how the wealthy keep their kids networking

[jefhatfield]

i mentioned that one of the ways that they wealthy keep their money (in the "taxes on the rise" thread) is thru private high schools and colleges

i have been a product of both private and public education, and the biggest difference was not quality of education, but the value placed on "networking"

go to a great college like stanford and it is perhaps the main topic of conversation...ie) my daddy's biz makes shoes and you said that your daddy made shoelaces? - so let's hook up

but a few miles up the road in the bay area at uc berkeley, an academic equal in every way, then the topic, still, are social issues, racial harmony, rights for the under privelidged and networking talk gets dirty looks more often than not

i went to a university equidistant to both schools so i would use both the other school's bigger resources and do a lot of homework there while i was in graduate business school

go to stanford, then i end up in a discussion about how i can hook up with someone from there, since i was at a pretty well connected private college myself

but go to berkeley, and then i end up in a discussion about changing the face of society, business, culture, etc...the radicals are the same there, but much more sophisticated and more conformist looking...but with equal desire to help liberal causes

when i meet someone who has not had the exposure to the way the wealthy interact and they happen to get accepted to both schools, they usually opt for the much less expensive uc berkeley to save money

little do they know that going to stanford will much more likely make them rich and powerful and actually get no better of an academic education

one can't say that stanford's mba school at 30k a year is worth 10k a year more than berkeley, which is 20k a year

the big difference is that the rich know that spending that extra 10k a year for their child's mba will possibly make a difference in millions over a lifetime

[diorio]

Originally posted by jefhatfield
i mentioned that one of the ways that they wealthy keep their money (in the "taxes on the rise" thread) is thru private high schools and colleges

i have been a product of both private and public education, and the biggest difference was not quality of education, but the value placed on "networking"

go to a great college like stanford and it is perhaps the main topic of conversation...ie) my daddy's biz makes shoes and you said that your daddy made shoelaces? - so let's hook up

but a few miles up the road in the bay area at uc berkeley, an academic equal in every way, then the topic, still, are social issues, racial harmony, rights for the under privelidged and networking talk gets dirty looks more often than not

i went to a university equidistant to both schools so i would use both the other school's bigger resources and do a lot of homework there while i was in graduate business school

go to stanford, then i end up in a discussion about how i can hook up with someone from there, since i was at a pretty well connected private college myself

but go to berkeley, and then i end up in a discussion about changing the face of society, business, culture, etc...the radicals are the same there, but much more sophisticated and more conformist looking...but with equal desire to help liberal causes

when i meet someone who has not had the exposure to the way the wealthy interact and they happen to get accepted to both schools, they usually opt for the much less expensive uc berkeley to save money

little do they know that going to stanford will much more likely make them rich and powerful and actually get no better of an academic education

one can't say that stanford's mba school at 30k a year is worth 10k a year more than berkeley, which is 20k a year

the big difference is that the rich know that spending that extra 10k a year for their child's mba will possibly make a difference in millions over a lifetime

I am totally lost. I have no idea what you are talking about. Actually, spending 10k a year for the "bigger name" school, isn't going to make that much difference. Nowdays, one can attend community college for two years, transfer to a university, and still make as much as someone who spendings 3x as much attending a private school.

the big difference is that the rich know that spending that extra 10k a year for their child's mba will possibly make a difference in millions over a lifetime

I don't know where you pulled this statistic up, but frankly it makes you sound kind of stuck up, like you are rich, and you do know this. And frankly, it isn't true.

[Nipsy]

Originally posted by diorio


I am totally lost. I have no idea what you are talking about. Actually, spending 10k a year for the "bigger name" school, isn't going to make that much difference. Nowdays, one can attend community college for two years, transfer to a university, and still make as much as someone who spendings 3x as much attending a private school.



I don't know where you pulled this statistic up, but frankly it makes you sound kind of stuck up, like you are rich, and you do know this. And frankly, it isn't true.

This is sooo wrong...

The monetary measurement of education institutions is in contacts, not knowledge.

You can go to a CC, transfer, get an MBA from a non "name" school, and still make a fortune, but it will be so much harder.

