If u were to choose between the two, an MBA from a top school like Wharton / Kellog / Stanford or a PhD in stat from again a top univ, for a "lucrative" career in finance, which wud u choose?
My thinking is that each of the B schools pass out 800+ of MBAs each year while PhD are of the order of 30s to 40s, and more than 50% going into academia..so i wud be more sought after if iget the PhD, I dont value much the oppurtunity lost cost since the MBA is going to cost a fortune while I can sustain myself in the PhD..with their fellowshis and stipends.
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
-
FDAXHunter
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
I would choose... the one who is able to spell properly, which isn't you. So PhD or no PhD, you ain't getting the job.
An MBA from good university is a piece of paper. It doesn't mean you can do anything, it just means you went to a good school and maybe read two general books on accounting and simple arithmetic, along with some org chart drawing instructions.
Now, for some people that is enough. They assume that it's reasonably hard to get into those schools (or not, depending on how much money you pony up I suppose). So to them, the fact that you got into Stanford or Wharton is like a vote of confidence (especially to HR departments).
Most practioners in the more quantiative fields (which is what this phorum is about, in case you haven't noticed) will certainly prefer the indepth statistical insight a PhD in statistics has to offer.
To me (and quite a few other people on this board) an MBA means jack shit. Give me electrical engineers, (computer) scientists, mathematicans or someone entrepreneurial, experienced and highly skilled in a particular field (say a games programmer or a bankruptcy lawyer).
What do you want with an MBA? Tell me that if you DCF our business model, we'd be billionaires? That if we spend more than we take in, we lose money? That our division's hierarchy is called "Matrix Organization"? That Peter Drucker lent his name to the "Peter Principle" and that you can spell "synergy" right, but don't quite know what it means? That you've done some homework in Excel and know a little bit of VBA? Great skillset. Uh-hu.
Having said that: "lucrative" career means making a lot of money to you, I suspect? I've said it before and I'll say it again: Choosing a career based on earning power is quite likely to leave you in a frustrated spot. The people who are successful are those who do what they do with a passion, not because they get paid well for it.
Next time, search for "MBA" there's like a dozen threads here on this nonsense.
An MBA from good university is a piece of paper. It doesn't mean you can do anything, it just means you went to a good school and maybe read two general books on accounting and simple arithmetic, along with some org chart drawing instructions.
Now, for some people that is enough. They assume that it's reasonably hard to get into those schools (or not, depending on how much money you pony up I suppose). So to them, the fact that you got into Stanford or Wharton is like a vote of confidence (especially to HR departments).
Most practioners in the more quantiative fields (which is what this phorum is about, in case you haven't noticed) will certainly prefer the indepth statistical insight a PhD in statistics has to offer.
To me (and quite a few other people on this board) an MBA means jack shit. Give me electrical engineers, (computer) scientists, mathematicans or someone entrepreneurial, experienced and highly skilled in a particular field (say a games programmer or a bankruptcy lawyer).
What do you want with an MBA? Tell me that if you DCF our business model, we'd be billionaires? That if we spend more than we take in, we lose money? That our division's hierarchy is called "Matrix Organization"? That Peter Drucker lent his name to the "Peter Principle" and that you can spell "synergy" right, but don't quite know what it means? That you've done some homework in Excel and know a little bit of VBA? Great skillset. Uh-hu.
Having said that: "lucrative" career means making a lot of money to you, I suspect? I've said it before and I'll say it again: Choosing a career based on earning power is quite likely to leave you in a frustrated spot. The people who are successful are those who do what they do with a passion, not because they get paid well for it.
Next time, search for "MBA" there's like a dozen threads here on this nonsense.
The Figs Protocol.
-
gekko
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
wow, quite a reply, spare me Im a newcomer here!, Im not as dumb as you might have percieved, Im just confused 
other ppl may want to comment?
other ppl may want to comment?
-
Cheng
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
Sure, here we go.
An MBA (master of b*llshitting and a*slicking) means not really much in phynance. Spend enough money and time and you will get it. A PhD in statistics is nice to have but I would recommend doing that only if you like what you are doing. While doing PhD you will reach a point where you are close to giving it up (believe me, I know what I talk about...). If you like what you do you will continue and finally make it, otherwise you are screwed.
"Lucrative"... Well, depends on what you do. But if you aim only for big $$$ you are almost surely doomed to fail.
HTH.
PS: It is not a phorum policy to be harsh to noobs but we had too many people asking questions like "PhD or no PhD", "MBA yes or no, if yes from where" etc. So take FDAXHunter's answer with a grain of salt as well as mine.
An MBA (master of b*llshitting and a*slicking) means not really much in phynance. Spend enough money and time and you will get it. A PhD in statistics is nice to have but I would recommend doing that only if you like what you are doing. While doing PhD you will reach a point where you are close to giving it up (believe me, I know what I talk about...). If you like what you do you will continue and finally make it, otherwise you are screwed.
"Lucrative"... Well, depends on what you do. But if you aim only for big $$$ you are almost surely doomed to fail.
HTH.
PS: It is not a phorum policy to be harsh to noobs but we had too many people asking questions like "PhD or no PhD", "MBA yes or no, if yes from where" etc. So take FDAXHunter's answer with a grain of salt as well as mine.
