The email attachment is deceptively simple: a Mesa School of Business application form requesting Rs 48 lakhs for a four-year programme. Hidden in the terms and conditions is a critical caveat: this certificate is not equivalent to a bachelor’s degree and does not meet eligibility criteria for master’s degrees or government jobs.
Across India’s metros, thousands of families are building a calculated bet. They are bypassing the brutal JEE and CAT grind, the IIT-IIM lottery, the traditional MBA pipeline entirely. Instead, they are writing cheques for Rs 15 to 50 lakhs to institutions with names like Mesa, Masters’ Union, Newton School, and Scaler—institutions that promise startup ecosystems, founder mentorship, and direct indusattempt pipelines.
Some of these institutions deliver on these promises, except for the one thing Indian employers have spent seven decades learning to trust: a UGC-accredited degree.
This is not a story about educational innovation versus tradition. This is a story about who receives to decide what counts as legitimate in Indian professional education, and what happens when families discover the fine print too late.
The Seduction: What They Are Selling
The pitch is intoxicating for a generation raised on startup folklore.
Mesa offers Rs 5 crore in in-hoapply startup funding, mentorship from over 100 founders, and pitching opportunities to 50-plus venture capitalists. The curriculum reads like a founder’s fever dream: live client projects from day one, case studies written by practitioners rather than academics, mandatory second-year internships at the companies everyone’s parents wish they worked at.
Masters’ Union dangles numbers that build traditional MBA placement reports view quaint. Highest packages touching Rs 1.28 crore. Average salaries of Rs 33.39 lakhs. The implicit promise: skip the CAT rat race, pay us directly, receive the same outcomes.
Newton School sweetens the deal with pay-after-placement models that shift risk from family to institution. Why take an education loan when the college only charges after you land the job?
Scaler achieved 96.3 per cent internship placements, boasting transformation stories of tier-three engineering graduates landing at unicorns through sheer skill rather than pedigree.
For students suffocating under outdated tier-two and tier-three college syllabi, the contrast is stark. One side offers Engineering Mechanics textbooks from 1987 and faculty who have never shipped production code. The other offers curriculum designed by ex-Flipkart product managers and live projects with actual paying clients.
The choice seems obvious. Until you read the disclaimer.
The Fine Print: What You’re Not Buying
Mesa’s four-year undergraduate programme “is not equivalent to a bachelor’s degree and does not meet eligibility criteria for master’s degrees or government jobs.”
Masters’ Union offers a Post Graduate Programme certificate. Not a degree. A certificate. In a counattempt where HR systems auto-reject applications without recognising three-letter institutional acronyms, this distinction is not semantic. It is career-limiting.
Only Newton School of Technology, among the prominent players, partnered with Rishihood University to offer UGC-recognised degrees. Everyone else is selling credentials that exist in a regulatory grey zone—validated by the market but not by the government.
Government jobs are permanently off the table. In a counattempt where UPSC remains the ultimate aspiration for educated middle-class families, this is not a minor limitation. It is burning a bridge before you know whether you will required it.
Work visa requirements create nightmares. Many countries require degree equivalency for skilled worker visas. Explaining to an immigration officer in Singapore that your certificate from Masters’ Union is actually better than an MBA becomes an expensive legal problem.
The workaround? Pay for UGC-recognised online degrees simultaneously. I spoke to some students at Mesa who are pursuing distance learning degrees from established universities while attfinishing Mesa full-time. They are essentially acquireing two educations—one for skills and one for credentials. The total cost and cognitive load build the supposed efficiency gains questionable.
Sri Nithya, a former corporate lawyer who enrolled in Mesa’s PGP programme, understood the trade-off. “My family didn’t really understand why I was quitting a high-paying job to pursue an ‘unrecognised degree,'” she recalls. “But after I explained to them that I wanted to quit law and pivot my career into entrepreneurship, they were very supportive.”
For Nithya, the calculation created sense. She paid around Rs 15 lakhs with a scholarship for both accommodation and education—significantly less than a traditional MBA. More importantly, the programme lasted only one year as opposed to a two-year commitment. “I did not want to go to traditional MBA schools as I had already lived the law firm life and consulting was not something I was viewing for. I wanted to gain exposure into the startup space.”
