<p>Okay, so Stanford’s business school tuition is not $93,000. [This[/url</a>] website says that their tuition is just under $60,000 a year. [url=<a href="http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/degrees/fully-employed-mba/admissions-and-events/tuition-and-fees]UCLA’s[/url">http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/degrees/fully-employed-mba/admissions-and-events/tuition-and-fees]UCLA’s[/url</a>] is about $37,000. [url=<a href=“http://mba.lmu.edu/prospectivestudents/programinformation/]Loyola”>http://mba.lmu.edu/prospectivestudents/programinformation/]Loyola</a> Marymount’s](<a href=“https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/programs/mba/financial-aid/cost-summary]This[/url”>Cost of Attendance | Stanford Graduate School of Business) is just under $30,000 a year.</p>
<p>So over two years you’d probably spend $120,000 at Stanford, about $74,000 at UCLA and $60,000 at Loyola Marymount.</p>
<p>I’m also not sure where you got the salary data from. Stanford says that their graduates’ median starting salary was $120,000, with a $25,000 signing bonus and $30,000 in other “guaranteed compensation” (probably fringe and year-end bonuses). [url=<a href=“http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/Documents/areas/adm/cmc/2012%20Parker%20CMC%20Employment%20Report%20SPREAD%20version.pdf]UCLA[/url”>http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/Documents/areas/adm/cmc/2012%20Parker%20CMC%20Employment%20Report%20SPREAD%20version.pdf]UCLA[/url</a>] Anderson MBA’s had a median salary of $103,500 with a signing bonus of $20,000 and other guaranteed compensation of $12,000. Loyola Marymount’s starting salary information is hard to find - they don’t offer it on their website and don’t release it to other aggregators, which I consider a bad sign.</p>
<p>Forbes has interesting information, too - the 5-year salary gain of graduates of certain programs (they measured from 2008 to 2013). Stanford graduates averaged $221,000 5 years after graduating, which means they had almost doubled their salary in five years. UCLA Anderson grads averaged about $165,000 5 years after graduating.</p>
<p>According to U.S. News, Stanford’s MBA program is ranked #1, tied with Harvard. Anderson is ranked #14, tied with Michigan, just below Yale and just above Cornell. LMU’s program is unranked. Forbes also ranks the schools on return on investment; Stanford ranks #1, and UCLA ranks #13.</p>
<p>Either UCLA or Stanford could be a good choice depending on your needs, but if we’re asking personally I would hands-down pick Stanford without a second thought. Yes, you will be more in debt at the end - to the tune of about $50,000 extra, while UCLA’s starting salaries are only about $17,000 lower ($30,000 if you include all of the bonuses and extra compensation). BUT first of all, Stanford’s name is big in business, big to the point that you could take a Stanford degree anywhere in the country - or world - and be a competitive player.</p>
<p>Secondly, Stanford’s ROI is incredible. I’m compressing the ROI because the median salary data is from the 2013 class and the 5-year salaries are from the 2008 class, so honestly the difference is probably bigger than how it looks. But Stanford graduates managed to add $100,000 to their salaries in the 5 years between graduation and now, whereas UCLA Anderson grads added about $62,000. And since salary increases tend to be based on past salary, the Stanford grads will always make more - and in another 10 years, will make much more.</p>
<p>Of course, money isn’t everything - although I feel like that’s a big reason to get an MBA. But combine the salary data with the prestige of attending Stanford. The best business professors, leading the field in research and experience - the ones who wrote the cases you’re learning, who literally wrote the book and solved the problems you’re studying. You’d have the ability to work on pretty much any business problem you wanted, at any firm. Stanford has tremendous recruiting power on campus. I’m sure Anderson does too, though.</p>
<p>Loyola Marymount would not even be a consideration for me. But that’s because personally, if I were going after an MBA my goal would be to work at one of the BIG firms. LMU simply won’t get you there. LMU may be a perfectly acceptable choice if you have more local designs or smaller aspirations - or who need to attend part-time - especially given that it is half the price of a Stanford degree. But I also don’t trust schools that have flimsy information about their hiring and salaries, since business schools tend to make that information so widely available. When they don’t have it up and readily available (and you can’t easily find it on other websites like Forbes or BusinessWeek…that’s a red flag.</p>