How to deal with Deposits May 1st if you are still on a waitlist elsewhere?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We paid for top choice ($900) May 1st. Then, got off an Ivy (first choice) WL, within days of submitting that deposit- of course.

Oh well. You need to have something locked down by the deadline. There is a real chance you might not get off any WLs.

^ my kid unenrolled the same day he accepted the WL and also sent a personal email to the school rep to let them know. You cannot be enrolled at two schools (you could lose your spot at both).

You are not enrolled when you accepted. You are enrolled when you start class.

Disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We paid for top choice ($900) May 1st. Then, got off an Ivy (first choice) WL, within days of submitting that deposit- of course.

Oh well. You need to have something locked down by the deadline. There is a real chance you might not get off any WLs.

^ my kid unenrolled the same day he accepted the WL and also sent a personal email to the school rep to let them know. You cannot be enrolled at two schools (you could lose your spot at both).

You are not enrolled when you accepted. You are enrolled when you start class.

Disagree.

Disagree all you want. But you are NOT enrolled when you make a deposit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We know someone who did this.

Kids double deposited by May 1st two years ago at two t30 schools. She was also granted a 1 year deferral (Gap year) at both places. In the meantime, this kid was also accepted to a UK university she wanted to attend. She enrolled in the UK university in the fall. She did not like it as much as she thought she would and dropped out after the 1st semester. But then she decided she was going to come back and attend one of the two t30s. She called one in February to tell them she changed her mind and was not going to attend. And then proceeded to start as a Freshman at the other t30 school in the fall.

Ethical? No. But she took full advantage of the deposits using the deferred entry.

How is this not ethical? I don't get it.

NP. She had promised to attend two different schools. That includes NOT enrolling in another school during that time period. Usually, the deposit for a deferred start/gap year is something substantial like 5k.

I guess I need to see the fine print to know how hard and fast this 'promise' was.

Also as a former registrar, we did not consider a student enrolled until the first day of class. The process was acceptance, confirmation of acceptance via deposit, registration, then official enrollment.

[Anonymous]

So many college consultants who blog claim it's unethical to "double deposit," that is, make two deposits at two colleges by the May 1 deadline when all colleges want 18-year-olds to make the most momentous decision of their lives, even if they are not sure which of two colleges to attend.

Colleges which scream "unethical" demonstrate an astonishing hypocrisy. These are the same people who get away with admitting students based solely on race, religion, sex and economic status. They were awarded these goodies from the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause, an interpretation that is beginning to go in the opposite direction.

Then there's a dean's article from Brandeis U which states: "I know I’ll catch a lot (A LOT) of flack for this, but it isn’t unethical, it’s a purchasing decision (let the flack begin!). You can place deposits on any number of items (say a car, just to draw the comparison most likely to inflame my colleagues), and decide NOT to make that purchase without being in the least unethical, can’t you?"

I say, "Of course!"

What raises my suspicions in all these articles is the total lack of documentation to prove their points. You won't find a single college consultant blogger who

can tell you what percentage of applicants are double-depositing,
can provide one - just ONE! - example of a college (out of 2500+ 4-year colleges) which actually counted how many wait-listed students had double-deposited, or
can cite just ONE college which rescinded a student's application. None.
They can't prove any of their claims. It's all smoke and mirrors, but these same bloggers act much like mindless cheerleaders, not for the students, but for the colleges.

They are telling which side they are on.

This scenario gets uglier.

To the horror of one of my clients, he discovered something in this year’s Common Application that could intimidate any 18-year-old.

Here's the statement (obscenities are allowed here) at the very bottom of the Signature page of the Common Application:

Required: I affirm that I will send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to only one institution; sending multiple deposits (or equivalent) may result in the withdrawal of my admission offers from all institutions. [Note: students may send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to a second institution where they have been admitted from the waitlist, provided that they inform the first institution that they will no longer be enrolling.]

I have a client who’s an attorney with a large national company. I called him and asked what he thought of this statement. This is what he wrote back:

Hi Paul. Following up on our call today, I did some research and consulted with a few of my colleagues. I confirmed that colleges are not exempt from the antitrust laws. My initial thought is that courts conceivably could find the sharing of “deposit” information of accepted applicants to be collusive and illegal.

