You've raised some fantastic points. You're right in that the immediate money calculation is going to be skewed in the favor of UCLA. And you're also right in thinking the size of the fish / size of the pond may come into play while you try to land a consulting gig. That said...my advice is still simple. UCLA and Stanford are not an apples to apples comparison. Stanford is better. Period. And that's the brand that'll follow you around for the rest of your life. I know in the immediate term $140K can seem really daunting but keep a longer time horizon in mind. Stanford is, in my opinion, the absolute right choice.

Oh - and did I say congratulations on the fact that you're facing this situation? That's really awesome!

Bhavik

Hmm, ok, so UCLA is a great place to be if you're going to be heading into media / entertainment. That said, if your goal is to run one of those companies...a Stanford MBA is gonna open some serious doors. And besides, you can always drop into LA a few times a year to meet the people you need to meet, grab some coffee, rub elbows, and be a general mover & shaker. I still think Stanford is the right call!

Bhavik

Well everything depends on what you want to do. I tend to agree with Bhavik that Staford is simply the better school and you should go there.

However if you wanted to really work in-industry then there IS a strong argument for UCLA, because there everything is contacts, and they will care more about who you know than where you graduated from.

But a firm like Netflix is astraddle on the Tech/Media industry, and for those sorts of firms, I think it's hard NOT to go to Stanford, it being the better school with a much deeper connection with Tech (and the VC world that funds it).

But speak to lots of people in your target firms, and see what they say too.

Best,
Jon