<p>Not if you’re only focused on the top schools, you won’t.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know what this is supposed to mean. I have said that I have an MBA and in what industries I worked pre and post B-school. I feel the comments I have made wouldn’t be possible if I hadn’t actually had the experience I have stated. My point was that you seem to have no context to be making these assessments other than objective admissions data, which is not the way to differentiate among B-schools. </p>
<p>I notice you conveniently ignore any of the analyses that look out at earnings beyond initial salary like someone posted on here, where Berkeley ranked somewhere ~ #18.</p>
<p>It’s probably also the reason why Tuck has very few applicants. Many high-caliber MBA applicants haven’t heard of it as well. </p>
<p>University of California-Berkeley - Haas School of Business
Full-time MBA: 500</p>
<h1>of Applicants: 3779</h1>
<p>Applicants who were accepted: 12 %
Middle 80% range GMAT scores: 670 - 760</p>
<p>Dartmouth College - Tuck School of Business
Full Time MBA: 506</p>
<h1>of Applicants: 2898</h1>
<p>Applicants who were accepted: 16 %
Middle 80% range GMAT scores: 650 - 760</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because I don’t think the data really pictures the general earnings of all Haas MBA grads considering the very low turnout of Haas grads respondents of the survey.</p>
<p>It’s time for REALITY CHECK, my friend!
Two very credible ranking league tables showed that Berkeley-Haas is now superior to Dartmouth-Tuck. This isn’t 10 years ago anymore. lol</p>
<p>gellino, I don’t mind if Tuck is ranked #9 and Ross #10. Or if Stanford is #3 and Kellogg and Chicago #4. In my opinion, there is almost no difference between #1 and #10, let alone between #3 and #4 or #9 and #10.</p>
<p>Says the person with no MBA, who doesn’t work in a business-related job, and doesn’t even reside in this country and you’re impugning my understanding of reality? You have no context whatsoever. Any ranking that doesn’t have Harvard, Stanford, Wharton ranked as 1,2,3 is not reputable to me. I don’t know where you’re getting this 188K vs 184K numbers but it does not come close to resembling any of the other pay analyses others have posted on here; not to mention Berkeley’s vast inferiority in placing people in the most desirable jobs in comparison to Tuck that another poster on here laid out. </p>
<p>However, since you are not in position to be aspiring to one of these positions, you have no appreciation of these differences. Stick to something you apparently know like science and leave a discussion on MBAs to the people who have actually been a part of the process and know about them. Only someone with no understanding of the differences in MBA programs would cite as evidence that one school is inferior to another based on USNWR saying one school is #7 and the other is #8 (this year no less). If you think USNWR matters so much, what have the comparisons been for the last 10 years?</p>
<p>Work with people aspiring to get an MBA, work with people with an MBA, get an MBA, be in a position to hire those with an MBA (none of which you have or you would have tried to use this experience in your defense), and then you would be in position to comment. Until then, your opinion is uninformed and without merit, which is why your obsequiously follow the rankings (for one year no less, the only year Berkeley was in front of Tuck). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Those rankings also have UChicago #1, UMichigan #5, Stanford #6, Duke #8, very far from general thinking as well. All you’re doing is picking and choosing the parts you like and then pointing to the rankings or a two point difference in GMAT score this year as evidence that you must be right. Do you think all the places that recruited at Tuck that didn’t recruit at Berkeley for all the years where USNWR ranked Tuck ahead are closely following the rankings and this year and pulling out at Tuck and recruiting at Berkeley instead? </p>
<p>Those rankings you posted also show that UVA and Notre Dame are ranked higher than Penn (Wharton) for UG business this year after years of the reverse. Would that also cause you to conclude that Wharton is now inferior to UVA and Notre Dame? I doubt very many would make such a conclusion. Published rankings are hardly any justification of anything in comparing schools to me.</p>
<p>My friend, we are not in a pi$$ing contest here, nor we are in a contest with having the best profile. No one here is interested to know who we are or what we do, neither do they are interested to know what our personal opinions are, I think. I presented the data because those are what matters here after all, not your personal, subjective, uninformed opinions. </p>
