>>oh, copernicus, before you shame your school anymore you should really stop posting. You are -- well, I don't know where to start. seemy responses in >>
yes decent article, but what does it show? sure Insead's salaries are higher on average, after all people coming in there from US/UK probably make twice as much as Asian students coming to HKUST.
>>this is about "exit" options, not entry. All my research shows that at top schools you get exit levels regardless of what you came with. my friends with lower salaries before MBA all got same salaries at exit. by your example, if i studied in a unknown place in africa with low entry ssalary and high exit, then that is world class?!! the fact that insead people seem to have nearly 100% more simply implies that companies taking them as paying at that level which HK people dont. And in that report how come Asia salaries are also nearly 100% of HKUST?!
if one is only looking through this one narrow criteria, then why not do the Kellogg/HKUST MBA and make three times
as much as Insead grads.
>>this is the stupid thing I have ever read. Just go through the 2 career report and you will see that Kellogg median salary is LOWER than INSEAD. I just checked it...here are the numbers...median salary for kellogg was about 106,000 but it is 115,000 for INSEAD!! where did you get this "3 times" number from. Do not lie to people to justify your school, you are misleading a lot of us who are trying to research and you are making your school and your class mates look really bad.
MBA is not all about exiting salaries.... '
>>existing salaries are an indication of how the graduates are valued.
by the way, i also read some of follow up comments to that article, and they mention another criteria which i did not think of, salary % increase from pre to post graduation, that would be a fair criteria to look at.
>>doesnt make sense - MBA is about what you get when you leave. so if you want to call HKUST in same league as top US and INSEAD, then the exit options must be same. relative % mean nothing -- if you go by % changes then basically chinese and indian schools will look better than harvard.
this is sooo embarassing...
The same person, thats they key, the same person, after either HKUST or Insead wil get the same job with the same salary in Asia.
>>No. the same person, if he were that good, would go to insead. what you are implying is hkust has worse jobs to be offered because clearly its nearly 1/2 the salary. the problem is because of your over hyping you confused all of us...how come if it was all as great as you siad the salary is 1/2 of insead? thats what i dont understand...why arent the companies paying lot more because you are so good?!
misleading everyone ..that is why i was so vehemant...i did a lot of reading affter my initial research, and it points to different things.
>>oh, copernicus, before you shame your school anymore you should really stop posting. You are -- well, I don't know where to start. seemy responses in >>
yes decent article, but what does it show? sure Insead's salaries are higher on average, after all people coming in there from US/UK probably make twice as much as Asian students coming to HKUST.
>>this is about "exit" options, not entry. All my research shows that at top schools you get exit levels regardless of what you came with. my friends with lower salaries before MBA all got same salaries at exit. by your example, if i studied in a unknown place in africa with low entry ssalary and high exit, then that is world class?!! the fact that insead people seem to have nearly 100% more simply implies that companies taking them as paying at that level which HK people dont. And in that report how come Asia salaries are also nearly 100% of HKUST?!
if one is only looking through this one narrow criteria, then why not do the Kellogg/HKUST MBA and make three times
as much as Insead grads.
>>this is the stupid thing I have ever read. Just go through the 2 career report and you will see that Kellogg median salary is LOWER than INSEAD. I just checked it...here are the numbers...median salary for kellogg was about 106,000 but it is 115,000 for INSEAD!! where did you get this "3 times" number from. Do not lie to people to justify your school, you are misleading a lot of us who are trying to research and you are making your school and your class mates look really bad.
MBA is not all about exiting salaries.... '
>>existing salaries are an indication of how the graduates are valued.
by the way, i also read some of follow up comments to that article, and they mention another criteria which i did not think of, salary % increase from pre to post graduation, that would be a fair criteria to look at.
>>doesnt make sense - MBA is about what you get when you leave. so if you want to call HKUST in same league as top US and INSEAD, then the exit options must be same. relative % mean nothing -- if you go by % changes then basically chinese and indian schools will look better than harvard.
this is sooo embarassing...
The same person, thats they key, the same person, after either HKUST or Insead wil get the same job with the same salary in Asia.
>>No. the same person, if he were that good, would go to insead. what you are implying is hkust has worse jobs to be offered because clearly its nearly 1/2 the salary. the problem is because of your over hyping you confused all of us...how come if it was all as great as you siad the salary is 1/2 of insead? thats what i dont understand...why arent the companies paying lot more because you are so good?!
misleading everyone ..that is why i was so vehemant...i did a lot of reading affter my initial research, and it points to different things.
</blockquote>