Early decision seems like a scam

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

And? How is that relevant?

The point is that candidates who may otherwise be admitted cannot try because ED'ing means taking the risk of committing to a school they can't afford.

No one is entitled to admission, either.

NPCs are accurate and you can back out if the offer is less than suggested by the NPC. Nobody should be surprised by the cost when applying ED.

NCs are not always accurate and in any case, you can't back out because you didn't get the merit aid you need in order to attend.

Yes you can.

No, you can't. If you don't get the expected FA, then yes, you can't back out. But if you don't apply for FA but need merit aid, and don't get it? You are stuck.

I see, well then don't apply.

[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:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

No one is entitled to pay less than $1000 for tooth floss, but it doesn’t happen because we have a free market for tooth floss with competition based on price. ED is a way of stifling competition so schools don’t have to compete on price as much as they otherwise would. That is why I think it should not be allowed even though my kids are exactly the kids who will benefit.

That makes no sense at all!

The people who can still afford to pay $95K+ for schools will still make up a given % at each school. Those who cannot will still not be able to afford it if their kid somehow gets accepted. What does change is the school cannot manage yield as well without ED as they don't know which students really want to attend. So they might end up with X+an extra 400 students when they only want X/can only support X freshman. So your kid will be in a double that is now a forced triple and in classes without seats for them during lectures. Or the school will only get X minus 400 students as freshman matriculation, and they are in financial trouble so tuition next year goes up by 10%+ instead of 3-5%. And now you cannot afford to attend after freshman year.
Schools are businesses. Their goal is to fill their freshman class with X students and not vary too much. If they mess that up, there are huge consequences.

Yes, assuming the price of college is fixed and non-negotiable, this is correct.

The part where ED induces you to believe, falsely, that the price of college is fixed and non-negotiable? That’s the scam.

How exactly does ED 'induce' one to believe that? They all have a COA they publish every year. They are all clear that ED is binding assuming the financials work for the applicant.

It is an idle and unenforceable threat.

This points to a real antitrust issue with ED. It is said that schools will communicate amongst themselves about kids who break ED agreements, thus placing their acceptances at other schools at risk, including the one the kid has decided to attend instead.

There is a word for this: collusion. It is anti-competitive.

There is also the related issue that schools with low acceptance rates, many of whom are defendants in this lawsuit, experience no damages when a kid breaks an ED agreement. The admissions office need only log into the list of applicants, pick the next qualified one, and electronically send an acceptance letter.

Takes about 2 minutes of staff time.

If necessary, the office can even sort the list to create one of full pay applicants to select the next admitted applicant.

It is said is not the same at it happening. Who is saying this? To me that has always sounded like made up stuff from parents. That said, I guess a lawsuit may reveal if that happens.

Discovery by plaintiffs in the current case is likely to provide some insight.

By the way, I think that this is coming from counselors and consultants, not parents, it is pushed as a major risk by numerous sites, almost universally so.

I would expect plaintiffs to pursue discovery against the defendant schools to find out if they have been talking amongst each other or colluding to tell counselors and consultants this.

[Anonymous]

ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

It's mutually beneficial. Students get a leg up by applying ED, sometimes a significant one. It's up to them and their parents to weigh the pros and cons. Also, it is not difficult to get out of ED for financial reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

It's mutually beneficial. Students get a leg up by applying ED, sometimes a significant one. It's up to them and their parents to weigh the pros and cons. Also, it is not difficult to get out of ED for financial reasons.

No much of “leg up” at top schools. One has to move down the chain to get some ED advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

Nobody is forcing anyone to apply ED. How is it 'taking away choices'?

[Anonymous]

What ED takes away from students is information.

Information about what other schools might accept them, and at what price.

Information about how they personally might change between October and May. Information about how colleges and the world might change between October and May.

Thus ED deprives students of the opportunity to make an informed decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What ED takes away from students is information.

Information about what other schools might accept them, and at what price.

Information about how they personally might change between October and May. Information about how colleges and the world might change between October and May.

Thus ED deprives students of the opportunity to make an informed decision.

AND THE STUDENTS ACCEPT THIS WHEN THEY DECIDE TO APPLY ED. NOBODY IS FORCING THEM.