Last I checked, the average Stanford MBA started at ~$125k, and the average MBA started at ~68k. Even if you remain at those salaries, it is a million plus over a career. You can extrapolate from those salaries that the wealthier companies are hiring from the "name" schools, and the lesser companies are hiring from the lesser schools. Thusly, the "name " school places you into a better advancement path from the getgo. If you start in middle management for GE, IBM, etc., you will go farther than if you start in middle managment for the County Records Deptartment, or a small local company.

You can certainly acheive anything without the "name", but it will not be nearly as easy. That 10k/yr makes a world of difference...

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by Nipsy


This is sooo wrong...

The monetary measurement of education institutions is in contacts, not knowledge.

You can go to a CC, transfer, get an MBA from a non "name" school, and still make a fortune, but it will be so much harder.

Last I checked, the average Stanford MBA started at ~$125k, and the average MBA started at ~68k. Even if you remain at those salaries, it is a million plus over a career. You can extrapolate from those salaries that the wealthier companies are hiring from the "name" schools, and the lesser companies are hiring from the lesser schools. Thusly, the "name " school places you into a better advancement path from the getgo. If you start in middle management for GE, IBM, etc., you will go farther than if you start in middle managment for the County Records Deptartment, or a small local company.

You can certainly acheive anything without the "name", but it will not be nearly as easy. That 10k/yr makes a world of difference...

i couldn't say it better myself

it's in the contacts:p

that's what i meant with the shoe biz example

i should have said...my daddy owns a huge shoe factory and your daddy owns a huge shoelace factory...talking millions...let's talk ;)

[Geetar]

Originally posted by diorio


I am totally lost. I have no idea what you are talking about. .

This is clear. He is right and you are wrong. You don't have much of a feel for this stuff, do you?

[diorio]

It depends on what job you are going for. If one company hires from a name college, and nowhere else, than everyone's arguments are true. However, when a recruiter for a company is looking at two canidates, if they both have an MBA, will not choose based on school. They will interview, and choose the better of the two. Spending an extra 10k a year for a name school, will not make you 10k more a year. A MBA is an MBA is an MBA. If I go to Berkely instead of Stanford and receive my MBA, I might not get hired from a certain company, but my job skills and knowledge will equal that of the Stanford graduate and my chances of getting a good job are the same. As an employer, I would look for the most qualified, not necassarily to the person with the richest father.

This is clear. He is right and you are wrong. You don't have much of a feel for this stuff, do you?

Show me the facts, for I have not seen a website, or link stating his opinions to be fact. I have talked to college recruiters, and college counselours. In the end, their responses are all the same. "The name of the college isn't important. Go for the college best suiting your needs, and you'll be fine. Don't go into debt so you can go to the name school. Go to the school that you can afford and you'll recieve an education similar to that of one you'll pay 2x as much for."

[Nipsy]

The point is that if you've got a Stanford MBA, you don't need a recruiter because of the contacts. The Stanford MBA is likely to interviewed by the VP of BizDev, while the State School MBA will be interviewed by HR. This is the value of the "name" & the contacts. If the Stanford MBA is not made of flubber, and impresses the VP of BizDev, that will likely outweigh the thoughts of someone in HR, and the Stanford MBA will get the job.

The school does matter. Look at first years average salaries from the Ivys and Stanford.

Then look at first year salaries from Chico state, ASU, etc.

That doesn't mean that indivduals cannot stray from the average, it just means that if you get a Stanford MBA, you're likely to get 125k when you're done, and if you get that MBA elsewhere, you're likely to get 68k, regardless of your education.

And that 10k (on average) becomes almost 60k when you leave school.

As for facts, stats, and docs, Fortune, Money, the WSJ, etc. do columns often about starting salaries and how they relate to schools. You can do the research, as I've already read them...

[Choppaface]

Originally posted by Nipsy
The school does matter. Look at first years average salaries from the Ivys and Stanford.

Then look at first year salaries from Chico state, ASU, etc.

there's going to be a lot more diversity of interests at non-ivies...especially at large public universities like berkeley. not everybody is going to want to be daddy's little clone at those places....

[Nipsy]

Originally posted by Choppaface


there's going to be a lot more diversity of interests at non-ivies...especially at large public universities like berkeley. not everybody is going to want to be daddy's little clone at those places....

