|
Post by Tom on May 13, 2019 12:09:02 GMT -5
I didn't see much new in the article.
Sure, you don't publicize that we're not totally need blind. Still the top 95 percent of the admitted pool was admitted need blind. They just looked at need for a bunch of really qualified applicants who didn't quite make the cut to fill out the bottom 5 percent.
There is some degree of risk with the slippery slope once you've crossed the line. This year it was 95-5. What will it be five years from now? Still 95 percent need blind or only 80?
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on May 13, 2019 12:38:34 GMT -5
This was new to me but haven't followed previous comments closely.
"Part of the motivation to move away from need blind, Freije said, was to offer better aid packages to some low-income students admitted than in the past. She said that Holy Cross has met its stated goal of offering complete aid packages, but that she feared some in the past relied too much on loans and not enough on grants."
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on May 13, 2019 12:40:18 GMT -5
Dipping quite deeply into the ED pool (tends to skew a bit towards full payers) as we currently do and accepting some (5%) RD as need-aware we enhance our ability to balance the books. Agree with Tom that it is a slippery slope and I would not expect a blow-by-blow accounting from admissions regarding future slippage of the 5% number.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on May 13, 2019 18:33:48 GMT -5
The Chair of the Bot said HC would revisit need-blind if the endowment grew to over $1 billion. The stock market does not look promising between now and June 30, so the $1+ billion is pushed further into the future, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on May 14, 2019 0:07:50 GMT -5
Excellent article and the comment section was educational also. HC has to place regrettable but necessary limits to sustain itself. The national 52% discount rate is eye opening. That means the product is worth forty-eight cents but some people are paying a buck and others are getting it for free.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on May 14, 2019 9:16:51 GMT -5
Excellent article and the comment section was educational also. HC has to place regrettable but necessary limits to sustain itself. The national 52% discount rate is eye opening. That means the product is worth forty-eight cents but some people are paying a buck and others are getting it for free. The product is worth what people are willing to pay for it--that's one of the first principles one learns in accounting class.
|
|
|
Post by alum on May 14, 2019 9:26:20 GMT -5
Excellent article and the comment section was educational also. HC has to place regrettable but necessary limits to sustain itself. The national 52% discount rate is eye opening. That means the product is worth forty-eight cents but some people are paying a buck and others are getting it for free. The product is worth what people are willing to pay for it--that's one of the first principles one learns in accounting class. ...and, as we know, different people value different goods and services differently which is why some people on your flight have paid $700 and others have paid $200. Similarly, some have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to get their kids into USC. Of course, we should also remember that as far as I know, no former widget purchasers send money to the widget manufacturer to make it possible for less affluent or more athletically talented widget customers to pay less than sticker price to acquire the product.
|
|