<p>
</p>
<p>I thought you were going to Wharton this Fall... :rolleyes:</p>
<p>The biggest problem,imo, is that UCLA is shadowed to an extent by UCB. Within the country,or outside, Berkeley enjoys reputation which is as good as the Ivy league or Stanford,MIT,Caltech. Unless one is biased, I don't think there is anything to argue about the ground reality. I have found the same mindset, even while applying for graduate studies or employment in the MC/IB segments. However, college life is much beyond "Should I get a job in the IB?". The 4 years at UCLA, will be something to treasure throughout your life. On this account, UCLA beats every other university in California, hands down:)</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is harder to get into IB from UCLA. Yes, no questions asked. Harder. Harder than Berk. Harder than USC.
[/quote]
I'm not so sure about that. There are some investment banks that visit Cal and UCLA but do not visit USC. Additionally, someone who graduated from UCLA and worked for a private equity fund told me they recruit from UCLA but not from USC. Obviously, this is just one example and it should not be an indication of any trend. However, to say "no questions asked," USC and Cal are better than UCLA for finance careers, is a huge assumption.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The biggest problem,imo, is that UCLA is shadowed to an extent by UCB.
[/quote]
This is not necessarily true. In Northern California, Cal may be more prestigious. However, UCLA is very respected in Southern California. If you are a top student with great extracurriculars, you will have no problem landing an investment banking job in Los Angeles with a bulge bracket firm. A fund of fund (hedge fund and private equity) recently interviewed me. As a matter of fact, the more coveted private equity jobs are actually available to some UCLA grads.</p>
<p>Honestly, Haas is not "as good as the Ivy league or Stanford,MIT,Caltech." A lot of people here have a "PhD mentality." If you look at the business school rankings in recent years, UCLA Anderson and Haas are very closely ranked. Anderson is actually known for its finance department. It is one of the top MBA schools recruited by investment banks. If you want to work for an investment bank in New York, then Haas and UCLA are probably not the best schools for you because the New York offices do not really recruit that many students from California schools (except maybe Stanford). There are a lot more Michigan grads working in Manhattan. Despite their "international prestige," a lot of Cal students actually work locally in the bay area.</p>
<p>Also, lets be honest, if you are that exception, you would have been accepted into Stanford or an Ivy League school. So perhaps, you should consider some backups. It is much more competitive (3.5 GPA average) to get into Haas than it is to get into UCLA’s Business Economics major and Accounting minor. Therefore, if you do not end up getting into Haas, then you are much better at UCLA for career opportunities. Try telling a Big Four recruiter to hire you because you are an Econ major at Berkeley. They will not care. For example, Big Four recruiters have told me they recruit from USD and SDSU but not from the more prestigious UCSD for accounting jobs because UCSD does not have any accounting classes.</p>
<p>Perhaps, you still do not trust me but put it this way: If Cal had much better career opportunities than UCLA then I would not be here at UCLA right now.</p>
<p>One reason why a lot of people from UCLA are not going into investment banking is a lack of interest. After all, this is Southern California and a lot of people are attracted to UCLA for its laid back lifestyle. Not many people want to put in 90 hours a week for an investment banking job that they know they will not do for a lifetime. A career at a Big Four assures you much better work/life balance while still giving you opportunities to deal with a wide variety of Fortune 500 clients.</p>
<p>UCLA isn't a BB target. Sorry, it just isn't. That's not to say that the BB's dont recruit here, but it isn't a "target" like the ivies, berk, stanford etc. However that doesn't mean you can't get a gig, it'll just be harder. Look at firms and find associates who are LA alums...email them and talk to them. Stay in touch, if they are in the area take them out to lunch and say you have some questions. It's these "connections" that get you an interview, and once u get the interview you just gotta show them what ur made of.</p>
<p>DYIP: When it comes to BB banks, it's berk>ucla. I'd consider ucla>usc but Berkeley is one of the top 5 schools for BB analyst position recruiting.</p>
<p>Ashton, please note that a college graduate from Haas (UCB) would naturally have any advantage over an Econ graduate from any college, since Haas is an undergraduate business school. Therefore, it would follow that since UCLA does not have an undergrad business school, graduates from the UCLA College of Letters and Sciences would naturally be at a disadvantage when competing with Haas graduates. Again, Haas is a Business School. In fact, forget Haas and UCLA. Let's make this even simpler. Any [insert name of any undergrad business school] graduate would have an advantage in IBanking over any [insert name of any normal college] graduate. We could be talking about UCLA, Harvard, Cal, it doesn't matter. You're comparing apples and oranges here. Try comparing UCLA Econ to Cal Econ (both college majors); that would make more sense. Hopefully this helps.</p>
<p>8Miner,</p>
<p>This is simply not true. </p>
