Yield Management 2026: The Most Absurd Non-Admits

[Anonymous]

Its important to be strategic. I had always heard about yield protection but it wasn't until DC1 applied this past cycle that I saw it play out. We'll definitely be more strategic with our younger ones.

DC1 is headed to an Ivy, and he had a very curated list of colleges with specific departments that he was very excited about. He was rejected from UVa with high stats, national award, etc. Without the why us supplemental, I imagine it was hard for the AO to put the pieces together (though it should be obvious if they knew everything UVA offered!)

[Anonymous]

My student got waitlisted at a liberal arts college that was surrounded by green dots in their high school’s scattergrams and then accepted to two much higher reaches where we anticipated rejections. It can be hard to know what goes into some of this!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid has 4.0 uw gpa, 35 ACT, private school DMV and got into all her safeties—even those she didn’t engage with. Maybe there’s something about your kid Syracuse just didn’t like…perhaps in the essays?

Syracuse does have a Supplemental "Why Syracuse" essay. It's up to the applicant to use that to convince admissions they want to attend.

Did your kid apply to places with supplementals? Because with those stats, yes many "safeties" will reject a kid because they know you are not attending (because with those stats, if you do the process correctly, you are getting into at least 1 target)

Yes most had supplementals. Many of the supplementals have some overlap and you only need to tweak another supplemental. I will say that she did click on all the emails as well. Interestingly none of the supplementals

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Think of all the good things the money being spent on expensive yield management software could be funding. Such as lower tuition. Or scholarships. Or rock climbing walls (kidding).

College admissions has become an exercise in statistics and game theory. Which is awful.

I know you said joking, but honestly these likely ARE good uses of funds. Walls build community, provide a physical outlet, and climbing *specifically* has been show to be helpful for ADHD because it combines physical activity with executive functioning training (the need to logically work through / plan the route and ‘solve it’ like a puzzle.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, it does. The process has gotten so ridiculous. "Over-qualified" kids get rejected from schools solely so they can manage their yields. This is not OK. If a kid applies, assume they want to go there. At least waitlist them so they can plead their case if they really are interested.

The process has gotten so over-complicated. Schools should be devoting their financial resources towards education, not paying yield management experts.

Except OP explicitly said that the kid did not want to go there!

So why did he apply? I think there should be a happy medium between "demonstrated interest" and "must visit, click on a lot of e-mails, and constantly suck up to show you love them."

It has become too easy to just apply to dozens of places. But there should also be more predictability to it - if the process was more predictable, students would feel less of a need to apply to many places. It is a bit of chicken and the egg.

I hate the stories about the underprivileged kid who got into 43 schools and got huge scholarships from all of them. Why were they applying to 43 schools? If you are so underprivileged, spend some of the time you spent applying and get a job (I know the additional work to apply to an additional school is often minimal, but you get my point). These kids aren't heroes.

Agreed! I think it's time we limit applications to 10-12. Both of my kids kept their to that and did fine.

I agree with everything you said except the system doesn't reward that. If everyone (or the Common App) limited the total applications to 12, then it would impact the process. If schools were divided into tiers (obviously, they would never agree to this) and you could only apply to, say, 4 Top XX schools and 6 in YY-ZZ, that would work too.

But for as long as colleges are rewarded to artificially suppressing acceptance rates by waiving fees, not requiring test scores, not asking for supplemental essays and sending kids to "alt campuses" for the first year without having to report on their stats as being admitted, the race to the bottom will continue.


Kid 1 got in everywhere except one (and that one was a T10 school they had no shot at---kid had a 26 ACT/3.5UW/No APs---yeah they were never getting in, but wanted to apply and we were happy to let them have that one). So rejected at Far reach and accepted at all targets and safeties (kid was at/above 50% at every school except the reach)


Kid 2:
4 Reaches: ED1 deferral then rejected in RD
Rejected at 1, WL at 1, Accepted with 1st year abroad at NEU

3 Targets:
Accepted at all 3, top merit automatic merit award at CWRU (the award you just get for applying)

3 Safeties:
Accepted at all 3, Top safety gave $28K merit per year (others were schools that don't give merit/state U)

So it went exactly as you would expect. Both kids got into all their targets and safeties and only applied to ~10 schools

The only reason you think you need more schools is because you want to apply to 10-15 Reaches and then toss in a few Targets/Safeties.
But in reality, there is no way most kids would actually be "good fit" for 15 reaches. It's time to do the work and research what schools you want before applying.

