Any comments on this school choice dilemma? Full time MBA @ Strat or Cass. I am aiming to work in finance in the UK.

Strathclyde rose quite a lot in the last FT ranking. That plus Scotland's economic growth makes me think that this is the right school.

However, Cass is ranked higher and it's in London. But I am afraid that the finance jobs will all go to MBAs from LBS and Imperial.

Any comments?

I think this depends on your tolerance for risk. Before starting the MBA, Cass students are on salaries rather similar to the ones that Strathclyde MBAs graduate into. So, the Cass cohort is better and get much better outcomes in the medium term. However, the labour market is more competitive in London. In Scotland, you are very likely to find a role quickly, but with lower pay. At Cass, you will probably go into a more senior role and that will take more time. So, the NPV of Cass is much higher but with more risk. Warwick, Imperial and Cranfield would give you less risk but most of the added income.

[Edited by Duncan on Feb 06, 2016]

Thank you for this analysis! I will take Warwick/Imperial/Cranfield into consideration as well.