<p>A USC business BA is not going to have any significant advantage over an econ grad at Harvard. In fact, I bet that the Harvard grad would do better than the USC business grad, simply because of location and brand name.</p>
<p>Absolutely not true. You don't seem to know a lot about ibanking. They hire English, History, and lots of Econ graduates. A lot (most of them) actually prefer a quantitative econ major from a top school over most undergrad business degrees.</p>
<p>
[quote]
One reason why a lot of people from UCLA are not going into investment banking is a lack of interest. After all, this is Southern California and a lot of people are attracted to UCLA for its laid back lifestyle.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Which is another way of saying UCLA people lack in ambition. IN GENERAL. honestly, I do not understand those who put weather as such high up in the factor for deciding the college. Majority of people who choose UCLA over Cal are because of social life and the weather. They often fail to realize that Cal will give them much more opportunity to career they want (both at national and international level due to the unmatched prestige factor).</p>
<p>And I seriously don't like the idea of how majority of the BizEcon ppl end up in Accounting job. To be honest, ANYONE can get into accounting. Some idiot from CSU can easily get into Big 4. This indicates that working in Big 4 isn't that much of an accomplishment. There is a reason why Haas people consider Big 4 as a "back-up" plan. Think "Safety school", that's how little people think of the accounting career. Therefore, going to the "most prestigious school in the Southern Cali" only to end up at Big 4 looks like a waste of effort of education and prestige.</p>
<p>Which is one reason why I want to end up at IBank. I don't want to end up like everyone else.</p>
<p>Wait, you asked if UCLA was good enough for ibanking earlier, got some answers saying yes you can definitely get into ibanking w/ a UCLA degree and now you're telling everybody that everyone ends up in accounting anyways, which btw is a job for idiots. Nice attitude man, you will be a "great" banker...good luck</p>
<p>mynameisashton,</p>
<p>Your argument assumes that people all think that i-banking is somehow the best career/goal possible. I don't know that wanting to be a doctor or lawyer or professor is any less ambitious. I think that it may be that UCLA people don't lack ambition, but that they have DIFFERENT ambitions.</p>
<p>This isn't necessarily zero sum, you know. </p>
<p>And no, Cal will not give you "much more opportunity." It will give you some, at most. I have yet to meet anyone from UCLA whose opportunities were cut short by the name brand of UCLA versus that of Cal.</p>
<p>mynameisashton, if you strongly believe that UCLA can get you nothing but accounting jobs from Big 4 which you consider merely as jobs for idiots, why do you even bother thinking about coming to UCLA? Just don't choose UCLA and go somewhere else. It's as simple as that.</p>
<p>Cal, Stanford, Ivy,etc may be (or may not be) better at placing their students at ibanking than UCLA. I don't know and don't wanna argue about it. But, the fact that you don't get accepted to any of these schools simply means that you cannot go there even if everybody on the earth agrees with you that those schools are better than UCLA.</p>
<p>resign yourself to the mediocrity of corporate accounting. now that you have come to ucla, you have no future.</p>
<p>UCLAri, I agree with your specific USC-Harvard comparison, but come on, Harvard is Harvard. When comparing UCLA to UCB, my argument holds, IMO.</p>
<p>You said "Any [insert name of any undergrad business school] graduate" will have an edge when it comes to ibanking. That's just wrong. Who told you that?</p>
<p>8Miner,</p>
<p>That still holds true for USC business versus Northwestern, if Vault's ratings are correct.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Which is another way of saying UCLA people lack in ambition. IN GENERAL. honestly, I do not understand those who put weather as such high up in the factor for deciding the college. Majority of people who choose UCLA over Cal are because of social life and the weather. They often fail to realize that Cal will give them much more opportunity to career they want (both at national and international level due to the unmatched prestige factor).
[/quote]
Anyone else smell as USC troll here?</p>
<p>I don't see what the big deal is? You can get IBanking from UCLA, it's gonna be much easier then UCSB however much more difficult then HASS. These are some of the most saught after internships/jobs for top level UG's, and it's also a very <em>prestige</em> oriented field, which accounts for why a Harvard history major can get a banking gig with a 3.5, whereas a 3.5 history major from ucla isn't gonna get it. However many people dont realize that you dont need to do UG --> Analyst --> Associate, you can just as easily do UG --> Work somewhere else for a couple of years --> B-school --> Associate.</p>
<p>much harder for haas? how so? is that fact? i understand that haas is more recruited but ibanking is also more popular at haas? is the difficulty in getting ibanking jobs really different as in the different percentages at different schools get into ib?</p>
<p>Med,</p>
<p>I think Ari mentioned it earlier in the thread, but Haas is a business school, therefore giving someone an edge already. Add to the fact that it is one of the best b-schools in the nation, compounded by one of the top i-banking schools (in terms of recruitment) makes it superior to UCLA. Furthermore, it's considered a target school for BBB's, whereas ucla is not.</p>