In effect, the language says that you cannot do business with any of our competitors – only us (read: you can only make one deposit). How would you react if you left a deposit on a new car and the dealer proceeded to warn you that the deposit means you cannot shop and deposit at any of its competitors? Would car dealers everywhere scream that double-depositing is unethical?

In the anti-trust case of United States vs Brown University, it was determined that the Ivy League colleges actually shared info about applying students. They were legally forced to stop this practice. But this hasn't stopped colleges from their on-going practice of intimidating students. That's because intimidation doesn't mean violation of the law, just an obnoxious violation of a student's peace of mind.

Here’s why the Common App people are using this language: colleges are their clients, and the colleges loathe the fact that parents make multiple deposits to colleges to hedge their bets in making their final decision. So the language is in there deliberately.

My response? The colleges carefully and painstakingly designed their requirements for admission, and now they don't want to live with the unintended consequences of their design. But why should a student care? Multiple deposits give the student an extra three months of undistracted time to decide on the right college. And the results make for a far better college choice.

That's the conclusion of many of my past clients who, on my strong recommendation, made double deposits. It's perfectly ethical to make two deposits, just as it's ethical to make two deposits to hold two cars before you decide whether you want the Ferrari or the Lamborghini.

Point: the last statement in the Common App is nothing more than an implied threat, pure and simple. It is pure intimidation with no teeth, and college bloggers will state that colleges "reserve the right" to rescind an admission. But the fact is, colleges don't DARE to rescind. The negative publicity that would follow (read: Goliath wants to KILL little David!") would cost the colleges a lot of money in the form of reduced applications, future donations, and alumni backlash.

They don't dare to rescind. Period. They could take a positive view about double-depositing, that is, they can keep the deposits of those who don't show up and treat the deposits as another revenue stream. Colleges are always looking for additional revenue streams, and this one appears to be hidden in plain sight. Is my cynicism showing yet?

The intimidation is an inexcusable and disgusting tactic, and the community of college consultants, particularly those who subscribe to the principles of the National Association of College Admission Counselors (NACAC), should speak out against it. Instead they are supporting it.

The language clearly serves the colleges, not the students. But since when has the student's concerns been supported by most colleges or by so many college bloggers and national organizations who pretend to?

In the meantime, as I have been doing for the past 17 years, I will continue to vigorously recommend that all my clients make multiple deposits when it's necessary. My proven admissions strategy (Can't you smell the shameless plug coming?!) makes it easy for them to have at least two colleges that get their deposits. It's a whole lot easier to choose the right college, be able to sleep nights, and motivate me more to use double-depositing as part of a very successful admission strategy.

By the way, I do tell my double-depositing clients that once a decision has been made, contact the other school immediately so that a wait-listed student can have that slot. Like double-depositing, it's the right thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We paid for top choice ($900) May 1st. Then, got off an Ivy (first choice) WL, within days of submitting that deposit- of course.

Oh well. You need to have something locked down by the deadline. There is a real chance you might not get off any WLs.

^ my kid unenrolled the same day he accepted the WL and also sent a personal email to the school rep to let them know. You cannot be enrolled at two schools (you could lose your spot at both).

You are not enrolled when you accepted. You are enrolled when you start class.

Disagree.

You can't be enrolled in college when you are still in high school.

[Anonymous]

Occasionally there may be unique circumstances, but in general, why can't most students decide by May 1?

[Anonymous]

The universities stop their ridiculous admissions practices is the day I will recommend kids stop double depositing….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many college consultants who blog claim it's unethical to "double deposit," that is, make two deposits at two colleges by the May 1 deadline when all colleges want 18-year-olds to make the most momentous decision of their lives, even if they are not sure which of two colleges to attend.

Colleges which scream "unethical" demonstrate an astonishing hypocrisy. These are the same people who get away with admitting students based solely on race, religion, sex and economic status. They were awarded these goodies from the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause, an interpretation that is beginning to go in the opposite direction.

Then there's a dean's article from Brandeis U which states: "I know I’ll catch a lot (A LOT) of flack for this, but it isn’t unethical, it’s a purchasing decision (let the flack begin!). You can place deposits on any number of items (say a car, just to draw the comparison most likely to inflame my colleagues), and decide NOT to make that purchase without being in the least unethical, can’t you?"

