<p>I need some good, well-thought out advice for a very important decision that will have a huge effect on my career. I realized toward the end of college that what I really want to do is work on the financial/accounting side of production in Hollywood, ideally for one of the Big 6 movie studios. Frankly, and not to brag but for the sake of explaining the situation, with my credentials i could probably get into any MBA program I wanted.</p>
<p>But here's the question: would it be better to go to USC because of its proximity to Hollywood and its incredible connections with the Big 6 studios, or to go to a top 5 MBA program like Harvard and use its reputation to find an in? Does anyone have any knowledge or stories of this particular industry that might be helpful? I know pedigree is important (Ari Gold in Entourage is supposed to be a HBS alum), but in reality I think being just a few miles from Hollywood might be more advantageous.</p>
<p>Here's a list of pros/cons for each:</p>
<p>USC:
-Connections, recruiting with the Big 6 studios
-If I do not get a job straight off at the studios, I will likely do public accounting or consulting in LA, and will still be able to apply to the studios, which would likely be clients, later on
-Could probably get in after 2 years w/e rather than 3 or 4</p>
<p>HBS:
-Pedigree might help get big connections at studios and could definitely accelerate career later
-If I don't get the job, backup would probably be I-banking or something else I really am just not interested in
-Probably 4, maybe 3 years w/e to get in</p>
<p>Let me know. Any well-thought out advice welcome. Thank you!</p>
<p>Without knowing what your shoo-in is, I would lean towards HBS over USC or UCLA (I would add it to the mix too as I know friends who went to UCLA and work in the business). I’m guessing from your post that you don’t have any work experience (except for internships yet) and are just finishing undergrad. While you think the business/finance side of entertainment is what you want to do, you haven’t worked yet </p>
<p>If you really can get in anywhere, HBS (or Stanford or Wharton) would give you a lot more options. You’ll be able to use the network to get in to interviews at the places you want to go, but you’ll also have a prestigious degree that will allow you do other things. </p>
<p>Finally, I don’t know as much about finance positions in the entertainment industry, but very few people go do public accounting after an MBA. I worked in the strategy consulting arm of one of the big public accounting firms pre-MBA and MBA hires worked with our group, not the accounting side. If you think you’d get hired from the accounting side into the type of position you want at a movie studio, not sure you’d need an MBA. Just get that public accounting position early and work your way up through the entertainment practice of the LA offices of one of the big accounting firms.</p>
<p>Hi there Old Alum, thanks for the response. Actually, I have graduated and just started in public accounting at a big 4 firm, which is where that example came from. However, I went to school and have started work in the Northeast, and in this economy requesting to be transferred to LA is not easy, but you’re right that it’s definitely worth a try.</p>
<p>So what I gather from your response is that you believe any of the aforementioned schools would provide access to the production industry, and all else equal it would be wiser to to take the HBS MBA as it is better and you never know where you’ll end up. But my question is, precisely which school, USC/UCLA or HBS/Wharton/Stanford/etc, would probably provide the highest probability of gaining access to the production industry and by how much more than the others?</p>
<p>All hypothetical I know, but any opinions appreciated.</p>
<p>How hard is it to start careers in non-conventional industries such as entertainment out of HBS or other top 5 MBA programs? When I think about the long-term, it seems like going to HBS is the obvious choice purely because the name Harvard carries so much weight, but working in the right industry is most important to me, and if that means going to USC then that is definitely what I’ll do.</p>
<p>"I would wait until you have been accepted by these programs before you plan your life. "</p>
<p>“Have you even been accepted yet?”</p>
<p>These responses annoyed me enough for a rebuttal… of course I have not been accepted, I am asking this question to determine where I should go from here/apply, my time-line being completely different depending on my decision.</p>
<p>To the other responders, I think you are correct about the “brand name” :), and after mulling over this for a couple weeks I have decided on a course of action. I’m going to go ahead and stay here in the northeast until business school and request a change of clients at my current firm to those in the media and entertainment industry. That experience, paired with the MBA, should be enough to break into Hollywood.</p>
<p>Thanks again. Any more insightful comments or responses are more than welcome and much appreciated.</p>
<p>As I recall Ari Gold from Entourage went to Harvard for undergraduate and the University of Michigan for his MBA. He is completely fictional mind you.</p>
<p>Actually his character is apparently strongly based on a big-time Hollywood agent in real life named Ari Emanuel, who I think actually did go to Harvard.</p>
<p>But anyway, I think Ari’s a ****** and that job is not even close to what I actually want to do, but I was wondering if anyone might know whether the entertainment industry is a very academic pedigree-conscious place? I usually don’t think of LA as being that way because most elite universities are in the north, but I don’t know.</p>
<p>I did some research and found some interesting facts. Apparently, well over 10% of USC’s students come from backgrounds in entertainment and media and go to careers in that industry when they graduate, and at UCLA it’s just under 10%. At HBS and other top-10 MBA programs, the number is less than 2%. This has me leaning toward the SoCal schools. Any other input?</p>