These 'arguments' against it make zero sense or are deliberately obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

It's mutually beneficial. Students get a leg up by applying ED, sometimes a significant one. It's up to them and their parents to weigh the pros and cons. Also, it is not difficult to get out of ED for financial reasons.

No much of “leg up” at top schools. One has to move down the chain to get some ED advantage.

ED has a distinct advantage at:

Northwestern
Brown
JHU
UChicago
Columbia
Dartmouth
Michigan
Rice
Vanderbilt
Emory
WashU
UVA

[Anonymous]

Brown ED especially if male is a huge advantage (compared to female RD).

Also important to remember the WL movement is usually mostly male at these schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

It's mutually beneficial. Students get a leg up by applying ED, sometimes a significant one. It's up to them and their parents to weigh the pros and cons. Also, it is not difficult to get out of ED for financial reasons.

No much of “leg up” at top schools. One has to move down the chain to get some ED advantage.

ED has a distinct advantage at:

Northwestern
Brown
JHU
UChicago
Columbia
Dartmouth
Michigan
Rice
Vanderbilt
Emory
WashU
UVA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

It's mutually beneficial. Students get a leg up by applying ED, sometimes a significant one. It's up to them and their parents to weigh the pros and cons. Also, it is not difficult to get out of ED for financial reasons.

No much of “leg up” at top schools. One has to move down the chain to get some ED advantage.

ED has a distinct advantage at:

Northwestern
Brown
JHU
UChicago
Columbia
Dartmouth
Michigan
Rice
Vanderbilt
Emory
WashU
UVA

We don’t yet know if it is a distinct advantage at Michigan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

It's mutually beneficial. Students get a leg up by applying ED, sometimes a significant one. It's up to them and their parents to weigh the pros and cons. Also, it is not difficult to get out of ED for financial reasons.

No much of “leg up” at top schools. One has to move down the chain to get some ED advantage.

ED has a distinct advantage at:

Northwestern
Brown
JHU
UChicago
Columbia
Dartmouth
Michigan
Rice
Vanderbilt
Emory
WashU
UVA

Among T20, Chicago and NU, yes there is an advantage. No comments on T30 schools.

Brown? Dartmouth? No advantage for unhooked.
How do you define "distinct"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED's main benefit is to colleges. It takes choices away from students.

It's mutually beneficial. Students get a leg up by applying ED, sometimes a significant one. It's up to them and their parents to weigh the pros and cons. Also, it is not difficult to get out of ED for financial reasons.

No much of “leg up” at top schools. One has to move down the chain to get some ED advantage.

ED has a distinct advantage at:

Northwestern
Brown
JHU
UChicago
Columbia
Dartmouth
Michigan
Rice
Vanderbilt
Emory
WashU
UVA

And for some SLACs, like Middlebury and Colby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ED is for colleges, recruited athletes, and suckers.

And for kids who know exactly what they want.

+1
Every school should have ED so there is no doubt about who will actually enroll if accepted. This would save SO MUCH time and effort on both the students' and the colleges' part.

Except it makes it impossible to comparison shop based on merit aid. If it were up to me colleges wouldn’t be able to have binding ED and maintain their nonprofit status. I say this as someone who can afford the full cost of a private university for my kids so they’ll likely benefit from ED.

But nobody is entitled to merit aid. ED matches and the resulting probable guaranteed tuition revenue allows the schools to offer more merit etc later. I think those who are put off by ED are people who try to use ED to game the system themselves like EDing at a high reach or to allay self-imposed anxiety by having a sure thing in the fall rather than a range of choices in the spring. That was not the purpose of ED.

Maybe I just have a different perspective because it worked out well for my dc. He EDed to basically a target school and it was his first choice by far and we could pay. Boom done.

And? How is that relevant?

The point is that candidates who may otherwise be admitted cannot try because ED'ing means taking the risk of committing to a school they can't afford.

No one is entitled to admission, either.

NPCs are accurate and you can back out if the offer is less than suggested by the NPC. Nobody should be surprised by the cost when applying ED.

NCs are not always accurate and in any case, you can't back out because you didn't get the merit aid you need in order to attend.

Yes you can.

No, you can't. If you don't get the expected FA, then yes, you can't back out.* But if you don't apply for FA but need merit aid, and don't get it? You are stuck.

I see, well then don't apply.

That's right.

Affirmative action for the rich.

*should say, "If you don't get the expected FA, then yes, you can back out.