Indeed, but the whole debate is about this statement "Actually, spending 10k a year for the "bigger name" school, isn't going to make that much difference. Nowdays, one can attend community college for two years, transfer to a university, and still make as much as someone who spendings 3x as much attending a private school.", which is easily disproved.

Also, Berkeley is not really a large public university, and historically one of the most diverse & liberal campuses in the states. Therfore, it is going to skew comparisons made.

[Full discolsure: I attended UC Berkeley & UC Santa Cruz]

[Chomolungma]

A few months ago, I think it was either CNBC or CNNfn reported a study that showed specialize professional (e.g. doctors, chemists, engineers) perfom just as well as those with a MBA degree. These professional spend a total of 1 month studying management skills. Is a MBA worth it? This was the premise of the story.

On similar line, in her latest book, Margeret Thatcher said that she is always suspicious of companys that are run by those who do not know the detail working knowledge of their products (e.g. technology companies such as HP).

I find it comical to see that our "leaders" learn leadership skills in a classroom (e.g. our current MBA president and the state of the economy).

[MacBandit]

I totally understand. I've spent the last 7 years working at a BMW Motorcycle shop in town. It has been a great resource. I have gotten to know a lot of big names in the town and influential people. I've purposely made friends with a number of them. This has given me opportunities I never knew existed. One of them wants to back me in a business opportunity right now.

[jefhatfield]

basically, what nipsy said first made the most sense, diorio, in clarifying the issue...it's not the education, but the contacts with who you are dealing with and the philosophy of the school

my personal philosophy is closer to that of berkeley, but being in the working world for 25 years has made me see a lot of strings attached and inner workings of businesses large and small

what may go on with alumni of private elite universities may not be fair, but it happens

diorio, are you still in high school or in your early 20s?

i still have the liberal beliefs of my youth but i was only making an observation of what i have seen from my eyes...many times, the elite private school mbas come from very rich families to start and that is the other half of the game besides the rich kids intermingling with each other at stanford, or harvard, or usc

sure if i had the power, i would love to see the playing field leveled but it won't any time soon

[mymemory]

I think the observation is good but the conclusionor analisys is wrong.

Look, everything depend of your enviroment, if you go to a getto you would be in the need of carrying a gun every where (for example), may be for no reason.

If you go to another social levels you are gonna find things different than yours, for exaplample, MOST OF THE TIME people with lower income or social level have more kids.

In the case of "networking" I would call that a good tip that makes people successfull, the other way around would be some one that spend time isolated from others= looser (most of the time).

If the rich people network a lot is because the enviroment realated with success demand that, may be they learned from their parents without even care. I would call that "good social relationships" that end in "networking" and that is the way to go, to meet some one that know some one that knows that person that you need to know.

If we go farther in to the subject, the humman being is from 3 to 5 people away from the rest of the humman beings. That means that if you want to know or have contact to last years Miss Universe you can do it thru me because I know where she lives. So, that is the importance of networking and successfull people knows that (specially bussiness people).

[Dignan]

Being rich isnt going to get you into harvard, or at least keep you from failing out. The fact is, these guys get a good education, they are smart, they are business savvy. When they need support to run businesses, they turn to people they know they can trust, they know are smart and up for the task, like their fellow alums.

Relationships and networking are important in business. So I think its important to start learning early, in college. And it does help to get pass lots of B.S.

best thing ive heard this year was at a meeting about getting into the entertainment industry... "we are here to tell you about how to get into the entertainment industry, because its really easy"

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by Dignan
Being rich isnt going to get you into harvard, or at least keep you from failing out. The fact is, these guys get a good education, they are smart, they are business savvy. When they need support to run businesses, they turn to people they know they can trust, they know are smart and up for the task, like their fellow alums.



when i asked one of my friends who went to thru the stanford mba program, she laid it out like this for the makeup she encountered at grad b-school

one third - rich legacy students who didn't have the grades, but whose parent(s) went to stanford

one third - people with lots of money and great grades, some of them being legacy students

one third - people like her with a student loan which will take time to pay off with interest, and great grades ...usually quite a bit higher than either the first or second group...and with a 700 or better on the GMAT entrance exam

[Dignan]

So far as I have been able to tell, the percentage of rich kids without the grades at harvard is pretty low. Lots of kids do fall under ivy-educated family, but these kids are really smart too. And plenty of kids who get financial aid to get in.