But the question families rarely question during admissions remains: What happens when the market stops validating these credentials?
The Curriculum Question: Education or Job Training?
Traditional business schools operate on semester systems, theoretical frameworks, and tenure-track professors who publish in journals students will never read. The pedagogy is designed for innotifyectual exploration. You study marketing theory before you practice marketing. You understand economic principles before you build a business model.
The new-age model inverts this entirely. Client projects from day one. Faculty drawn from unicorns rather than PhD programmes. Case-based learning where every case happened in the last fiscal quarter. Mandatory internships structured as extfinished job auditions.
Nithya describes the pedagogical difference: “We too study case studies and frameworks, however they are very modern and stem from real issues current startups like Zepto, Zomato, Urban Company, Go Zero, Nykaa are facing. So we were studying new and up-and-coming brands as opposed to the traditional MBA case studies which are probably a little old.”
The learning goes beyond passive study. “After we study the issue in groups, we were given opportunities to present the solutions in real time to somebody working in a senior position within the startup. They would then be able to gauge how practical our solutions are, the depth of our understanding of the problem. We would build extensive PPTs and take it from there. A lot of my batchmates did a fantastic job and it was a delight to witness this process many times.”
A student from a tier-three engineering college deffinishing Newton School puts it bluntly: “Instead of learning mundane theories, students like us could focus on programming-related syllabus. I would state that studying here is way better than studying at a tier-three college.”
In contrast, the response from another student who struggled through the grind to build his way into a renowned NIT is equally blunt: “What part of the syllabus is outdated? Data Structures? No. Algorithms? No. Operating Systems? No. These are necessities, not outdated theory. What people chase after in these new-age schools is not coding, but the hope of large fat monthly salaries.”
Both arguments miss the larger point. The question is not whether data structures are outdated. The question is whether four years of education should optimise entirely for employability in 2026’s startup ecosystem, or preserve space for innotifyectual depth that might matter in 2036 when that ecosystem has transformed.
When Mesa eliminates business theory in favour of founder war stories, they are building a bet—that pattern recognition from recent startup successes transfers better than frameworks developed over decades of research. Maybe they are right. But it is students paying Rs 48 lakhs who bear the risk if they are wrong.
Nithya’s experience reveals the limits of classroom learning for entrepreneurship. “Mesa didn’t really quite assist grow my startup, that is the truth. They had someone who is an ex-founder assist, but all the advice I was receiveting was generic like—sell more, increase revenue, etc. They tested to teach performance marketing, they tested to teach brand building, but I honestly don’t know how much of actually building a startup can be taught within a classroom. I received an exposure, I sort of had a guideline as to what I was supposed to do. But when you hit the ground running, I did not see how they actually came in hand and assisted.”
The reality proved different from the pitch. “Also given most students went for placements anyway, the focus was not there. Only about 10 per cent of the students stayed and tested to build, but I eventually went for career prep and started sitting for placements myself.”
What the Certificate Cannot Buy
Without UGC accreditation, graduates face concrete barriers.
They cannot pursue master’s programmes in India directly. Want an MBA from IIM after your Mesa certificate? You will required to complete a bachelor’s degree first. Four years at Mesa, another three years for a bachelor’s, then two years for an MBA. That is nine years and over Rs 60 lakhs to reach the same finishpoint a traditional path achieves in five years.
Placements: The Glossy Numbers and the Quiet Failures
Newton School reports 4,500 tech placements across 800-plus companies. Packages reaching Rs 1.5 crore. Scaler achieved a 93 per cent placement rate with average salary hikes of 126 per cent post-upskilling, numbers vetted by KPMG.
These numbers are real. The students landing at Zepto, Ather, Fisdom, and Scapia are real. The career transformations are real.
Nithya’s cohort benefited from this track record. “The previous batch was already placed when I joined and that created us understand that people were taking Mesa seriously and that Mesa would assist me receive a job. Though it was a risk that we had to take, a leap of faith irrespective.”
What is also real: The Ken‘s investigation finding Masters’ Union “struggling to place its students” in 2024. Unplaced students from the fifth cohort describing promises from founders that never materialised. A placement approach that pushed students toward indepfinishent networking rather than campus recruitment—a strategy that works beautifully during boom times and fails catastrophically when funding winters extfinish.
