Which LACs attract the most affluent students?

[Anonymous]

FWIW, I noticed it at Middlebury in the way kids were dressed. Plenty of those outdoorsy $150 pants you buy at REI. Which, honestly, is a more pulled together look than the Tony Soprano track pants and slides look I saw elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, I noticed it at Middlebury in the way kids were dressed. Plenty of those outdoorsy $150 pants you buy at REI. Which, honestly, is a more pulled together look than the Tony Soprano track pants and slides look I saw elsewhere.

Lots of kids with Audis driving around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that none of the Claremont colleges make this list. I guess all the Beverly Hills/ Bel Air kids are headed to USC these days.

True old money would never slum it out to attend 5Cs. The only LACs old money would attend are Williams, Wellsley and maybe Amherst, Barnard, and Vassar.

West coast no way.

agreed. would probably replace vassar with middlebury? the days of jackie bouvier attending vassar are over!

old money/generational wealth LAC top list:
williams
amherst
wellesley
barnard

middlebury
haverford

Have you people been to Williams in any recent time? Most of the wealthy people these days are international students.

i was going to say this. A large number of the 1%ers at these schools are international.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious
If you already have generational wealth, why the need for so much networking? Serious question.
Are you looking for friends? Spouse? Something else?

I guess that is why you don't have generational wealth? I find these questions/comments so telling. People without generational wealth like to say rich families aren't stressed about what school their kids go to, that's it's a "striver thing." It is very MC to look at college as ROI and transactional (e.g. going to meet a spouse or networking).

Generational wealth has always wanted certain schools. Wealthy people place a high value on education. This is the number one reason. But let's be honest, it is also to "keep up appearances." A lot of schools are unimpressive to their wealthy friends. Networking and finding a spouse are not part of the equation. That is for the less wealthy people to do at the college. Generational wealth already have a ton of contacts from their grandparents, parents, country club, summer home, and the list goes on. This is why things were rigged against minorities and MC for so long. Big law, finance, banking... all bastions of nepotism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious
If you already have generational wealth, why the need for so much networking? Serious question.
Are you looking for friends? Spouse? Something else?

[i]I guess that is why you don't have generational wealth?[b] I find these questions/comments so telling. People without generational wealth like to say rich families aren't stressed about what school their kids go to, that's it's a "striver thing." It is very MC to look at college as ROI and transactional (e.g. going to meet a spouse or networking).

Generational wealth has always wanted certain schools. Wealthy people place a high value on education. This is the number one reason. But let's be honest, it is also to "keep up appearances." A lot of schools are unimpressive to their wealthy friends. Networking and finding a spouse are not part of the equation. That is for the less wealthy people to do at the college. Generational wealth already have a ton of contacts from their grandparents, parents, country club, summer home, and the list goes on. This is why things were rigged against minorities and MC for so long. Big law, finance, banking... all bastions of nepotism.

It’s obvious that you don’t either, based on this response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that none of the Claremont colleges make this list. I guess all the Beverly Hills/ Bel Air kids are headed to USC these days.

True old money would never slum it out to attend 5Cs. The only LACs old money would attend are Williams, Wellsley and maybe Amherst, Barnard, and Vassar.

West coast no way.

agreed. would probably replace vassar with middlebury? the days of jackie bouvier attending vassar are over!

old money/generational wealth LAC top list:
williams
amherst
wellesley
barnard

middlebury
haverford

Have you people been to Williams in any recent time? Most of the wealthy people these days are international students.

i was going to say this. A large number of the 1%ers at these schools are international.

Williams - pre intl visa fiasco - was 9% international last year. Which was higher than usual. Probably back down to 7% this cycle.

It’s lower than most LACs and big universities a lot.

Also nearly half of Williams is full pay. So your math doesn’t math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious
If you already have generational wealth, why the need for so much networking? Serious question.
Are you looking for friends? Spouse? Something else?

[i]I guess that is why you don't have generational wealth?[b] I find these questions/comments so telling. People without generational wealth like to say rich families aren't stressed about what school their kids go to, that's it's a "striver thing." It is very MC to look at college as ROI and transactional (e.g. going to meet a spouse or networking).

Generational wealth has always wanted certain schools. Wealthy people place a high value on education. This is the number one reason. But let's be honest, it is also to "keep up appearances." A lot of schools are unimpressive to their wealthy friends. Networking and finding a spouse are not part of the equation. That is for the less wealthy people to do at the college. Generational wealth already have a ton of contacts from their grandparents, parents, country club, summer home, and the list goes on. This is why things were rigged against minorities and MC for so long. Big law, finance, banking... all bastions of nepotism.

It’s obvious that you don’t either, based on this response.

