<p>How much of a difference will a Harvard MBA make vs. say like a Columbia or Wharton MBA?</p>
<p>Can a Columbia or Wharton MBA accomplish what a Harvard MBA can?</p>
<p>Thanx in advance for your input.</p>
<p>I think Most people think Wharton is worth more than Harvard</p>
<p>"Can a Columbia or Wharton MBA accomplish what a Harvard MBA can?"</p>
<p>Yes.</p>
<p>Personally, I think a USC, Emory, Yale, Cornell MBA can accomplish just as much, but apperantly no one else thinks that being stuck working 60 hours a week and making 150k a year is aweful which is what these MBA sheep are lining up and begging for. I think about it and I am amazed. </p>
<p>I have loan officers who work from home and barely have a GED making that much money.</p>
<p>I think 150k per year is pretty awful</p>
<p>
[quote]
Personally, I think a USC, Emory, Yale, Cornell MBA can accomplish just as much, but apperantly no one else thinks that being stuck working 60 hours a week and making 150k a year is aweful which is what these MBA sheep are lining up and begging for. I think about it and I am amazed.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, MBA starting salaries are quite misleading. The fact is, most new MBA's take jobs not because they are particularly excited about the starting salary, but rather for the potential for 'later salary'. For example, new investment bankers right out of MBA school make, including bonus, only 200-225k (which is really not that much considering how hard they work), however the ones who are good and can get promoted can easily make in the 7 or 8 figures later on. </p>
<p>In fact, phear_me, I think you'd probably be pretty good at investment banking or related high finance jobs. Yes, you told me your various circumstances about how you'd rather stick around Socal. Fair point. But Ibanking is one of those things that lots of people see as something that they simply have to try. If they don't make it, they don't make it, but at least they tried.</p>
<p>I don't think most MBA's are making 200 out the gate, unless the figures I see are drastically incorrect.</p>
<p>The numbers are not drastically incorrect, but they are highly misleading. Specifically, most of the numbers published out there are only salary, or maybe salary + signing bonus, and almost always exclude the year-end bonus. Certain jobs, most notably banking, pay out a great deal of their total compensation in the form of the year-end bonus. In fact, highly experienced star investment bankers hardly make anything off their salary, as they can make 90%+ of their money off the bonus. </p>
<p>The problem, of course, is nobody ever really knows exactly what the year-end bonus is going to be. It depends on how good you are, how good the bank does, how good the general economy is, etc. So I can understand why many of the figures shy away from publishing figures when they are so highly variable. </p>
<p>However, I would say that from a ballpark standpoint, the following numbers are fairly representative. But note, that the figures are from 1999-2001. Today's numbers are higher. New MBA's would be coming in as first-year associates. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.careers-in-finance.com/ibsal.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.careers-in-finance.com/ibsal.htm</a></p>
<p>Actually these figures are from the go go years in the stock market. From 2001-2004, I think the salaries and bonuses dropped quite a bit. This year, for example, a first year analyst's (bachelors degree) base salary just went up to 60K from 55K. So you can see base salaries remain the same as they were in 1999. Bonuses for analysts remain within the same range.</p>
<p>60 hours a week? That's a light week for a lot of i-bankers</p>
<p>I agree that bonuses (but not salaries) dropped during the 2001-2002 towntown. Salaries in general don't change very mmuch from year to year.</p>
<p>However, I would point out that 2005 was actually a HUGE banner year for Wall Street. 2005 was actually a record year in terms of bonuses given out. I believe that the total compensations given out in 2005 were handsomely above what was provided in my previous link. A total of $21.5 billion in bonuses were handed out in 2005, compared to $19 billion in the previous record year of 2000. </p>
<p><a href="http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11371413/%5B/url%5D">http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11371413/</a></p>
<p>And of course, you drop USC in the mix because that's your target school;) The reality is that MBAs from those schools CAN make as much -- hell, there are many without MBAs that make that much and more. The issue is breaking into those firms/industries. For example, Chicago, Wharton, Columbia, and NYU are HUGE feeders into the IB industry, primarily because of their reputation/prestige and to a certain extent, their locations. Does that mean that someone from USC cannot get the same job? They definitely can. But what you will find is that at schools with less polished reputations, you will have to be more of a standout student when compared to the top tier schools which send grads in droves. Check your local career center and check the stats for the firms that recruit on campus, how many offers are made, and compare with other institutions.</p>
<p>in a foreigner's opinon, harvard is more well know than other 5 school in other countries.
but other 5school is pretty great school thou...i don't know..i m struggling for UCs...</p>