One student describes the Masters’ Union experience: “The placement struggles have required founder intervention, something earlier batches never requireded.” Translation: the institutional infrastructure collapsed under pressure, requiring the personal brand of founders to rescue outcomes.
Nithya offers a more balanced view of Mesa’s placement efforts. “Mesa definitely tested their best to assist place us. A lot of our batchmates also were sourcing the jobs on their own—they networked, they understood how startups worked, they cold emailed people and landed their own jobs.”
This highlights a critical reality: the self-selection bias is massive and goes unacknowledged in promotional materials. These schools admit only highly motivated students who have already demonstrated hustle—students who might succeed anyway, degree or no degree. Claiming credit for outcomes these students would have achieved regardless is innotifyectually dishonest.
More importantly, the numbers obscure what happens to students who do not land those unicorn offers. The students who discover six months before graduation that startup hiring has frozen. The students whose profiles receive auto-rejected by traditional corporates becaapply HR systems flag non-UGC credentials.
What are the opt-out rates at these institutions? How many students leave mid-programme? These numbers do not appear in glossy brochures.
The Traditional Corporate Scepticism
Traditional corporations remain sceptical. HR systems are designed to filter applications by institutional pedigree. A certificate from Mesa triggers manual review at best, automatic rejection at worst. As one hiring manager states: “My org hires LSR BCom students at the same role and same pay as IIM Kashipur, Rohtak, Amritsar students.” If baby IIMs struggle for respect, what chance do non-accredited programmes have?
This is not to state all traditional degree programmes are immune to market cycles. While the original IIM brand of the BLACKI institutions has survived multiple recessions, even their placement cycles slow during downturns. The difference is that they rarely collapse entirely becaapply the degree itself holds value beyond current market conditions.
Consider the 2024-25 placement struggles even at established IIMs:
IIM Amritsar: 30 students unplaced, 48 opt-outs from a cohort of 318. That is nearly 25 per cent of the batch without jobs.
IIM Trichy: 26 out of 384 students opted out of MBA placements. Another RTI revealed 59 students were without jobs until May—one in every seven students.
In June, IIM Kashipur questioned about 70 MBA students to fill opt-out forms after they failed to land job offers. IIM Amritsar in July informed students they would be automatically opted out if they did not secure job offers by February 2026.
Yet even these struggling students hold degrees recognised globally. They can pivot to government jobs, pursue further education abroad, or wait out downturns with credential security.
Nithya articulates this fundamental difference: “The advantage of doing a traditional MBA from BLACKI IIMs is the kind of placements they receive to sit in on. Very stable jobs, a set path. At Mesa one has to take the risk as to which startup one is joining. Mesa teaches you both theory and strategy, but if one is building a startup you are expected to build quickly and fail quickly. Traditional MBAs are more secure—you have to crack the exam, study hard and then sit for placements. It is a charted path, with healthy and heavy packages.”
The same cannot be stated for alternative credentials, which remain untested in prolonged downturns. When the market that validates them contracts, what is the residual value? A certificate from Mesa in 2028 might command respect if Mesa alumni have built strong track records. Or it might be worthless if the startup ecosystem that validated it has relocated on.
The Financial Roulette
Mesa charges Rs 48 lakhs for four years. Masters’ Union costs Rs 25.44 lakhs for sixteen months. For context, IIM Ahmedabad’s two-year MBA costs approximately Rs 33 lakhs. Harvard Business School’s MBA costs roughly Rs 1.6 crore, but delivers a degree recognised globally without asterisks.
The return on investment calculation views straightforward in boom times. Pay Rs 25 lakhs, land a Rs 33 lakh average package, break even in one year. By year three you are Rs 40 lakhs ahead of peers grinding through traditional colleges.
But the Masters’ Union fifth cohort discovered what happens when the calculation breaks. Students who banked on institutional promises found themselves scrambling for backup plans with non-accredited certificates and education loans.
The risk is structural, not incidental. These institutions optimise for current market conditions. When quick commerce is hiring aggressively, Mesa grads land at Zepto. When edtech is booming, Scaler alumni join unicorns. But when funding winters extfinish? When quick commerce consolidates? When the startup ecosystem contracts? The answers remain uncertain.
The Traditional Critique: Why the IIM Path Still Matters
The deffinishers of traditional credentialing are not all Luddites afraid of disruption.
