Elon vs U of Richmond

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

There will be less students at UR’s current academic profile that will be willing to pay. They will have to give more scholarships or admit lower stat kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

There will be less students at UR’s current academic profile that will be willing to pay. They will have to give more scholarships or admit lower stat kids.

There will probably be the same # of students meeting their 2005 academic and fiscal benchmarks, though. And if they were doing fine then, why wouldn't they do fine now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kind hearted sensitive girl will be attending, sad I found this post and read it. Definitely dampers some excitement and can only hope you’re all exaggerating for emphasis based on a couple people you know.

One of the PPs above. She may be fine. Try to get on a hall dorm not a suite. My kid was bullied mercilessly by her suitemates and had to move (then they moved on to another girl, who also later moved). I think a hall gives your DD more opportunity to meet a wider variety of kids. Have her get into clubs to try to find her people (mine did but one of her cruel suitemates was in the main club so that dampened it for my Dd but she did make a couple good friends that way). Frankly, had my kid been in a regular dorm, not a suite, she may have been ok. Her suitemates were very cruel (while pretending to be her friend) and it really messed her up and she spiraled downward. She moved out (oddly, to another quiet across the hall because that is all they could offer her) second semester and it was much better, although I would not say she was happy there. I think she just started on the wrong foot and never recovered. I hope your DD loves it. It’s a beautiful school and there are a lot of things to love there. I really wanted my DD to love it, but she is happier at her new school.

Sounds like every school ever.

Nope. Not really. I have had daughters at 2 other schools and not had this problem. Elon was definitely different in that way.

Again if everyone else is the problem then you’re the problem. sounds like one of your kids is not like the other. Grow up and stop blaming 6k kids for your delicate flower child.

What an attitude. No amount of advertising could undo the impression this comment gives. Elon is off DC's list and we won't be looking back.

If YOU are seriously curating YOUR KIDS list for them based on some anonymous DCUM poster who doesn’t appreciate their college being dogged on by some disgruntled mommy, you need your head examined.

While I agree that it does not make sense to create a list based solely on DCUM, I would like to point out that there is more than 1 “disgruntled mommy.” I know because I am one of them and all of the comments are not mine. The to e if your post certainly says a lot about your personality (and quite honestly does not help your pro-Elon case).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kind hearted sensitive girl will be attending, sad I found this post and read it. Definitely dampers some excitement and can only hope you’re all exaggerating for emphasis based on a couple people you know.

One of the PPs above. She may be fine. Try to get on a hall dorm not a suite. My kid was bullied mercilessly by her suitemates and had to move (then they moved on to another girl, who also later moved). I think a hall gives your DD more opportunity to meet a wider variety of kids. Have her get into clubs to try to find her people (mine did but one of her cruel suitemates was in the main club so that dampened it for my Dd but she did make a couple good friends that way). Frankly, had my kid been in a regular dorm, not a suite, she may have been ok. Her suitemates were very cruel (while pretending to be her friend) and it really messed her up and she spiraled downward. She moved out (oddly, to another quiet across the hall because that is all they could offer her) second semester and it was much better, although I would not say she was happy there. I think she just started on the wrong foot and never recovered. I hope your DD loves it. It’s a beautiful school and there are a lot of things to love there. I really wanted my DD to love it, but she is happier at her new school.

Sounds like every school ever.

Nope. Not really. I have had daughters at 2 other schools and not had this problem. Elon was definitely different in that way.

Again if everyone else is the problem then you’re the problem. sounds like one of your kids is not like the other. Grow up and stop blaming 6k kids for your delicate flower child.

What an attitude. No amount of advertising could undo the impression this comment gives. Elon is off DC's list and we won't be looking back.

If YOU are seriously curating YOUR KIDS list for them based on some anonymous DCUM poster who doesn’t appreciate their college being dogged on by some disgruntled mommy, you need your head examined.

While I agree that it does not make sense to create a list based solely on DCUM, I would like to point out that there is more than 1 “disgruntled mommy.” I know because I am one of them and all of the comments are not mine. The to e if your post certainly says a lot about your personality (and quite honestly does not help your pro-Elon case).

+2000000000000000000000000000000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

Why would they lower their tuition? If anything, they'll raise it in line with what they've done every single year or more. They certainly have more power to raise than Elon, if you're suggesting the opposite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

Why would they lower their tuition? If anything, they'll raise it in line with what they've done every single year or more. They certainly have more power to raise than Elon, if you're suggesting the opposite.