They give out tons of financial aid, because, they can afford to

[arn]

jeff... there's a big distinciton between grad school and Undergrad...

For Grad school - especially business school - I think you have more of a point... regarding contacts... for undergrad... it's very different. I don't think about contacts.

For undergrad for schools such as Harvard and Princeton etc.... you will have a small contingency of "rich kids" whose parents went to Harvard etc... but this is a small percentage. The majority of the school is made up of middle-class smart-kids who did well in high school/sat's and made it into harvard, along with a diverse background.

Personally, I went to Columbia University for undegrad... and I find this comment to be a joke:

"go to a great college like stanford and it is perhaps the main topic of conversation...ie) my daddy's biz makes shoes and you said that your daddy made shoelaces? - so let's hook up"

I promise I've never had that conversation with anyone in undergrad. :) Columbia was a very diverse population... I wager a far more geographically diverse population than most state schools... as it has a larger geographic reach in the student population.

arn

[e-coli]

It's not what you know, it's who you know. ;)

[Choppaface]

Originally posted by arn
The majority of the school is made up of middle-class smart-kids who did well in high school/sat's and made it into harvard, along with a diverse background.

and sometimes it doesn't even take that...I've read about 10 or so people got accepted to harvard early and their sats were <1250, and not all underrepresented minorities

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by arn
jeff... there's a big distinciton between grad school and Undergrad...

For Grad school - especially business school - I think you have more of a point... regarding contacts... for undergrad... it's very different. I don't think about contacts.



arn

grad school is where i mostly directed my comment...especially business

since i was not a history, science, or liberal studies major for undergrad with contact with both cal and stanford undergrads, i would not really know the context of the makeup of the students

when you say "especially" business, i take it you assume a more of a contact hungry type of group into business networking...i would also tend to think so

the public school could give the mba the same quality of education as any private school, but at the mba level, the contacts and entrepreneurial possibilities are half the reason for going and spending the extra dough for a wharton or a harvard

[arn]

Originally posted by jefhatfield

when you say "especially" business, i take it you assume a more of a contact hungry type of group into business networking...i would also tend to think so

the public school could give the mba the same quality of education as any private school, but at the mba level, the contacts and entrepreneurial possibilities are half the reason for going and spending the extra dough for a wharton or a harvard

sure... I generally agree with the above. :)

arn

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by arn


sure... I generally agree with the above. :)

arn

i had a good friend of mine, who many years ago, was accepted to two mba programs... a top tier private school (university of southern california) and a decent public school (hayward state)

he was able to pay for hayward state out of pocket so he opted for that school and received his mba in an education which he says was as good as any he could have asked for...during the two years he was there, he never made any contacts

but now almost twenty years later, he feels like he should have taken the road less traveled and gone to that top tier private school for its "connections"

every time i meet my friend, he keeps saying he wouldn't have minded paying many years of students loans and interest, and wondered what his life could have been like if he had gone to usc's mba school

its hard to pick up a business magazine or trade periodical and not notice some high profile ceo that came out of usc, which has the best and most impressive name in california next to stanford

like another poster mentioned on this thread, a private school, top tier mba starts on the middle rungs of the ladder while the public school no name school mba works at the bottom or at some small, unknown company

i have seen mba school ratings consistently place stanford at the top of the heap of the mba schools in california with usc at third or fourth

...public schools ucla, and sometimes cal berkeley rate higher academically than usc in the mba curriculum

but given the chance, i would take usc over any school in the state except for stanford...again, for the contacts

on another note concerning contacts, i used to be a musician and some of the best local musicians i have met in my small town of 4,000 people opted to stay here thinking that their talent would get them noticed of bring them great (or even liveable) income

some of the lesser known or lesser talented musicians i knew who decided to go to a large city like san francisco or los angeles did much better due to the contacts they encountered at the right place in the big city

certainly, it was not their talent or training these traveling musicians got in high school in the 4,000 person town that gave them the edge, but the fact they went to a place where they knew their chances of getting connections would help

not everything in life is about connections, but certain areas/fields like top tier private mba schools and big city music scenes virtually require contacts/connections for success