Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

This. They needed it to be guaranteed or they weren't parting with their cash.

I’m pretty sure the development office would provide a guarantee if you donated 10mm and your child was reasonably well credentialed. The varsity blues families were simply looking for a cheaper alternative.

If 250K-500K is enouhg, why did they bother to go to the illegal backdoor LOL

Some cu

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

This. They needed it to be guaranteed or they weren't parting with their cash.

No you don’t. $250-$500k in donation (you’re also paying tuition) would get your kid admissions to many of the schools in the scandal.

No, it won't. And it doesn't get your child into a DC private school either. Sure, we'll cash that check. But we know what you're doing. It says that you and probably your child expect a transactional relationship, and that is never worth the amount of your donation. So there's a note in your child's file that is a warning to the admissions committee.

Bwahahahaha! Depends on the school.

There has to be a veneer of social propriety to the donation for it to be foolproof.

First, in most cases, it has to be more than a 1M.

Second, the donor has to have an excellent altruistic reason to donate, something that could credibly supersede the merely personal motivations of getting a relative into that college. They will need to have built relationships with board members for some time, or the head of the development office. They will have discussed what their donation will be used for. They need to be seen as well-informed on what their donation can do for the school, and genuinely interested in furthering the interest of students other than their own.

After that sort of relationship, it becomes a natural gesture of goodwill for the university to admit their child, provided they aren't total dimwits.

The varsity blues thing was a tremendous value.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

This. They needed it to be guaranteed or they weren't parting with their cash.

No you don’t. $250-$500k in donation (you’re also paying tuition) would get your kid admissions to many of the schools in the scandal.

One aspect some involved people admitted to is that amount gets you a second look but definitely not a sure thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

This. They needed it to be guaranteed or they weren't parting with their cash.

No you don’t. $250-$500k in donation (you’re also paying tuition) would get your kid admissions to many of the schools in the scandal.

Not.Anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

This. They needed it to be guaranteed or they weren't parting with their cash.

No you don’t. $250-$500k in donation (you’re also paying tuition) would get your kid admissions to many of the schools in the scandal.

No, it won't. And it doesn't get your child into a DC private school either. Sure, we'll cash that check. But we know what you're doing. It says that you and probably your child expect a transactional relationship, and that is never worth the amount of your donation. So there's a note in your child's file that is a warning to the admissions committee.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

This. They needed it to be guaranteed or they weren't parting with their cash.

No you don’t. $250-$500k in donation (you’re also paying tuition) would get your kid admissions to many of the schools in the scandal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

This. They needed it to be guaranteed or they weren't parting with their cash.

This makes sense. Thanks

OP

Anonymous wrote:I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

This. They needed it to be guaranteed or they weren't parting with their cash.

I think in the varsity blues scandal, they paid like $250,000 to get a kid in. You’d need to give like $5-10 million to be a rando large donor and get your kid in.

Anonymous wrote:It is a slimy sign that you are considering this approach to college admissions.

Ycch

Wrong. I’m wondering why the people in the college scandal didn’t just donate. In another thread I read today - I think the one about the d junior year, but I’m not sure, someone said something like, “if you’re not an URM, donor, legacy, etc…” and I was thinking how can donor alone be enough?

But thanks for the nasty assumption.

It is a slimy sign that you are considering this approach to college admissions.

Ycch

I keep seeing this mentioned on boards. How would this work? Isn’t it obvious what the angle is? If donating along worked, why didn’t people donate only instead of using the college admissions scandal?