If they have less students to choose from they’ll have to lower tuition. They are too expensive for the enrollment cliff and not T10. UR will have to give merit like Elon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

Why would they lower their tuition? If anything, they'll raise it in line with what they've done every single year or more. They certainly have more power to raise than Elon, if you're suggesting the opposite.

If they have less students to choose from they’ll have to lower tuition. They are too expensive for the enrollment cliff and not T10. UR will have to give merit like Elon.

They have the applications to fill their class at least 2x over. Also, they don't rely on tuition money, as is evidenced by their ability to meet 100% of demonstrated need, which Elon is unable to do. Also, their endowment is a great size and massive proportionate to their student body size. They could probably get by on yearly distributions alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

Why would they lower their tuition? If anything, they'll raise it in line with what they've done every single year or more. They certainly have more power to raise than Elon, if you're suggesting the opposite.

If they have less students to choose from they’ll have to lower tuition. They are too expensive for the enrollment cliff and not T10. UR will have to give merit like Elon.

They have the applications to fill their class at least 2x over. Also, they don't rely on tuition money, as is evidenced by their ability to meet 100% of demonstrated need, which Elon is unable to do. Also, their endowment is a great size and massive proportionate to their student body size. They could probably get by on yearly distributions alone.

If they “fill their class 2x over” and double the amount of admits the acceptance rate will skyrocket.

They don’t rely on tuition? Why do they charge anyone then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kind hearted sensitive girl will be attending, sad I found this post and read it. Definitely dampers some excitement and can only hope you’re all exaggerating for emphasis based on a couple people you know.

One of the PPs above. She may be fine. Try to get on a hall dorm not a suite. My kid was bullied mercilessly by her suitemates and had to move (then they moved on to another girl, who also later moved). I think a hall gives your DD more opportunity to meet a wider variety of kids. Have her get into clubs to try to find her people (mine did but one of her cruel suitemates was in the main club so that dampened it for my Dd but she did make a couple good friends that way). Frankly, had my kid been in a regular dorm, not a suite, she may have been ok. Her suitemates were very cruel (while pretending to be her friend) and it really messed her up and she spiraled downward. She moved out (oddly, to another quiet across the hall because that is all they could offer her) second semester and it was much better, although I would not say she was happy there. I think she just started on the wrong foot and never recovered. I hope your DD loves it. It’s a beautiful school and there are a lot of things to love there. I really wanted my DD to love it, but she is happier at her new school.

Sounds like every school ever.

Nope. Not really. I have had daughters at 2 other schools and not had this problem. Elon was definitely different in that way.

Again if everyone else is the problem then you’re the problem. sounds like one of your kids is not like the other. Grow up and stop blaming 6k kids for your delicate flower child.

What an attitude. No amount of advertising could undo the impression this comment gives. Elon is off DC's list and we won't be looking back.

If YOU are seriously curating YOUR KIDS list for them based on some anonymous DCUM poster who doesn’t appreciate their college being dogged on by some disgruntled mommy, you need your head examined.

While I agree that it does not make sense to create a list based solely on DCUM, I would like to point out that there is more than 1 “disgruntled mommy.” I know because I am one of them and all of the comments are not mine. The to e if your post certainly says a lot about your personality (and quite honestly does not help your pro-Elon case).

Shrug. Plenty of happy Elon alums and parents on the thread as well. Can’t please everyone with my “tone” and don’t care that you don’t appreciate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

Why would they lower their tuition? If anything, they'll raise it in line with what they've done every single year or more. They certainly have more power to raise than Elon, if you're suggesting the opposite.

If they have less students to choose from they’ll have to lower tuition. They are too expensive for the enrollment cliff and not T10. UR will have to give merit like Elon.

They have the applications to fill their class at least 2x over. Also, they don't rely on tuition money, as is evidenced by their ability to meet 100% of demonstrated need, which Elon is unable to do. Also, their endowment is a great size and massive proportionate to their student body size. They could probably get by on yearly distributions alone.

If they “fill their class 2x over” and double the amount of admits the acceptance rate will skyrocket.

They don’t rely on tuition? Why do they charge anyone then?

Why in the world would they double their class size? Of course that would be crazy.

They charge tuition because it adds money to the budget? Why wouldn't they charge tuition? I only know of one college that does not charge tuition for any student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

Why would they lower their tuition? If anything, they'll raise it in line with what they've done every single year or more. They certainly have more power to raise than Elon, if you're suggesting the opposite.