[Anonymous]

Not sure what happened there. But, I agree with the PP. The problem is that the system, as it currently stands, disincents rational behavior.

If the CommonApp (or colleges in general) only allowed students to apply to, say, 4 schools in the top 20, 10 schools between 21-50, etc.. (of course, no college would agree to this and there would never be agreement on the list), the process would change. Acceptance rates would go up, yield would go up and games would lighten.

But for as long as schools waive application fees, have no supplemental essays, don't require test scores, don't count "alt campus" admits in their stats and admit 50-75% of their classes through RD, the "click, spray and pray" methodology will ensure massive application volume and artifically low acceptance rates.

[Anonymous]

*ED is what I meant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids apply to any safety school? If all else fails, it could be the best available option.

Top students shouldn’t use schools like Syracuse and BC as safeties. Even if they get in, there will be very few other strong students at the school, because the school actively turns such students away. They’d be better off at a state flagship where at least there will be top in-state kids.

Please tell us more about BC having very few strong students.

Please tell me how a strong student could possibly get into BC. Everyone in this thread says that their scores and grades disqualify them, because BC cares more about yield!

They get in ED1 and ED2. By regular decision BC only takes middle-of-the-class kids from most privates. They waitlist or decline the strongest kids.

In my experience NEU and Case Western also operate this way. Not to say that they don't take some of the strongest kids but the bulk are a step down stat/strength of application-wise.

Not true at all. Plenty of high stats kids get into Case and NEU thru EA/RD. My own kid got into both with EA (1520/3.98UW/8AP/good EC). Now yes, Case does take kids who apply EA and encourage them to do ED2, specifically really high stats kids. Why? Because they know that anyone with really high stats is likely also considering plenty of T30 schools and will happily attend those if they get in. So Case is a Target for that kid. Go interview the case kids, and 75%+ wanted to attend 1+ schools ranked higher, but didn't get in. That is a well known fact. So case has a yield management issue---they know they attract high stats kids and that means those kids really have several higher choices often in "better locations" (not many kids think of Cleveland as a dream location). So if Case wants to have a full freshman class in the fall, they need to figure out who actually wants to attend case. So yeah if your kid has a 1580/4.5W/10+AP resume, Case will likely review their EA and ask them to ED2 and provide you with the FA/Merit package. And if your kid isn't using Case as a backup school, you can choose to commit. If that upsets you, well that means your are using case as a backup school and they have every right to not accept you because they are 100% accurate that you likely wont be attending.

Absolutely true as a whole. And you sort of proved my point since your kid has very very good stats but not top stats. My kid was in your 1580/4.5W/10+AP situation and absolutely would have considered Case if not for the games they played. This is why they applied! Other schools can manage to predict their yield properly. Will never get over parents justifying schools doing this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just for kicks, please list the basic stats (or whatever else you want) of schools that your kid should have statistically gotten into but didn't.

I'll start:

School: Syracuse
GPA: 3.81 unweighted (DC private)
SAT: 1510

For kicks? You really need to get a life

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just for kicks, please list the basic stats (or whatever else you want) of schools that your kid should have statistically gotten into but didn't.

I'll start:

School: Syracuse
GPA: 3.81 unweighted (DC private)
SAT: 1510

For kicks? You really need to get a life

Agree, quite clear same OP started the For fun post too. Must be real bored. Pretty pathetic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids apply to any safety school? If all else fails, it could be the best available option.

Top students shouldn’t use schools like Syracuse and BC as safeties. Even if they get in, there will be very few other strong students at the school, because the school actively turns such students away. They’d be better off at a state flagship where at least there will be top in-state kids.