I say, "Of course!"

What raises my suspicions in all these articles is the total lack of documentation to prove their points. You won't find a single college consultant blogger who

can tell you what percentage of applicants are double-depositing,
can provide one - just ONE! - example of a college (out of 2500+ 4-year colleges) which actually counted how many wait-listed students had double-deposited, or
can cite just ONE college which rescinded a student's application. None.
They can't prove any of their claims. It's all smoke and mirrors, but these same bloggers act much like mindless cheerleaders, not for the students, but for the colleges.

They are telling which side they are on.

This scenario gets uglier.

To the horror of one of my clients, he discovered something in this year’s Common Application that could intimidate any 18-year-old.

Here's the statement (obscenities are allowed here) at the very bottom of the Signature page of the Common Application:

Required: I affirm that I will send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to only one institution; sending multiple deposits (or equivalent) may result in the withdrawal of my admission offers from all institutions. [Note: students may send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to a second institution where they have been admitted from the waitlist, provided that they inform the first institution that they will no longer be enrolling.]

I have a client who’s an attorney with a large national company. I called him and asked what he thought of this statement. This is what he wrote back:

Hi Paul. Following up on our call today, I did some research and consulted with a few of my colleagues. I confirmed that colleges are not exempt from the antitrust laws. My initial thought is that courts conceivably could find the sharing of “deposit” information of accepted applicants to be collusive and illegal.

In effect, the language says that you cannot do business with any of our competitors – only us (read: you can only make one deposit). How would you react if you left a deposit on a new car and the dealer proceeded to warn you that the deposit means you cannot shop and deposit at any of its competitors? Would car dealers everywhere scream that double-depositing is unethical?

In the anti-trust case of United States vs Brown University, it was determined that the Ivy League colleges actually shared info about applying students. They were legally forced to stop this practice. But this hasn't stopped colleges from their on-going practice of intimidating students. That's because intimidation doesn't mean violation of the law, just an obnoxious violation of a student's peace of mind.

Here’s why the Common App people are using this language: colleges are their clients, and the colleges loathe the fact that parents make multiple deposits to colleges to hedge their bets in making their final decision. So the language is in there deliberately.

My response? The colleges carefully and painstakingly designed their requirements for admission, and now they don't want to live with the unintended consequences of their design. But why should a student care? Multiple deposits give the student an extra three months of undistracted time to decide on the right college. And the results make for a far better college choice.

That's the conclusion of many of my past clients who, on my strong recommendation, made double deposits. It's perfectly ethical to make two deposits, just as it's ethical to make two deposits to hold two cars before you decide whether you want the Ferrari or the Lamborghini.

Point: the last statement in the Common App is nothing more than an implied threat, pure and simple. It is pure intimidation with no teeth, and college bloggers will state that colleges "reserve the right" to rescind an admission. But the fact is, colleges don't DARE to rescind. The negative publicity that would follow (read: Goliath wants to KILL little David!") would cost the colleges a lot of money in the form of reduced applications, future donations, and alumni backlash.

They don't dare to rescind. Period. They could take a positive view about double-depositing, that is, they can keep the deposits of those who don't show up and treat the deposits as another revenue stream. Colleges are always looking for additional revenue streams, and this one appears to be hidden in plain sight. Is my cynicism showing yet?

The intimidation is an inexcusable and disgusting tactic, and the community of college consultants, particularly those who subscribe to the principles of the National Association of College Admission Counselors (NACAC), should speak out against it. Instead they are supporting it.

The language clearly serves the colleges, not the students. But since when has the student's concerns been supported by most colleges or by so many college bloggers and national organizations who pretend to?

In the meantime, as I have been doing for the past 17 years, I will continue to vigorously recommend that all my clients make multiple deposits when it's necessary. My proven admissions strategy (Can't you smell the shameless plug coming?!) makes it easy for them to have at least two colleges that get their deposits. It's a whole lot easier to choose the right college, be able to sleep nights, and motivate me more to use double-depositing as part of a very successful admission strategy.

By the way, I do tell my double-depositing clients that once a decision has been made, contact the other school immediately so that a wait-listed student can have that slot. Like double-depositing, it's the right thing to do.

