As a graduate of UCLA Biz Econ (class of 2001), I want to defy some of the rumors and false expectations you guys might have about the program.

1. "USC and UC Berkeley have business programs; UCLA doesnt. Thus, UCLA doesnt open alot of doors for you with its Biz Econ degree."

Very, very wrong. Fatal mistake if you base your decision based on this rumor alone.

First of all, as high as Haas program or USC business program is lauded, the simple fact is that business program or Biz Econ program WILL NOT train you for the real world. All you have is four year undergraduate degree, and no matter how much you study accounting 101, finance 101, or econ 101, you will not be fully prepared with the undergraduate academic degree of only four years.

That\'s why most of the management consulting and investment banking firms have their in-house 4~6 weeks training program to train newly recruits fresh from the undergraduates.

In other words, if you think majoring business program would open more doors for you than majoring biz econ, you are making a big mistake.

Goldman Sachs, Morgran Stanley, McKinseys, Boston Consultings, and other prestigious business jobs invite the students with all kind of majors (yes, including history and philosophy) for their campus interview. What you major will not matter for these firms, but what you do and how you do with a given major means much more.

I am very frustrated by the fact that most of the posters here have some romantic idea about the superiority of business program, but the matter of fact is majoring something in your early youth is not in any way a determining factor in landing a job. You go to MBA for that. Companies have explicit policy of inviting all sorts of majors including liberal arts and humanities major and CS, EE, and math majors for entry level jobs.

Thus, dont worry about the title of your major. Instead, try to learn as much as you can from the core business courses offered at each respective schools. Each school have a range of finance, accounting, and economic classes. So dont worry about the majors and study hard.

Most firms would in a heartbeat choose philosphy major with 3.7 GPA (if he takes a few math or accounting courses) over business program major with 3.3 GPA.

Again, I repeat. The name of the major is highly overrated in the real world, especially if you are just graduating from college for your first job.

Also, the jobs for UC Berkeley and UCLA are virtually mutually exclusive, as the job opportunities for these schools are rather geographically separated that you wont compete against each other in most cases. And also in the LA market, there are enough jobs to go around for both USC business and UCLA biz econ that the students will not be hurt by the name of your major or school alone. Most firms would prefer USC Math major with 3.7 GPA over UCLA Biz Econ with 3.3 GPA. And the same firms would prefer UCLA Math majors with 3.7 GPA over USC Business Program major with 3.3 GPA.

2. "But business program is preferable since I am gonna do MBA. MBA prefers people with previous business expertise."

Wrong. Again, very wrong. MBA program dont have any kind of preference on the types of major. Over 30% of the MBA students have engineering backgrounds. The only requirement for the admission to MBA programs is calculus and some basic accounting courses. And you should be able to take these courses at any school even if you are not majoring business or econ degree.

Actually for that matter, most MBA program actually prefer students with some funky undergraduate majors for obvious diversity factors. So if you want to get into MBA programs with the help of your major, try to major in Asian American studies, Biochemistry, Art, Music, or Western History majors.

In this way, you would make yourself stand out more. Majoring business or econ programs would only put you in the bucket of thousands and thousands of virtually identical candidates.

3. "But I know for fact that I would network more if I go to business program"

Says who!?

This logic is comparable to "hey UCLA have far more pretty chicks than Berkeley does, so I should have far higher chances of hooking up with pretty chicks at UCLA".

It is not the pool that matters; what you do with a given pool matters far more.

And UCLA is not a suburban, deadbeat, boring, and dull campus. UCLA is located in the heart of West LA with very developed business communities (Santa Monica, Century City, Beverly Hills, Hollywoord, Downtown LA) nearby, and simply studying in this climate alone would open alot of doors in terms of meeting interesting people who might one day give you some help. Ditto for USC and UC Berkley.

So stop obsessing yourself with "network" Network is not something you can speak with a casual attitude. It takes work and dedication to get to know people. And if you still want to insisit on the merits of networking, go to the campus with the largest student population in a big city. You would have far greater pool of interesting people.

Again, networking is dependent on the skills and dedication by each person, not by the pool of the school. I have seen highly successful people coming out of all of the three schools mentioned previously, and the quality of networking at UNDERGRADUATE LEVEL (lets face it; you will not meet another Bill Gates by networking at undergraduates. You network at some social or business clubs you join. Or on some rare occassions, during the recreational activities offered at school) is virtually identical in each of the schools since the schools are all located in big cities.

If you really care about networking still, go to NYU. NYU has a good business program and is located in NY. Just dont regret later when you find out that the values of networking do not turn out to be as you had expected previously.

Academics should be your first priority (and in most cases, your only priority), since most prestigious firms would screen the interview candidates mostly by GPAs (the only visible, tangible data that they can use to evalute the relative strengths of the candidates), not networking.

4. "UCLA Biz Econ teaches only theoretical stuff. I want some practical stuff."

Again, false expectation. If you look hard enough, there are a plenty of classes that teach you practical business materials. While at UCLA, I took so many "practical" courses such as "Changing Strategies in a Managment World", "Basic and Advanced Managerial Finance", "Public Finance", "Money and Banking", "International Trade", "International Finance", and "Employment Opportunities and Relationships" that I barely recognized the fact that my major was biz E-C-O-N-O-M-I-C-S.

Again, its the classes you are taking that matters, not the names of your major. So try to focus on less superficial aspects of your education.

Let me know if you have any questions.