<p>Hey guys. I'm a random high school senior looking to pursue economics & finance (hey, it runs in the family!) in college, and maybe in graduate school.</p>
<p>So.. the question is.. which of these schools do I go to?</p>
<p>Berkeley - but Haas isn't guaranteed.. But I'm a California resident with substantial aid - so going to Berkeley = free.</p>
<p>CMU Tepper, how is it? I heard the finance concentrations there are good.. Pittsburgh is also a good spot in the East Coast.. I think. Some aid.</p>
<p>NYU Stern - I heard you can get lots of good internships there, and you're also right next to Wall Street! But I heard the education isn't so top tier.. and apparently the campus is scattered over NY? Little to no aid.</p>
<p>UChicago.. very prestigious school. But little to no aid.</p>
<p>Take the free ride to Berkeley. Chicago, in my opinion, offers the best undergraduate education overall of the 4, but that would matter (given the cost) only if you are very interested in what sets it apart. Any extra prestige, to the extent it might help your finance career, isn’t worth $200K.</p>
<p>^If thefreakedout is interested in investment banking, that $200,000 and extra “prestige” would be completely necessary to jumpstart his career.</p>
<p>^ If you’re going to encourage someone to spend an extra $200K based on that premise, maybe some elaboration is in order? Are you talking about specific Wall Street firms that you believe, based on reliable evidence, would give a very significant advantage to Chicago grads over Berkeley grads? If so, are there no attractive finance jobs in, say, San Francisco that might be just as interested in a Berkeley grad?</p>
<p>Berkeley is the obvious best choice here – best reputation, great undergrad business school, great employment prospects, highest salary scale of graduates and a top feeder school to the best, richest and high paying investment banks and management consultancy firms. It also has a global appeal and has very rich and influential alumni all over the world. And the fact that you can go there for free makes it even sweeter. You’re a fool if you would take the Berkeley offer.</p>
<p>Berkeley does not obviously have the “best reputation” as an undergraduate institution. I suspect RML would base this assertion on the USNWR PA scores (UCB = 4.7, Chicago = 4.6). I would not hang my hat on that small difference. But I agree UCB is the best choice given the cost differences.</p>
<p>^ I was actually talking about the brand power of the school in general when I said best overall reputation. And, I bet Berkeley Haas/Econ send many more peeps to BB than Chicago does.</p>
<p>What is “brand power”? How do you observe and measure it? Are we talking about universities, or toothpaste?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Probably so. Berkeley is a far larger undergraduate institution.
But show some numbers, o.k.? What specific “BB” firms are we talking about? What is the rate of hiring from various schools?</p>
<p>While UChicago and NYU seem abundant with internship opportunities, UCBerkeley is still a really great school. Though I don’t know your financial situation, going to Berkeley for free while saving money could help pave your way for grad school. </p>
<p>Grad school can still give you a great boost to get yourself started in the world, especially coupled with internships you may have scored at Berkeley and ones at grad school.</p>
<p>School brand power is often measured by employers, scholars and academicians. How employable the graduates are, how much are they paid and what position do they hold are some indicators of strong school brand power. </p>
<p>Let’s put value on some of these indicators.</p>
<p>The PA score of Berkeley is 4.8 (sometimes 4.7), which is often rated equal to Yale and / or Caltech. The PA score of Chicago is only 4.6. In many years, it was just only 4.5 and it never was a 4.7 in its entire history.</p>
<p>Here’s the salary scale of graduates of both schools:</p>
<p>Having said that, I still think Chicago offers a more “convenient” undergraduate education, as it has a smaller faculty-to-student ratio. But if you after school prestige and higher salary scale after graduation, then Berkeley is the way to go between the two.</p>
<p>^ O.K., good. One can quibble with any of those numbers, but when you put these and others together and compare against the cost, I do agree with RML on the main issue. It’s hard to justify spending $200K more on Chicago.</p>
<p>I would suggest taking the free ride if the amount of loans you would need elsewhere are substantial. Even without cost considerations, Berkeley is a good school that would be a worthy choice, even compared to your list of others.</p>
<p>If you are mathematically inclined, consider majoring in Economics (taking the math-heavy version of intermediate microeconomics and macroeconomics) with Math and/or Statistics as a second major, minor, or courses. Or consider the Operations Research and Management Science major.</p>
<p>However, note that Economics and ORMS, as well as Business Administration, require applying to declare the major. But Math and Statistics do not.</p>
<p>boy what a useless rating ROI is. Of course the top schools are heavily weighted to tech (engineering & science) like MIT, RPI, WPI, etc. To be meaningful this ROI would have to only be done for specific majors to compare schools. Some idiot probably spent day with an excel spreadsheet to come up with this and sadly people looking for colleges with find it and use it as part of an evaluative process to justify school selection.</p>
<p>Take Berkeley. Especially if you’re considering grad school (extra $$), especially between peer schools in academia/finance/etc., go with Berkeley.</p>
<p>MrPrince does make a good point. If you’re between several options, and some of them are offering full rides, etc., I have known Chicago’s financial aid office to be accommodating. Good luck!</p>