<p>These days, you can’t be so confident about getting into HBS with just Big 4 experience, sorry to say. In fact, unless you have some other great potentials, I think your chances are rather slim.</p>
<p>To put things in perspective, </p>
<p>I had a friend who graduated from Harvard with 3.7+ GPA, 720+ GMAT, 4 years experience from Monitor, no glaring problems, got rejected from Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Wharton.</p>
<p>I have heard of other candidates from top schools who came from Consulting and/or Ibanking who couldn’t get into a top 5 B school.</p>
<p>Your assumption that you are a shoo-in for Harvard B-School with just Big 4 experience is outrageously ambitious. I would listen to others’ advice and see what you can get into and then decide, if I were you.</p>
<p>Either that or just go for USC, it’s much easier.</p>
<p>Interesting to hear the unsuccess stories. It’s true that I’m by no means actually a shoo-in, i just put it that way for the sake of the conversation so that people wouldn’t get confused about what the actual topic was. The question is, “assuming I can and do get into either, which is better?” rather than “assuming I have approximately a 33.9% chance of getting a second round interview after 3 yrs work experience or a 47.6% chance after 5 yrs work experience…” etc. etc.</p>
<p>But it’s true that USC would be easier and there’s a good chance I can get in with just 2 yrs experience, which would be a huge jump-start to my career (especially since working at the big 4, ahem, f-ing sucks). That alone makes it probably a very good option. But the question is, assuming I get into both, which is better for this career path?</p>
<p>Neat, maybe we’ll work together some day. (Send me an email and we’ll stay in touch.) I’m applying for MBA’s over the next couple months to possibly work in the movie industry on the management and production side of things. (I’m applying for technology related scools as well because I’m torn, anyway…)</p>
<p>USC is on my list for film. Berkeley is on my list for Tech industry.
Stanford and HBS are both second tier on my list because of the focus of the first two.</p>
<p>As an example, I recently stumbled into a position with an artist management agency in Nashville. (where I live and go to a crappy state school)</p>
<p>The point? Location is everything. If you know what you’re doing it’s hard NOT to find work in the music industry here in Nashville. </p>
<p>I would think the same applies for Hollywood.</p>
<p>Having done a few internships in the entertainment industry (interned at a top talent agency after my freshman year and then in a corporate strategy/M&A role after my sophomore year) I can tell you what I’ve seen anecdotally. </p>
<p>Most of the HBS/Wharton/Stanford/etc. grads at the majors tend to work in roles such as corporate strategy, corporate development (M&A), business development, production finance (content acquisition/deal analysis), etc. Generally the “sexier” jobs. </p>
<p>The USC/UCLA grads (although there are some in the above groups) tended to work more in general accounting, financial reporting, tax, tc. (the less “sexy” jobs). </p>
<p>So it totally depends on what exactly you want to do at a studio. I would go to HBS/etc as it opens up doors to jobs that you likely would have a harder time getting coming from USC. </p>
<p>If you are thinking agency then I would say USC just because you could intern during the school year…since everyone starts in the mailroom and works their way up you can start to do that while in school as opposed to waiting until post-graduation.</p>
<p>Willpower–awesome, thrilled to hear from someone with similar goals! Shows I’m not the only one to see this as a very cool opportunity. I think you’re right about the location, and the numbers seem to back that up. Good luck with your applications!</p>
<p>Whartongrad–OMG!! Someone finally answered my question!!! Believe it or not, the compliment I gave your master’s idea in your other thread was written before i read this, so I’m very excited as this seems to vindicate my taste in good ideas.</p>
<p>Your experience in the industry is very interesting to hear about, and I’m not entirely sure what implications it has. I would be more than happy with any of those jobs at the majors, but you’re right that I would probably trade a Ferrari, a solid gold rolex, and Alessandra Ambrosio herself for that job in production finance. I guess this puts me back at square 1: applying to both schools and seeing which I get into.</p>
<p>I guess my only question left is how long did it take people to get those sexy jobs after graduating from the top MBA programs? Did they start in LA consulting and work up from there or was it quicker?</p>
<p>generally people started in those jobs right out of MBA. Most have the following background (undergrad -> Investment Banking/Management Consulting/Corporate Stategy or M&A at a F500 company -> MBA -> Job at Studio).</p>
<p>I would suggest just browsing profiles on Linkedin. Look for people in the type of role that you want at any of the studios and just look at their background/path.</p>
<p>You wouldn’t be hurt going to any of these schools – Anderson, Marshall, HBS, Wharton, etc. USC has good pull in the studios I’ve talked to for a lot of positions, but certain pedigree schools might grease the skids to certain kinds of positions. I am less certain about UCLA, but I have to imagine it’s the same.</p>
<p>In other words, I’ve really added nothing to what was said above. You’ve gotten some good advice. And I think all the advice about applying, coming from a Big 4, etc. is good too.</p>
<p>Wharton/Penn has a strong network, and Wharton has a media initiative that may be of interest. Berkeley is fairly well represented, I understand, too.</p>
</p>