"No trade with death / No trade with arms / Dispense the war / Learn from the past"
-
apine
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
maybe my skin has grown quite thick, but i don't find FDAX's post harsh at all.
first, i don't really think FDAX was really poking about the spelling. he was making the point that it is far more important when new around town to act professionally, polished and show respect. when gekko makes a real financial inquiry, FDAX will be the first to help. second, he was being harsh on mba's which is appropriate. that said, no one will argue that it has its uses. mostly as wallpaper for those who need external justification to get hired (i.e., most of us). third, he gave examples of backgrounds that would be technically useful in a modern trading environment. finally, he gave eternally good advice: do what you love, the money will follow.
wtf is harsh about that?
first, i don't really think FDAX was really poking about the spelling. he was making the point that it is far more important when new around town to act professionally, polished and show respect. when gekko makes a real financial inquiry, FDAX will be the first to help. second, he was being harsh on mba's which is appropriate. that said, no one will argue that it has its uses. mostly as wallpaper for those who need external justification to get hired (i.e., most of us). third, he gave examples of backgrounds that would be technically useful in a modern trading environment. finally, he gave eternally good advice: do what you love, the money will follow.
wtf is harsh about that?
Too many people make decisions based on outcomes rather than process. -- Paul DePodesta
-
Mars
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
FDAX has been fair. Also, if you had read some other posts regarding your same question in NP (there is a very helpful Search button in NP) you could see many discussions regarding the question you have written. I also think what FDAX has written is a good suggestion. I hope I had had NP a few years ago, when I started. I suggest you spend a couple of hours reading previous posts on the subject, and ask questions after that.
NP has its own flavour, and I think you still have not smelled it.
NP has its own flavour, and I think you still have not smelled it.
NÄ ES TÖ. TÖ ES NÄ. Nikito Nipongo.
-
IAmEric
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
apine,
I think your post is kind of harsh.
(just kidding! Cool )
gekko,
If what you care about is a "lucrative" career, get an MBA from a top Uni. Hands down. If you really enjoy pain and suffering, a.k.a. research, get a PhD. If you search previous similar threads, the best advice regarding doing a PhD is to only do it if you love it. Like Cheng said, that is the only thing that will carry you through the rough times (and there will be plenty).
By the way, that stuff that would set you apart from the other 800+ MBAs is some of the same stuff that is going to be needed to get you through the PhD. Either you have it, or you don't. If you have it, then I wouldn't worry about the competition. If you don't, not much (not even a PhD) is going to help you anyway.
As a final note, having a PhD would almost guarantee a less lucrative career.
I think your post is kind of harsh.
(just kidding! Cool )
gekko,
If what you care about is a "lucrative" career, get an MBA from a top Uni. Hands down. If you really enjoy pain and suffering, a.k.a. research, get a PhD. If you search previous similar threads, the best advice regarding doing a PhD is to only do it if you love it. Like Cheng said, that is the only thing that will carry you through the rough times (and there will be plenty).
By the way, that stuff that would set you apart from the other 800+ MBAs is some of the same stuff that is going to be needed to get you through the PhD. Either you have it, or you don't. If you have it, then I wouldn't worry about the competition. If you don't, not much (not even a PhD) is going to help you anyway.
As a final note, having a PhD would almost guarantee a less lucrative career.
One day, in the midst of another one of his increasingly frequent homicidal fantasies, Croke noticed a new member had invaded his favorite forum. It was an obnoxious coed (or so he thought) who went by the nickname "Lilly". At first, all Croke could think about was strangling the life out of this giddy new member. Her insistent flirting with everyone was disgusting to Croke and he began a merciless vendetta against her.
He was sure that his prominent status would cause the other "regulars" to outcast the newcomer as he wished. On the contrary, everyone dug Lilly and even Croke's most vehement beratings fell on def ears. This infuriated Croke even more.
He was sure that his prominent status would cause the other "regulars" to outcast the newcomer as he wished. On the contrary, everyone dug Lilly and even Croke's most vehement beratings fell on def ears. This infuriated Croke even more.
-
Crassus
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
It depends on your character. If you're a PhD type then a PhD may be better...
Whatever the forum says, everybody loves an MBA, because it is sexy. Beyond that it is a good finishing school (especially if you've already got a technical degree).
So if you think you can get into a top MBA (only the best will do here), get in there and punt that fukka out of the stadium. Having said that, I recommend not to go into corporate finance, M&A, or management consulting.
Whatever the forum says, everybody loves an MBA, because it is sexy. Beyond that it is a good finishing school (especially if you've already got a technical degree).
So if you think you can get into a top MBA (only the best will do here), get in there and punt that fukka out of the stadium. Having said that, I recommend not to go into corporate finance, M&A, or management consulting.
What is best in life? To crush your enemies... to see them driven before you and to hear the lamentation of the women
-
mj
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
if you ask on a forum dedicated to quant work which would you prefer PhD or MBA, you'll get the inevitable answer: "we hate MBAs"
if you ask on a forum full of MBAs you'll get the opposite answer. Apply for a job at McKinsey and they'll tell you having done lots of maths is a negative.
if you ask on a forum full of MBAs you'll get the opposite answer. Apply for a job at McKinsey and they'll tell you having done lots of maths is a negative.
Quant Job Interview Questions and Answers now available on lulu and createspace: www.markjoshi.com
-
gekko
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:00 am
MBA in finance or PhD in Statistics?
Having re-"searched" this forum, I take no offence at any of the remarks, this is after all my 3rd post..
I will be mostly going for the PhD, but my friends warned me that the MBA guys will make much more cash than me and also lead a more peaceful life (lesser work), which got me thinking and I still am...
But from the responses I see here and from other research i did, money will not be a deciding factor in a man's success / satisfaction..atleast in his own eyes..
Considering I have always loved maths / physics from school days and not particularly good at speaking in public / giving presentations..a PhD would be better for me
I will be mostly going for the PhD, but my friends warned me that the MBA guys will make much more cash than me and also lead a more peaceful life (lesser work), which got me thinking and I still am...
But from the responses I see here and from other research i did, money will not be a deciding factor in a man's success / satisfaction..atleast in his own eyes..
Considering I have always loved maths / physics from school days and not particularly good at speaking in public / giving presentations..a PhD would be better for me