Very interesting take. Good to see there are some counselors out there how have not yet sold their souls to NACAC.

[Anonymous]

DD double deposited last year. One Ivy and one t20. She gave up on one in June….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another take promoting that you SHOULD double deposit:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/double-deposits-do-paul-hemphill-college-consultant

Pretty balsy…..if it didnt affect other kids I would tend to agree with this guy….

Well it does affect other kids. And it affects your OWN kid!!! At some point, your kid needs to pick (even if they didn't get into any reaches or their top choice or really even if they were rejected at all reaches and targets) and start focusing on getting excited about where they are attending. They need to attend "orientation" or whatever the college calls it, many start in June with in person orientations. Given that there is a 95% change your kid will end up at that school (WL often do not move), you owe it to your kid to get excited and be all in for their school. Then be pleasantly surprised if they get off a WL. But waiting until June/July/Aug to hear and not be 100% focused on one school is not mentally healthy for kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We know someone who did this.

Kids double deposited by May 1st two years ago at two t30 schools. She was also granted a 1 year deferral (Gap year) at both places. In the meantime, this kid was also accepted to a UK university she wanted to attend. She enrolled in the UK university in the fall. She did not like it as much as she thought she would and dropped out after the 1st semester. But then she decided she was going to come back and attend one of the two t30s. She called one in February to tell them she changed her mind and was not going to attend. And then proceeded to start as a Freshman at the other t30 school in the fall.

Ethical? No. But she took full advantage of the deposits using the deferred entry.

How is this not ethical? I don't get it.

If she did it at just one university, then the deferral is ethical. But to do it at multiple is unethical. You are not supposed to do that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many college consultants who blog claim it's unethical to "double deposit," that is, make two deposits at two colleges by the May 1 deadline when all colleges want 18-year-olds to make the most momentous decision of their lives, even if they are not sure which of two colleges to attend.

Colleges which scream "unethical" demonstrate an astonishing hypocrisy. These are the same people who get away with admitting students based solely on race, religion, sex and economic status. They were awarded these goodies from the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause, an interpretation that is beginning to go in the opposite direction.

Then there's a dean's article from Brandeis U which states: "I know I’ll catch a lot (A LOT) of flack for this, but it isn’t unethical, it’s a purchasing decision (let the flack begin!). You can place deposits on any number of items (say a car, just to draw the comparison most likely to inflame my colleagues), and decide NOT to make that purchase without being in the least unethical, can’t you?"

I say, "Of course!"

What raises my suspicions in all these articles is the total lack of documentation to prove their points. You won't find a single college consultant blogger who

can tell you what percentage of applicants are double-depositing,
can provide one - just ONE! - example of a college (out of 2500+ 4-year colleges) which actually counted how many wait-listed students had double-deposited, or
can cite just ONE college which rescinded a student's application. None.
They can't prove any of their claims. It's all smoke and mirrors, but these same bloggers act much like mindless cheerleaders, not for the students, but for the colleges.

They are telling which side they are on.

This scenario gets uglier.

To the horror of one of my clients, he discovered something in this year’s Common Application that could intimidate any 18-year-old.

Here's the statement (obscenities are allowed here) at the very bottom of the Signature page of the Common Application:

Required: I affirm that I will send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to only one institution; sending multiple deposits (or equivalent) may result in the withdrawal of my admission offers from all institutions. [Note: students may send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to a second institution where they have been admitted from the waitlist, provided that they inform the first institution that they will no longer be enrolling.]

I have a client who’s an attorney with a large national company. I called him and asked what he thought of this statement. This is what he wrote back:

Hi Paul. Following up on our call today, I did some research and consulted with a few of my colleagues. I confirmed that colleges are not exempt from the antitrust laws. My initial thought is that courts conceivably could find the sharing of “deposit” information of accepted applicants to be collusive and illegal.

In effect, the language says that you cannot do business with any of our competitors – only us (read: you can only make one deposit). How would you react if you left a deposit on a new car and the dealer proceeded to warn you that the deposit means you cannot shop and deposit at any of its competitors? Would car dealers everywhere scream that double-depositing is unethical?

