premium for a more or less school seems plain stupid. You're talking 128k over the life of your degree not even calculating the additional ~20-30k in interest you could end up paying on your student loans. Even if you got a half tuition package at USC, which is only allotted to a super select group of students, you are still talking a 10k annual price differential. Come on now, we are all either in finance or trying to get in, I think we should understand the concept of relative value. If you have some form of scholarship bringing the prices more in line, then it comes down to personal preferences between the schools. Other than that its simple dollars and cents, with UCLA winning out by a cool 128-158k.

Apr 28, 2010

UCLA ocr isn't horrendous at all. Most of the BBs interview on campus as well as top MM firms like HL, Greenhill, and Jefferies. We have excellent placement into both LA and SF offices. NY isn't out of the question either. I landed interviews at JPMorgan NYC and Barclays NYC (though not thru ocr but applying through their website). There are a wealth of opportunities available to you if you are good enough to land even one. If not, as someone mentioned above UCLA is pretty good for consulting as well as Big 4 accounting/advisory and finance rotation programs.

Don't let the people who've never gone to UCLA fool you, it's a great all-around school. Yes, you do have to do a lot of your own legwork as career services won't help much, but the competition within the school is less than you might face at Cal for the same exact jobs and without the price tag of USC.

Apr 29, 2010

Excellent analysis ke18sb. USC is not the type of school I'd pay that kind of tuition for. I also have friends that go there and never landed jobs through these storied "alumni connections". In fact, a lot of students there are complacent thinking that they'll be able to network their way to a BB job by chatting up a random alum they cold email their junior year. Having gone to a large public school like UCLA has made me work for everything I have both academically and professionally and I think that kind of work ethic will carry me a long way in the future.

Apr 28, 2010

While it's nice for all these UCLA alum to defend their school, it's absolute bs that the OP's opportunities at UCLA would be comparable to those he would have going to Berkeley. You can get into a BB coming from Podunk U. in the Midwest; does that mean you should go there? Hell no.

Apr 28, 2010

OP, golf 101 is a lil overhyped to be honest. i'm sure you can find a similar opportunity at both UCB and UCLA. Elective classes ranging from golf to sailing to whatever can be found in college. Be mindful of that and congrats on acceptances to all 3.

Apr 28, 2010

don't go to a uni based on its golf 101 course

lol

Apr 28, 2010
Affirmative_Action_Walrus:

don't go to a uni based on its golf 101 course

lol

USC is an overhyped private school. I can't believe anyone would cite fucking golf 101 as one of the reasons to go there over berkeley.

Apr 28, 2010

dude, it's sooo sick though

Apr 28, 2010

I strongly disagree that UCLA's recruiting is on par with USC and Berkeley. My BB bank has a couple students from both UCB and USC in this year's analyst class, but zero from UCLA. Also, McK and BCG do NOT consider UCLA a target.

It's true that USC's academic standard is inferior to Cal, but it does have a better social life. Also, the fact that it's less competitive allows you to stand out more. Just a couple things to consider.

Apr 28, 2010

Middle 50th percentile of SAT scores for USC was 1930-2150 last year, 1750-2080 for UCLA. ACT were 29-32 and 24-31 respectively. 24% acceptance rate for USC, 22% for UCLA but 20k more people applied (just takes $60 and another checked box on the UC app so not hard to see why). USC's freshmen have had better stats for the past few years now.

nervous nelly are you serious? recounting your personal experiences isn't "analysis." also, please don't act like you're the authority on usc's alumni connections or lack thereof cuz you talked to 2 kids who went there who don't have jobs. ke18sb - good work spewing crap again. i wonder where you arbitrarily came up with 10k and 42k, since UCLA's website clearly states tuition is closer to 11k next year for instate students, while USC's is closer to 40k. More importantly, anyone who thinks he/she is going to UCLA for 10k next year is clearly naive. Cost of attendance for incoming instate freshmen next year is 30k, what does that do for your "analysis?" Out of state students end up paying 52k, which is practically the same as at USC. 20 or even 10 years ago you could make the argument that there is no way you would pick USC between the two as the quality of education at UCLA is definitely superior, but that's not the case anymore

Apr 29, 2010
icebox712:

Middle 50th percentile of SAT scores for USC was 1930-2150 last year, 1750-2080 for UCLA. ACT were 29-32 and 24-31 respectively. 24% acceptance rate for USC, 22% for UCLA but 20k more people applied (just takes $60 and another checked box on the UC app so not hard to see why). USC's freshmen have had better stats for the past few years now.

nervous nelly are you serious? recounting your personal experiences isn't "analysis." also, please don't act like you're the authority on usc's alumni connections or lack thereof cuz you talked to 2 kids who went there who don't have jobs. ke18sb - good work spewing crap again. i wonder where you arbitrarily came up with 10k and 42k, since UCLA's website clearly states tuition is closer to 11k next year for instate students, while USC's is closer to 40k. More importantly, anyone who thinks he/she is going to UCLA for 10k next year is clearly naive. Cost of attendance for incoming instate freshmen next year is 30k, what does that do for your "analysis?" Out of state students end up paying 52k, which is practically the same as at USC. 20 or even 10 years ago you could make the argument that there is no way you would pick USC between the two as the quality of education at UCLA is definitely superior, but that's not the case anymore

incoming class profile isn't all that important.
the average ACT score is higher at Vanderbilt than it is at Texas, but Texas is a much better school for business.

as for your tuition blurb, so UCLA is 11k and USC is 40k (instead of 10 and 42k- WOW a 3k swing!)
If cost of attendance (I'm assuming you mean tuition+books+insurance+room/board/living expenses) for UCLA is 30k, then imagine what it is for USC. Using the same non-tuition costs as UCLA, USC cost of attendance is about 60k. So the 30k difference in cost between UCLA and USC is real.

for out of state students the costs are likely comparable, but OP is from California.

Apr 29, 2010

Are your parents rich (as in can they pay your tuition, housing, books, living expenses while you're in college)?

Are your parents poor (as in do you think your EFC will be around $0)?

Are you going to join a social fraternity?

Are you an attractive looking guy or mediocre looking guy?

Does diversity matter a lot to you ,or will you be hanging out with your own race (look into your current high school circle and answer)?

Do you want to work in Investment Banking/ Management Consulting after graduating?

On a scale of 1-10, how important is social life and the quality of women that you party with to you?

I come from a very diverse family that went to USC, Stanford, UCB, and UCLA.

If you answer my questions truthfully, I can give you the no bs answer that can help you decide which school to go to.

Apr 29, 2010
Comment