Why do selective schools market?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

You must be the PP. You still don't get it do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

You don't have to provide "evidence" that something is unethical. Since you like analogies so much, I'll use Supreme Court Justice Stewart's quotation: "I know it when I see it." Although he was speaking about obscenity/pornography, it applies to ethics as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

You must be the PP. You still don't get it do you?

No, I don't get it, and no one here has explained it in any way close to sufficient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

You don't have to provide "evidence" that something is unethical. Since you like analogies so much, I'll use Supreme Court Justice Stewart's quotation: "I know it when I see it." Although he was speaking about obscenity/pornography, it applies to ethics as well.

You don't have to provide evidence of a claim?

Not how things work man. Not in science or academia, on a debate team, in a book, and certainly not in a court of any kind. Not even good enough for Wikipedia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

You don't have to provide "evidence" that something is unethical. Since you like analogies so much, I'll use Supreme Court Justice Stewart's quotation: "I know it when I see it." Although he was speaking about obscenity/pornography, it applies to ethics as well.

You don't have to provide evidence of a claim?

Not how things work man. Not in science or academia, on a debate team, in a book, and certainly not in a court of any kind. Not even good enough for Wikipedia.

We are talking ethics, man. Are you dense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

Domino's decine 100% of questionable cc transactions. They have a standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

You don't have to provide "evidence" that something is unethical. Since you like analogies so much, I'll use Supreme Court Justice Stewart's quotation: "I know it when I see it." Although he was speaking about obscenity/pornography, it applies to ethics as well.

You don't have to provide evidence of a claim?

Not how things work man. Not in science or academia, on a debate team, in a book, and certainly not in a court of any kind. Not even good enough for Wikipedia.

We are talking ethics, man. Are you dense?

Your ad hominems and pejoratives are also not evidence for your claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

You don't have to provide "evidence" that something is unethical. Since you like analogies so much, I'll use Supreme Court Justice Stewart's quotation: "I know it when I see it." Although he was speaking about obscenity/pornography, it applies to ethics as well.

You don't have to provide evidence of a claim?

Not how things work man. Not in science or academia, on a debate team, in a book, and certainly not in a court of any kind. Not even good enough for Wikipedia.

We are talking ethics, man. Are you dense?

Your ad hominems and pejoratives are also not evidence for your claim.

That's not an ad hominem. But it is obvious you are quite dense (now that is one!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

You don't have to provide "evidence" that something is unethical. Since you like analogies so much, I'll use Supreme Court Justice Stewart's quotation: "I know it when I see it." Although he was speaking about obscenity/pornography, it applies to ethics as well.

You don't have to provide evidence of a claim?

Not how things work man. Not in science or academia, on a debate team, in a book, and certainly not in a court of any kind. Not even good enough for Wikipedia.

We are talking ethics, man. Are you dense?

Your ad hominems and pejoratives are also not evidence for your claim.

That's not an ad hominem. But it is obvious you are quite dense (now that is one!)

Doubling down on both. Nice! I'll wait politely for evidence regardless.

(ps yes it is an ad hom attacking the speaker and not the point).

[Anonymous]

You mean highly rejective schools?

Answer: So they have more people to reject. Gotta keep that acceptance rate at 7% baby!

And also have the keep class size artificially low to make the school seem selective.

[Anonymous]

I’ve found it interesting to read the material sent to my DS. It gives me a sense of what the main priorities of the campus are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we got one from Yale too. Threw it into the garbage.

This is the logical approach to receiving mass-market advertising for a product you are not interested in.

Huge difference between receiving a Domino's mailer and one from Yale. Anyone can purchase Domino's.

And anyone can apply to Yale.

Not the equivalent.

Sigh. Yes it is.

The letter is designed to get people to apply. It is sent to prospective applicants. To get them to apply.

Let me ask you - how should colleges market themselves, then? And don't say "they don't have to!" because that flies in the face of all logic and everything you learn day 1 in a high school business class. If you can't answer this simple question:

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

LOL. No. Have you ever ordered pizza then had your order declined because you were smart enough? Of course not. Yale marketing is like Domino's sending mailers than denying 95% of orders with no explanation.

You didn't answer the question, even though it was in bold.

How should they market to get the widest class of applicants that is different from how they do it now?

You're making an assumption. They don't need a wider class of applicants if they're already filling.

But they believe they do. Their admissions mission is not to "fill seats". It is to build the best possible class they can.

By your logic, business should not advertise when they are hiring, they should just fill the job with whoever's resume gets sent in.

After all, they have more applicants than they can hire...

NP. Your analogy doesn't quite make sense. First, businesses are not ranked like colleges are by USNWR and other rankings. Second, a specific position at a company is not well known by many applicants whereas any student can easily look up what colleges specifically want and offer.

PP is trying REALLY hard to justify this unethical marketing.

And you still have provided no evidence that it is "unethical" or motivated by unethical means.

Because it isn't.

And yes the analogy is perfect, and the poster does not even know that USNWR doesn't use acceptance rate in rankings. And the idea that people don't know what jobs are at companies is preposterous.

This is such a red herring. Are you the same person who claimed that acceptance rates aren’t reported to USNWR? Because they are. USNWR does provide a handy list of colleges ranked by acceptance rate. So, even if they don’t use that stat for their overall rankings, it is a statistic that everyone who cares about such things knows and refers to.

Further, the appropriate analogy would be a company sending a letter asking you *specifically* to apply for a job, when they know they’re not going to hire you, but because they have already identified someone else who they want to hire and they need to show HR that they looked at multiple applicants. And, yes, that happens all the time and is also unethical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You mean highly rejective schools?

Answer: So they have more people to reject. Gotta keep that acceptance rate at 7% baby!

And also have the keep class size artificially low to make the school seem selective.

This is it.