<p>Lil<em>wayne</em>Fan, you still don't get it. Seriously, don't major in finance ( just kidding).</p>
<p>Using future value tables that you will learn in finance, if you save an extra $100,000 over what BC would charge over UMass, you at the end of 30 years invested at a measly 8% in an average performing mutual fund, it would be worth $1,006,265 to you</p>
<p>If you invested this for 40 years , it would be worth to you at retirement a whopping: $2,172,452</p>
<p>In effect, going to BC over UMass costs you an extra $2,172,453 in lost future assets. It isn't worth it! Get over it. Moreover, I think UMass is every bit as good as BC.</p>
<p>i had the same issue. My parents said the only school they are willing to pay for was stern and i lucked out. But i applied to cheaper schools like UNC-chapel hill and kelley just in case my dad didnt feel like paying for BC or Gtown</p>
<p>how rich are ur parents? if they dont make 150k plus, i wouldn't really want to put the burden of 200k on them</p>
<p>see where the alumni end up and what positions they end up(5 people working in goldman sach IT department isnt as impressive as 2 working in IB)</p>
<p>my suggestion, if u dont have a decent plan b , i would go with rutgers</p>
<p>It all depends. Check recruitment and position they get. If rutgers has the types of careers you want open, go to Rutgers. If not, say only like 5 people go into IB, and BC has like 40 people go into IB, go to BC. Check the positions they get. a person working at Goldman can be an computer IT, operations, or IB. The actually job plays a big difference. </p>
<p>business education on the undergrad level is not that different, unless u get into a really elite school, so it really doesn't matter that much</p>
<p>and rutgers honors isn't that bad. did u get any money from rutgers?</p>
<p>LWF, it seems that this is a conversation you should be having with your parents. Every family has to decide what is "worth it" for themselves, so if you really want to go to BC, go for it.
FYI, my children have attended privates without any aid and I've never regretted paying for it.</p>
<p>Lil_Wayne, it's obvious that you're not actually seeking a dialogue here, more validation for your decision. So I'll bite: Sure, BC is worth 30k-40k in debt. And actually now that I think about it, even if I wasn't pandering to your ego, its business school probably is. Especially if you're willing to work during college to pay off most of the loans.</p>
<p>It's not that I have an ego, it's because I'm Asian</p>
<p>An Asian settling for his state school? Especially when so many people here in NJ look down upon Rutgers (it's not hard to get into)?</p>
<p>It's more of a cultural thing, you know? I ain't gonna lie, I would feel ashamed. It's bad enough I'm not going to a Top 20 school (I got rejected by Cornell, Rice, Emory, NYU Stern)</p>
<p>I think my dad was just trying to scare me with the 100k debt thing (he always purposely misleads me), we're going to visit BC on April 20th, and if he likes it I'm sure he will pay more for me to go there</p>
<p>IMO there are only 5 or 7 schools worth paying 50k / yr to attend, unless you are absolutely loaded and 50k is pocket change and the marginal benefit justifies it.</p>
<p>look, going to a place like BC is good. its great. its better than what 95% of people do. however, its not the best option for you. save the money, save the burden that it would put on yourself and on your parents. people end up rich as hell from state schools all the time. focus on yourself, on your personal accomplishments, and stay ambitious.</p>
<p>Rutgers, like all major universities, has a long list of successful graduates. Your success will not be determined by which of these universities you choose, but rather, what you choose to do once you are in school and beyond.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Especially if you're willing to work during college to pay off most of the loans.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How would that affect this investment? Can he not also work while attending a school in which he has no debt? The only difference i see is that he would receive an added benefit of avoiding interest payments by paying down the loan, but if he worked while going to a cheaper school, could he not just invest the money and receive a higher rate of return than the rate on a student loan anyways?</p>
<p>Vector, you completely pulled that sentence out of context. Let me clarify: Going to BC's business school is worth it if you're willing to work during your 4 years and trim your debt down to more healthy levels. I'm not saying it's not worth working if you don't have debt (I do), but it's certainly not a college experience I would choose without payoff.</p>
<p>I get that you're saying you'd make roughly 40k+ through the 4 years regardless of which school you'd go to, so instead of a -40k from debt you could have 40k spending/investing capital, but the reality is if he went to a cheaper school, there would be less motivation to work. But we're not considering alternatives here. Do you think 100k is manageable? Probably not. But if it's 50-60k it certainly is.</p>
<p>Reviving this 2008 thread as we are facing very similar decision and this one has real meaty discussion. Generalizing the choice as between an elite top 20 private (non-ivy) and a well regarded top 20 public school. The price points are respectively about 55k and 20k annual with little or no merit aid at either. Major in this thread is Finance but it could be any business or engg concentration in general. </p>
<p>If I understand the economics, the only student profile that should choose the private school would be at two ends - those with EFC <= 20k for whom the two schools end up costing the same or those with so much wealth that the 35k per year differential is pocket change. That would equate approximately to families with incomes < 80k or >500k. For most in between, the private school choice would not be financially beneficial given that merit aid is relatively rare. </p>
<p>So my question - is this income bi-modality the typical student profile at these top private schools? Or are there intangibles that cause this distribution to be more normalized? In a perfect market (which college education is not), you could not have such a dominant choice and still have the private college segment thriving as it is.</p>