If they have less students to choose from they’ll have to lower tuition. They are too expensive for the enrollment cliff and not T10. UR will have to give merit like Elon.

They have the applications to fill their class at least 2x over. Also, they don't rely on tuition money, as is evidenced by their ability to meet 100% of demonstrated need, which Elon is unable to do. Also, their endowment is a great size and massive proportionate to their student body size. They could probably get by on yearly distributions alone.

If they “fill their class 2x over” and double the amount of admits the acceptance rate will skyrocket.

They don’t rely on tuition? Why do they charge anyone then?

Why in the world would they double their class size? Of course that would be crazy.

They charge tuition because it adds money to the budget? Why wouldn't they charge tuition? I only know of one college that does not charge tuition for any student.

You said they can fill their class 2x over and don’t rely on tuition. You’re right, the things you say don’t make sense.

[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:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

Why would they lower their tuition? If anything, they'll raise it in line with what they've done every single year or more. They certainly have more power to raise than Elon, if you're suggesting the opposite.

If they have less students to choose from they’ll have to lower tuition. They are too expensive for the enrollment cliff and not T10. UR will have to give merit like Elon.

They have the applications to fill their class at least 2x over. Also, they don't rely on tuition money, as is evidenced by their ability to meet 100% of demonstrated need, which Elon is unable to do. Also, their endowment is a great size and massive proportionate to their student body size. They could probably get by on yearly distributions alone.

If they “fill their class 2x over” and double the amount of admits the acceptance rate will skyrocket.

They don’t rely on tuition? Why do they charge anyone then?

Why in the world would they double their class size? Of course that would be crazy.

They charge tuition because it adds money to the budget? Why wouldn't they charge tuition? I only know of one college that does not charge tuition for any student.

You said they can fill their class 2x over and don’t rely on tuition. You’re right, the things you say don’t make sense.

What I was implying was that even if half of their qualified applicants stopped applying, they would be able to fill their class all the same.

Similar point for tuition, even if they did have to give full rides to half of their accepted students to get them to enroll, they would be totally fine because of their huge endowment.

I never said they would double the class sizes or that they would cease charging tuition full stop?

[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:Elon's endowment is shockingly low, both overall and per-capita. Richmond's is great both overall and per-capita. If you want a well-resourced institution that is in a fantastic position to weather the endowment cliff, go with Richmond.

Will people pay 80k for UR when they have better options because of the enrollment cliff?

I don't know how post-enrollment cliff interest would be any different from pre-2010 interest, so...yes.

The enrollment cliff changes supply and demand. If consumers have more choices because there are less applicants how would interest in UR not change?

Because numbers would just be returning to pre-2010 ish numbers across the board? So consumers would have the same choices they would've had in 2005? Also, any place with a sub 35% acceptance rate could probably fill their class 2x over and get pretty similar compositions, so it isn't the case that even if interest did wane UR would be in deep trouble. Their endowment is so large they could also just half the class size.

Will they charge 2005 tuition and pay professors 2005 salaries?

Why would they lower their tuition? If anything, they'll raise it in line with what they've done every single year or more. They certainly have more power to raise than Elon, if you're suggesting the opposite.

If they have less students to choose from they’ll have to lower tuition. They are too expensive for the enrollment cliff and not T10. UR will have to give merit like Elon.

They have the applications to fill their class at least 2x over. Also, they don't rely on tuition money, as is evidenced by their ability to meet 100% of demonstrated need, which Elon is unable to do. Also, their endowment is a great size and massive proportionate to their student body size. They could probably get by on yearly distributions alone.

If they “fill their class 2x over” and double the amount of admits the acceptance rate will skyrocket.

They don’t rely on tuition? Why do they charge anyone then?

Why in the world would they double their class size? Of course that would be crazy.

They charge tuition because it adds money to the budget? Why wouldn't they charge tuition? I only know of one college that does not charge tuition for any student.

You said they can fill their class 2x over and don’t rely on tuition. You’re right, the things you say don’t make sense.

What I was implying was that even if half of their qualified applicants stopped applying, they would be able to fill their class all the same.

Similar point for tuition, even if they did have to give full rides to half of their accepted students to get them to enroll, they would be totally fine because of their huge endowment.

I never said they would double the class sizes or that they would cease charging tuition full stop?

And, by the way, neither of those things would ever happen because of Richmond's strong regional reputation which will allow them to thrive when the cliff comes like regional SLAC peers.