Need some thoughts here...
I recently got admitted to UCLA Anderson and NYU Stern FT MBA programs and I need to make a decision in about a month. I am currently in the corporate banking division (within commercial bank) working on syndicated bank debt (credit side). Given my background/interest in debt financing, I want to transition intoand figured MBA is needed to make that happen.
Below are pros and cons for each school that I came up with. I still struggle and go back and forth every min.. Welcome any thoughts and/or advice...
- I already live in LA and the campus is 15 min from Santa Monica.. 340 days of sunshine
- Students are generally more down to earth and nice
- Great alumni base in LA and very strong IB/Finance recruiting in LA
- Cheaper than NYU (both tuition and living expenses)
- Smaller class size with not that many people recruiting for banking = less competition among students
- Long term wise, I eventually want to work abroad (somewhere in Asia) but UCLA is not very well known outside of the U.S. Well... not very well known outside of West Coast
- Less opportunities in LA compared to NYC - not that many LevFin shops in LA compared to NYC
- I love living in LA but finance=NYC?
- Overall better brand name than UCLA, especially internationally
- It's NY.. better and more firms to recruit + will likely open more doors down the road
- I've visited NYC many times for both business and vacations and I could totally see myself living there as well
- More expensive (tuition is about ~$20k more expensive per year and living expense.. you know.. it's NY)
- Larger student body with more people recruiting for banking jobs
- Compete with other higher ranked schools (Booth/Wharton/Columbia, etc.) for jobs
- Big change for me personally/culturally given I've always lived in the South and West coast
I also got into Cornell but... damn.. after visiting Ithaca.. I can't live there...