Please tell us more about BC having very few strong students.

Please tell me how a strong student could possibly get into BC. Everyone in this thread says that their scores and grades disqualify them, because BC cares more about yield!

They get in ED1 and ED2. By regular decision BC only takes middle-of-the-class kids from most privates. They waitlist or decline the strongest kids.

In my experience NEU and Case Western also operate this way. Not to say that they don't take some of the strongest kids but the bulk are a step down stat/strength of application-wise.

Not true at all. Plenty of high stats kids get into Case and NEU thru EA/RD. My own kid got into both with EA (1520/3.98UW/8AP/good EC). Now yes, Case does take kids who apply EA and encourage them to do ED2, specifically really high stats kids. Why? Because they know that anyone with really high stats is likely also considering plenty of T30 schools and will happily attend those if they get in. So Case is a Target for that kid. Go interview the case kids, and 75%+ wanted to attend 1+ schools ranked higher, but didn't get in. That is a well known fact. So case has a yield management issue---they know they attract high stats kids and that means those kids really have several higher choices often in "better locations" (not many kids think of Cleveland as a dream location). So if Case wants to have a full freshman class in the fall, they need to figure out who actually wants to attend case. So yeah if your kid has a 1580/4.5W/10+AP resume, Case will likely review their EA and ask them to ED2 and provide you with the FA/Merit package. And if your kid isn't using Case as a backup school, you can choose to commit. If that upsets you, well that means your are using case as a backup school and they have every right to not accept you because they are 100% accurate that you likely wont be attending.

NP here. Hmm. I feel like Case asks everyone to ED2 after deferral, not just high stats kids. At least, they deferred my test optional kid; she declined to ED2 (didn't ED anywhere) and was ultimately waitlisted. She got into NEU in EA, again test optional.

I'll add...she has stayed on Case's waitlist but is tired of answering the weekly emails about whether she wants to remain on the WL. I get why they do it, but they keep bombarding her (and my) email with webinars, tours, etc. There's only so many times she can participate in the same thing, you know?

[Anonymous]

Did not happen to my kid. He got into every safety and target, and was rejected from his reaches. We can't complain at all

I will say this: he made sure to write customized personal statements on the Common App for every college, in an effort to convince them that he genuinely liked their institution. It took him ages, so he only applied to 7 places.

This is why it's hard for me to believe that kids who apply to 15+ colleges can really do a good job with their applications... unless they're extremely rapid and confident writers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its important to be strategic. I had always heard about yield protection but it wasn't until DC1 applied this past cycle that I saw it play out. We'll definitely be more strategic with our younger ones.

DC1 is headed to an Ivy, and he had a very curated list of colleges with specific departments that he was very excited about. He was rejected from UVa with high stats, national award, etc. Without the why us supplemental, I imagine it was hard for the AO to put the pieces together (though it should be obvious if they knew everything UVA offered!)

That's very interesting, PP. So you think that UVA rejected your Ivy-bound kid because they only looked at his stats and thought he was going to be accepted elsewhere and would never attend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:nope. To be fair, he wasn't going there anyway, but it was odd.

That probably came through on his application, so in this case they were right to yield protect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its important to be strategic. I had always heard about yield protection but it wasn't until DC1 applied this past cycle that I saw it play out. We'll definitely be more strategic with our younger ones.

DC1 is headed to an Ivy, and he had a very curated list of colleges with specific departments that he was very excited about. He was rejected from UVa with high stats, national award, etc. Without the why us supplemental, I imagine it was hard for the AO to put the pieces together (though it should be obvious if they knew everything UVA offered!)

That's very interesting, PP. So you think that UVA rejected your Ivy-bound kid because they only looked at his stats and thought he was going to be accepted elsewhere and would never attend?

I think so, but of course maybe they didn't think he was a fit. Although he certainly thought he was a fit for UVa. We're also out of state. (But DC was born in VA and grew up there, but probably doesn't matter). He has a few friends who got into UVa from out of state, and they are good students and applied ED.