In the anti-trust case of United States vs Brown University, it was determined that the Ivy League colleges actually shared info about applying students. They were legally forced to stop this practice. But this hasn't stopped colleges from their on-going practice of intimidating students. That's because intimidation doesn't mean violation of the law, just an obnoxious violation of a student's peace of mind.

Here’s why the Common App people are using this language: colleges are their clients, and the colleges loathe the fact that parents make multiple deposits to colleges to hedge their bets in making their final decision. So the language is in there deliberately.

My response? The colleges carefully and painstakingly designed their requirements for admission, and now they don't want to live with the unintended consequences of their design. But why should a student care? Multiple deposits give the student an extra three months of undistracted time to decide on the right college. And the results make for a far better college choice.

That's the conclusion of many of my past clients who, on my strong recommendation, made double deposits. It's perfectly ethical to make two deposits, just as it's ethical to make two deposits to hold two cars before you decide whether you want the Ferrari or the Lamborghini.

Point: the last statement in the Common App is nothing more than an implied threat, pure and simple. It is pure intimidation with no teeth, and college bloggers will state that colleges "reserve the right" to rescind an admission. But the fact is, colleges don't DARE to rescind. The negative publicity that would follow (read: Goliath wants to KILL little David!") would cost the colleges a lot of money in the form of reduced applications, future donations, and alumni backlash.

They don't dare to rescind. Period. They could take a positive view about double-depositing, that is, they can keep the deposits of those who don't show up and treat the deposits as another revenue stream. Colleges are always looking for additional revenue streams, and this one appears to be hidden in plain sight. Is my cynicism showing yet?

The intimidation is an inexcusable and disgusting tactic, and the community of college consultants, particularly those who subscribe to the principles of the National Association of College Admission Counselors (NACAC), should speak out against it. Instead they are supporting it.

The language clearly serves the colleges, not the students. But since when has the student's concerns been supported by most colleges or by so many college bloggers and national organizations who pretend to?

In the meantime, as I have been doing for the past 17 years, I will continue to vigorously recommend that all my clients make multiple deposits when it's necessary. My proven admissions strategy (Can't you smell the shameless plug coming?!) makes it easy for them to have at least two colleges that get their deposits. It's a whole lot easier to choose the right college, be able to sleep nights, and motivate me more to use double-depositing as part of a very successful admission strategy.

By the way, I do tell my double-depositing clients that once a decision has been made, contact the other school immediately so that a wait-listed student can have that slot. Like double-depositing, it's the right thing to do.

Momentous decision?!?!? They have had their junior and senior years of HS to decide. And literally since Sept of Senior year, they likely had their list of colleges to apply to finalized. So 8-9 months to make a choice. If your kid cannot do that, then they might not be ready for the pressures of a 4 year college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD double deposited last year. One Ivy and one t20. She gave up on one in June….

Well that is unethical and a waste of $$$. Someone "capable of gaining admission to Two Top 20 schools" really should be able to decide between end of march and May 1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many college consultants who blog claim it's unethical to "double deposit," that is, make two deposits at two colleges by the May 1 deadline when all colleges want 18-year-olds to make the most momentous decision of their lives, even if they are not sure which of two colleges to attend.

Colleges which scream "unethical" demonstrate an astonishing hypocrisy. These are the same people who get away with admitting students based solely on race, religion, sex and economic status. They were awarded these goodies from the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause, an interpretation that is beginning to go in the opposite direction.

Then there's a dean's article from Brandeis U which states: "I know I’ll catch a lot (A LOT) of flack for this, but it isn’t unethical, it’s a purchasing decision (let the flack begin!). You can place deposits on any number of items (say a car, just to draw the comparison most likely to inflame my colleagues), and decide NOT to make that purchase without being in the least unethical, can’t you?"

I say, "Of course!"

What raises my suspicions in all these articles is the total lack of documentation to prove their points. You won't find a single college consultant blogger who

can tell you what percentage of applicants are double-depositing,
can provide one - just ONE! - example of a college (out of 2500+ 4-year colleges) which actually counted how many wait-listed students had double-deposited, or
can cite just ONE college which rescinded a student's application. None.
They can't prove any of their claims. It's all smoke and mirrors, but these same bloggers act much like mindless cheerleaders, not for the students, but for the colleges.