<p>Again, basing on the data which I’ve previously posted, Berkeley-Haas is now slightly superior to Dartmouth-Tuck, albeit very slightly, that’s why I have to group them together. Tuck’s strengths lie on being a superior feeder school to “big time” financial industries which are mostly located in NY, whilst Berkeley-Haas’ are entre/start ups / innovations/technology-driven industries. </p>
<p>
You’ve confused yourself now. I provided that link because you were asking where I got the salary data for Berkeley-Haas and Tuck.</p>
<p>
I did not present the GMAT data to show that Haas is superior to Tuck. I showed it so that you and some others here would know that Haas applicants aren’t subpar to Tuck’s applicants. In fact, through the GMAT scores we were able to find out that both Haas and Tuck do have an identical level of academic abilities.</p>
<p>I don’t see how Chicago at #1 is “very far from general thinking” Gelino. Or Michigan at #5 or Stanford at #6 or Duke at #8. Do you think #5 is “very far” from #1? Chicago is generally regarded as #4-#7 among MBA programs these days. And is #5 truly “very far” from #10? Ross is generally considered one of the top 10 MBA programs afterall. And is #6 very far from #2 or #3? How is Stanford at #6 “very far” from Stanford at #2 or #3? And how is Duke at #8 “very far” from its actual ranking? It occurs to me that in your termanology, “very far” is a 3-5 spot difference in ranking. That is a negligible difference in my book. There are roughly 10-15 elite MBA programs. The difference between #1 and #15 is obviously worth nothing, but the difference between #1 and #5 or between #5 and #10 is completely negligible as far as recruiters and academe are concerned.</p>
<p>“I’ve never heard of anyone who would pass up Harvard, Wharton or Stanford for Chicago.”</p>
<p>the_prestige, my experience has been extremely different from yours. There is a guy in my office who has passed up Wharton and Stanford for Chicago just a couple of months ago. My own cousin turned down Wharton in favor of Kellogg. Those are people whose acceptances have been verified (I actually saw their acceptances with my own eyes). I would be very surprised if none of the 500-600 MBA students who enroll into those programs annually got acceptances from Harvard, Stanford or Wharton. </p>
<p>“Name me 5 b-schools better than Stanford. GSB is at worst #3 and arguably 1 or 2”</p>
<p>Better? None. Like I said, there is virtually not difference between #1 and #5. But as good as Stanford, I can think of a couple, including HBS, Wharton and Kellogg. Which was my point. How is #6 “VERY FAR” from #2-#4 when there are literally a dozen of awesome MBA programs? Is #8 Dartmouth very far from #5 Sloan? Is #10 Yale very far from #7 Haas? Is #9 Columbia very far from #6 Chicago?</p>
<p>I agree that Stanford at #6 is a tiny bit low, but is it “very far” from its rightful spot at #3? I guess it depends on one’s definition of “very far”.</p>
<p>I know a couple of guys who turned down Stanford and Wharton for Chicago. Their reason, however, was money (they both got a full scholarship from Chicago), but still, they qualify for what the_prestige was looking for. </p>
<p>After giving a thought to what Alexandre has said, I’ve realised now that the difference that separates all the top 10 schools are very, very minute, to the point that it’s almost negligible.</p>
<p>Alex, while I have no doubt there are cases here and there, the overall majority of cross-applicants who have been accepted at Chicago + H/W/S will invariably favor H/W/S and by a wide margin.</p>
<p>The_prestige, I agree that the majority of cross admits will chose Stanford and Wharton over Chicago, but it is not by as wide a margin as you think. Like I said, of the 1,200 or so MBA students who enroll into Booth and Kellogg each year, I am sure that there are hundreds who were admitted into Stanford and Wharton but opted to stay go for Booth or Kellogg. Now HBS is a different story. I have only met a handful of people who ever turned down HBS for any MBA program.</p>
<p>How are you any more “sure” than anyone else? From my experience (which is at least as relevant as yours) I would estimate that 80%+ of those accepted into HSW, Kellogg, UChicago choose one of the former three. Personally, I only know one person to ever turn down Stanford for any school (Harvard), while at least know some that turned down Harvard and Wharton for Kellogg or Tuck. The only ones I’ve know to go to UChicago were turned down by all five of the others.</p>
<p>RML, you’re asking inane questions like this and you expect people on this board to respect your opinion about the relative ranking of business schools?</p>
</p>