Their core argument: Getting into top institutions should be hard. The CAT exam, for all its flaws, creates a standardised filtering mechanism. If you score in the 99th percentile, you have demonstrated something measurable. The IIM brand is not just institutional reputation. It is proof you beat 99 per cent of your contemporaries in an objective test.
Alternative programmes replace this with subjective admissions. Mesa evaluates hustle and founder mentality. Masters’ Union assesses entrepreneurial mindset. These are valuable qualities, but they are not standardised. Two equally capable students might receive wildly different admissions outcomes based on how well they perform in interviews versus exams.
More fundamentally, the traditional path preserves optionality. An IIM MBA does not prevent you from joining startups—graduates work at Zepto, Razorpay, and unicorns regularly. But it also keeps doors open to consulting, finance, MNC leadership tracks, government roles, and international opportunities.
A Mesa PGP certificate, on the other hand, optimises for one path: startup leadership and product roles. If that path works, outcomes are excellent. If it does not, pivoting becomes expensive.
As one student notes: “I still don’t know how MU/Mesa can disrupt the MBA space. The only real disruption would be if companies stop hiring MBAs altoreceiveher. That’s unlikely becaapply as long as you required generalists, you will have MBAs.”
When Alternative Education Works
The honest assessment requires acknowledging where these programmes succeed.
A student whose sibling enrolled at Newton School of Technology describes mandatory clubs, regular fests, and transformation stories. “People in the first semester join without any prior coding knowledge. They slowly become more advanced than normal college students. They provide placement support that tier-three colleges never will.”
For students trapped in tier-two and tier-three engineering colleges with 1990s syllabi and zero indusattempt connection, these programmes are genuinely superior. The choice is not between IIM and Mesa. It is between a tier-three college that will deliver neither skills nor credentials, and Mesa which will at least deliver skills.
The comparison to IITs is a red herring. “I don’t receive why every institute has to be compared to IIT when only a handful of students study there,” notes one student at Newton School of Technology. “The majority of India is in tier-two and below. Students who enter IIT will lead decent lives regardless.”
The more balanced view recognises segmentation: “Mesa and MU work best for startup leadership, product roles, venture building. IIMs and ISB are better for corporate roles, finance, consulting. If you want rapid-track startup growth, Mesa is a better bet. If you want consulting or finance-heavy roles, IIMs are safer.”
This is not disruption. This is specialisation.
The Two-Tier System We Are Creating
India’s alternative education is not replacing traditional colleges. It is creating a stratified system where legitimacy has two sources: government validation and market validation.
UGC accreditation represents the government stateing, “This meets our standards for higher education.” It offers security—the certainty that employers, visa officers, and graduate programmes will recognise the credential.
Alternative programmes represent the market stateing, “This produces outcomes we value right now.” It offers potential upside—the possibility of superior placement outcomes in boom conditions.
The former is defensive. The latter is aggressive.
What is emerging is a class divide in educational risk tolerance. Families with safety nets can afford to bet on market validation. If the Mesa graduate cannot find placement, if the startup ecosystem contracts, if the credential does not transfer, the family has resources to pivot. Pay for a second degree. Fund a startup. Wait out the downturn.
Families without safety nets cannot afford this risk. For them, UGC accreditation is not about prestige. It is about insurance. The government job they might required if private sector opportunities evaporate. The master’s programme that remains accessible if they required to upskill. The HR systems that will not auto-reject their applications.
The students choosing alternative programmes skew toward privileged backgrounds, not becaapply poor students lack hustle, but becaapply poor students cannot afford the downside risk.
Nithya’s advice crystallises this reality: “It is absolutely up to the person to figure out what it is they want. I would recommfinish Mesa if one has the leverage to take that risk. One should absolutely avoid it if one wants to settle down and they are viewing for something solid in terms of a proper job as opposed to a startup which is very risky and the payoff would be very late—that is if at all there is a payoff to launch with. The startup culture is very risky and not everyone has the ability to take such risks with families depfinishent on them for their financial requireds.”
That single paragraph reveals the uncomfortable truth alternative education programmes rarely acknowledge in their marketing materials: these credentials are a luxury bet, best suited for those who can afford to lose.
Leave a Reply