They are telling which side they are on.

This scenario gets uglier.

To the horror of one of my clients, he discovered something in this year’s Common Application that could intimidate any 18-year-old.

Here's the statement (obscenities are allowed here) at the very bottom of the Signature page of the Common Application:

Required: I affirm that I will send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to only one institution; sending multiple deposits (or equivalent) may result in the withdrawal of my admission offers from all institutions. [Note: students may send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to a second institution where they have been admitted from the waitlist, provided that they inform the first institution that they will no longer be enrolling.]

I have a client who’s an attorney with a large national company. I called him and asked what he thought of this statement. This is what he wrote back:

Hi Paul. Following up on our call today, I did some research and consulted with a few of my colleagues. I confirmed that colleges are not exempt from the antitrust laws. My initial thought is that courts conceivably could find the sharing of “deposit” information of accepted applicants to be collusive and illegal.

In effect, the language says that you cannot do business with any of our competitors – only us (read: you can only make one deposit). How would you react if you left a deposit on a new car and the dealer proceeded to warn you that the deposit means you cannot shop and deposit at any of its competitors? Would car dealers everywhere scream that double-depositing is unethical?

In the anti-trust case of United States vs Brown University, it was determined that the Ivy League colleges actually shared info about applying students. They were legally forced to stop this practice. But this hasn't stopped colleges from their on-going practice of intimidating students. That's because intimidation doesn't mean violation of the law, just an obnoxious violation of a student's peace of mind.

Here’s why the Common App people are using this language: colleges are their clients, and the colleges loathe the fact that parents make multiple deposits to colleges to hedge their bets in making their final decision. So the language is in there deliberately.

My response? The colleges carefully and painstakingly designed their requirements for admission, and now they don't want to live with the unintended consequences of their design. But why should a student care? Multiple deposits give the student an extra three months of undistracted time to decide on the right college. And the results make for a far better college choice.

That's the conclusion of many of my past clients who, on my strong recommendation, made double deposits. It's perfectly ethical to make two deposits, just as it's ethical to make two deposits to hold two cars before you decide whether you want the Ferrari or the Lamborghini.

Point: the last statement in the Common App is nothing more than an implied threat, pure and simple. It is pure intimidation with no teeth, and college bloggers will state that colleges "reserve the right" to rescind an admission. But the fact is, colleges don't DARE to rescind. The negative publicity that would follow (read: Goliath wants to KILL little David!") would cost the colleges a lot of money in the form of reduced applications, future donations, and alumni backlash.

They don't dare to rescind. Period. They could take a positive view about double-depositing, that is, they can keep the deposits of those who don't show up and treat the deposits as another revenue stream. Colleges are always looking for additional revenue streams, and this one appears to be hidden in plain sight. Is my cynicism showing yet?

The intimidation is an inexcusable and disgusting tactic, and the community of college consultants, particularly those who subscribe to the principles of the National Association of College Admission Counselors (NACAC), should speak out against it. Instead they are supporting it.

The language clearly serves the colleges, not the students. But since when has the student's concerns been supported by most colleges or by so many college bloggers and national organizations who pretend to?

In the meantime, as I have been doing for the past 17 years, I will continue to vigorously recommend that all my clients make multiple deposits when it's necessary. My proven admissions strategy (Can't you smell the shameless plug coming?!) makes it easy for them to have at least two colleges that get their deposits. It's a whole lot easier to choose the right college, be able to sleep nights, and motivate me more to use double-depositing as part of a very successful admission strategy.

By the way, I do tell my double-depositing clients that once a decision has been made, contact the other school immediately so that a wait-listed student can have that slot. Like double-depositing, it's the right thing to do.

Momentous decision?!?!? They have had their junior and senior years of HS to decide. And literally since Sept of Senior year, they likely had their list of colleges to apply to finalized. So 8-9 months to make a choice. If your kid cannot do that, then they might not be ready for the pressures of a 4 year college.

🙄

[Anonymous]

I still have yet to see any written, contractual language that would deem a double deposit improper or unethical. If it exists, please provide it! And I don’t mean an opinion from a college consultant, I mean something binding that means you are only permitted to make one deposit.