<p>@ FutureOfWallSt</p>
<p>If all things were equal, i.e. all conditions that could obtain to be equal did, in fact, obtain then yes, NYU is the clear choice over UW.</p>
<p>However, it is rarely the case in the real world that things work so logically simple. I.e. things in the real world typically, almost never, obtain equally across situations. In the case of NYU, it is very typical that the cost of attendance is quite high.</p>
<p>Recent studies have shown that people typically do as well as the highest ranked school they were accepted to, not which school they actually attended.</p>
<p>However, business, like law, is highly based on perceived prestige; i.e. where you go actually matters. Which means that, it could be the case that it does obtain that going to UW is not as good as going to Stern. </p>
<p>If the OP can afford the Stern tuition without going into considerably more debt than they would at UW, then it would be generally recommended that the OP should go to Stern. However, it seems far more likely, at least from my quick reading, that UW would be substantially cheaper than Stern. Which means that the situation is far more complex than “Stern is better, go there” as you’ve purported. </p>
<p>Remember, an undergraduate is limited to a very small amount of money which they can borrow. The rest must come from Parent PLUS loans or co-signed loans; all of which are limited by the parent’s “borrowing power”; this in turn means that if the parents is not financially well-off enough to borrow enough money for Stern tuition, the student may have to drop out before they were able to finish.</p>
<p>So the question should come down to the following, addressed to the OP:</p>
<p>Of the two, UW and Stern, which is financially feasible? I.e. can you afford both out of pocket? </p>
<p>If not, how much more expensive would Stern be?</p>