We do have generational wealth and are from New England. I’m guessing you don’t have this kind of wealth because what I said isn’t rocket science or lies. It is just simply the truth. But maybe you have a couple million dollars (think you are rich) and are from a gauche southern family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious
If you already have generational wealth, why the need for so much networking? Serious question.
Are you looking for friends? Spouse? Something else?

[i]I guess that is why you don't have generational wealth?[b] I find these questions/comments so telling. People without generational wealth like to say rich families aren't stressed about what school their kids go to, that's it's a "striver thing." It is very MC to look at college as ROI and transactional (e.g. going to meet a spouse or networking).

Generational wealth has always wanted certain schools. Wealthy people place a high value on education. This is the number one reason. But let's be honest, it is also to "keep up appearances." A lot of schools are unimpressive to their wealthy friends. Networking and finding a spouse are not part of the equation. That is for the less wealthy people to do at the college. Generational wealth already have a ton of contacts from their grandparents, parents, country club, summer home, and the list goes on. This is why things were rigged against minorities and MC for so long. Big law, finance, banking... all bastions of nepotism.

It’s obvious that you don’t either, based on this response.

We do have generational wealth and are from New England. I’m guessing you don’t have this kind of wealth because what I said isn’t rocket science or lies. It is just simply the truth. But maybe you have a couple million dollars (think you are rich) and are from a gauche southern family.

At what level do you consider someone to have generational wealth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that none of the Claremont colleges make this list. I guess all the Beverly Hills/ Bel Air kids are headed to USC these days.

True old money would never slum it out to attend 5Cs. The only LACs old money would attend are Williams, Wellsley and maybe Amherst, Barnard, and Vassar.

West coast no way.

agreed. would probably replace vassar with middlebury? the days of jackie bouvier attending vassar are over!

old money/generational wealth LAC top list:
williams
amherst
wellesley
barnard

middlebury
haverford

Have you people been to Williams in any recent time? Most of the wealthy people these days are international students.

i was going to say this. A large number of the 1%ers at these schools are international.

Williams - pre intl visa fiasco - was 9% international last year. Which was higher than usual. Probably back down to 7% this cycle.

It’s lower than most LACs and big universities a lot.

Also nearly half of Williams is full pay. So your math doesn’t math.

Being full pay doesn’t make you wealthy. It’s that simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that none of the Claremont colleges make this list. I guess all the Beverly Hills/ Bel Air kids are headed to USC these days.

True old money would never slum it out to attend 5Cs. The only LACs old money would attend are Williams, Wellsley and maybe Amherst, Barnard, and Vassar.

West coast no way.

agreed. would probably replace vassar with middlebury? the days of jackie bouvier attending vassar are over!

old money/generational wealth LAC top list:
williams
amherst
wellesley
barnard

middlebury
haverford

Have you people been to Williams in any recent time? Most of the wealthy people these days are international students.

i was going to say this. A large number of the 1%ers at these schools are international.

Williams - pre intl visa fiasco - was 9% international last year. Which was higher than usual. Probably back down to 7% this cycle.

It’s lower than most LACs and big universities a lot.

Also nearly half of Williams is full pay. So your math doesn’t math.

Full pay doesn't make you wealthy.

[Anonymous]

I guess? But Williams FA is among the top of all schools. Better than Yale's. So you have to be pretty wealthy with substantial assets to not even apply for FA. I think wealthy is having 2.1 kids and being confident enough in your wealth to drop 800k in tuition without even sending in a CSS form

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess? But Williams FA is among the top of all schools. Better than Yale's. So you have to be pretty wealthy with substantial assets to not even apply for FA. I think wealthy is having 2.1 kids and being confident enough in your wealth to drop 800k in tuition without even sending in a CSS form

800k? It’s like half that, and that’s with years of saving. We’re talking about politicians’ children, CEO’s son, seniors in the most competitive industries. People with real pull and connections.

I wouldn’t call being a typical upper middle class household that can afford the full pay, wealthy.

[Anonymous]

Midd COA is $93,756

with 2 kids and a 4-5% increase per year, that's 800k

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Surprised to not see swarthmore or Pomona here. When we toured Pomona, we saw so many luxury cars by students and our tour guide was a Brearley grad.

Me too- my kid was a recruited athlete and toured swarthmore and the team roster was filled of kids from elite prep schools. One of the reasons why he didn’t pick it was that he would have been the poor kid- 😂😂😂.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I graduated from Hamilton in the 90s. I am (delightfully) surprised it is ranked so low. When I went, there were many rich private school kids from the Upper East side and Greenwich.

If it's on the top twenty list, it seems like it's ranked pretty high.