Undecided - 04-04-2022 | Clear Admit DecisionWire

<< Back to DecisionWire

April 3, 2022 6:28pm ET

Enrolled: Undecided

Admitted: Rice / Jones $

$60000

, UCLA Anderson $

$70000

, UT Austin / McCombs $

$40000

Applied: Columbia, NYU Stern, Rice / Jones, UCLA Anderson, UT Austin / McCombs

Entering Year: 2022

Post MBA Career: Investment Banking

GMAT: 730

Location: TX

Notes:

Goal is BB/EB. I want to explore PE/VC through a venture fellowship and be in an entrepreneurial environment. I have pre-mba experience as both a founder and investor but want to move into banking before a long-term plan of PE. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Like (2)

Show Comments (5) Last: April 4, 2022

alexbr4 Verified User. Likes Earned: 1677 Are you wanting to be in Texas in the long term? Otherwise, Anderson might be your better choice, especially if LA is appealing? (1)

anon10646 Likes Earned: 783 I'm guessing you're open to NYC, CA, TX office placements based on the school list, maybe with a TX lean? IB prospects overall are fairly equal between Anderson & McCombs. LA/SF is going to have a broader array of the BB/EBs than Houston, but while the # of seats are likely lower in TX, you're also in a less competitive office in recruiting. I'm not as familiar with Houston's landscape, but I believe the dropoff from the budge and top independents will be to boutiques because there is not going to be as much MM work (more largecap & Energy work). Competition may be a bit stiffer for top offices in CA, but you're not going to have a much of that drop, so less of a top-tier or bust. Also, you need to consider the coverage/product groups in each office. While effectively it's all just numbers at the end of that day, in TX offices it's going to be a lot of Energy and RX work due to O&G industry. In LA/SF you're going to have a much wider range; industrials/defense, consumer retail, TMT, HC, RE, gaming, leisure, more of a cyclical RX, etc. I'd argue the latter gives a better PE platform unless you're looking for an Energy PE. I'd verify with each school's finance club about their placements this cycle, but Anderson seems a better fit and slightly cheaper once you account for the aid. (3)

anon Likes Earned: 0 OP Here: I would prefer TX long-term. My SO is a SWE finishing master's in LA, with offers in SF, LA, NYC, ATX. I'm open to any of those short/mid-term, but there are no real IB opportunities in ATX. I do have a strong undergrad and professional network in Houston/TX, so I think the later jump to TX is somewhat feasible even with a smaller UCLA connection. Also, NYC seems to have the strongest ties with the Houston IB/PE market, so I'm unsure who has the edge in NYC but it seems McCombs?? (2)

anon60923 Likes Earned: 14 @anon10646. OP here. Thank you for the insight, it’s very helpful. My experience is O&G, so my long term PE plan would likely include energy, but most interested in cleantech. There are a few EBs here but a ton of smaller boutiques. I’ll reach out to the finance clubs for more detail on placements. Thanks again! (2)

anon10646 Likes Earned: 783 Re: NYC connection. I'd say McCombs slightly, just because an LA/SF is often treated more as a regional hub than a satellite office like a Houston, so people seem more likely to go into the NYC office from UT, either because less structured entry or broader exposure outside energy. Although, my guess is it's a narrow spread based on their regional placement stats on each respective employment report, and NYC is the given IB location that you can recruit from anywhere. Color from the clubs would aid here, plus some LinkedIn screening as the UT undergrad representation in NYC may make a difference. I wouldn't worry so much about the UCLA connection impacting lateralling down the road if LA/SF > TX, since you'll have built industry networks after a few years and either internally lateral or do a little leg work to build up a move. Advice I was given in recruiting is IB is the difficult bit is getting in, so just find a seat; once you're in it's far easier to move about, especially at associate years. I'd focus more so on which is going to give you the best placement odds at the best firms. Although, Energy/Nat Resources type of placement in NYC would be great pathways if everything works out. (3)