Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America does not want to experience college walking between snow trenches. That’s their fundamental problem. If Syracuse was as far south of NYC as it is north, Syracuse would be fine.

This made me laugh, because I went to Syracuse and it was truly the best 4 years of my life... Snow and all.

Same here! I wouldn't trade those 4 years for anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Relatively low-ranked, low selectivity, high-priced college in a terrible location is having enrollment issues.

Who could have predicted that?

Syracuse was a top 50 school for most of the past 50 years and would still be one except for the changes in the USNWR designed to boost publis schools. The nonsensical stupidity of your comment says a lot about you….nothing good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People keep blaming the “demographic cliff” for enrollment declines, but schools in the SEC and other popular schools have had enrollment increases.

The schools that are being hurt are the too expensive for what they’re worth, like Elon and Syracuse.

People talk "on average". The enrollment decline will eventually happen at these SEC schools as well. It's related to the actual number of college eligible people. That number is declining due to trending lower fertility rates. It's not fiction it's fact. Newsflash people have been have fewer kids.

The Southern states have growing populations and economies and popularity. As real estate is all about location, location, location, so are colleges. Just as the population decline isn't likely to affect Harvard, population declines aren't uniform nationally. And in this day and age of mobility, people are also self-segregating to a greater degree than in the past.

What's not really being commented because people are afraid to mention it is that southern SEC schools have also become popular nationally for offering a pragmatic and relaxed college experience that shies away from ideologies. Many students who'd have happily gone to northern universities and LACs in the 1990s are now going to the SECs, especially the boys. I live in an affluent Maryland suburb and the change is notable. The sons and daughters of people who went to the NESCAC, people who consider themselves moderate to conservative, are increasingly going south over northern schools. One of my interns last year went to Alabama and he's from Connecticut and I asked what made him go south and he echoed the same thing I heard from others, low key (aka no politics) fun time. And he's a great guy.

There are suburbs and exurbs in the NE that have a lot in common socially and culturally with the ones in the South. Makes sense there are kids in them that would find Southern schools appealing. But the ones that get into NESCAC schools aren’t going south unless the schools are GT, Duke, Rice and Vanderbilt, maybe UT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminate the administrative bloat, slash need-based financial aid, and drop the sticker price to $65k. The solution is easy. But they won’t do it.

You are terribly uninformed and have never really examined the economic situation of a complex university. There is bloat and waste for sure, just like in any other large organization, but your proposed solution is impossible to execute.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People keep blaming the “demographic cliff” for enrollment declines, but schools in the SEC and other popular schools have had enrollment increases.

The schools that are being hurt are the too expensive for what they’re worth, like Elon and Syracuse.

People talk "on average". The enrollment decline will eventually happen at these SEC schools as well. It's related to the actual number of college eligible people. That number is declining due to trending lower fertility rates. It's not fiction it's fact. Newsflash people have been have fewer kids.

The Southern states have growing populations and economies and popularity. As real estate is all about location, location, location, so are colleges. Just as the population decline isn't likely to affect Harvard, population declines aren't uniform nationally. And in this day and age of mobility, people are also self-segregating to a greater degree than in the past.

What's not really being commented because people are afraid to mention it is that southern SEC schools have also become popular nationally for offering a pragmatic and relaxed college experience that shies away from ideologies. Many students who'd have happily gone to northern universities and LACs in the 1990s are now going to the SECs, especially the boys. I live in an affluent Maryland suburb and the change is notable. The sons and daughters of people who went to the NESCAC, people who consider themselves moderate to conservative, are increasingly going south over northern schools. One of my interns last year went to Alabama and he's from Connecticut and I asked what made him go south and he echoed the same thing I heard from others, low key (aka no politics) fun time. And he's a great guy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fwiw, tons of kids from nyc suburbs go to Syracuse, have the best 4 years, and are very successful afterward. It’s a very common scenario! And it’s not just Newhouse. The education is good, the experience is good, they don’t mind the weather. I’m trying to think of what a similar private school 3 hours from the dc area would be. But yeah it’s the price. Some of those families can easily pay but the ones who can’t have cheaper state school options.

There are very few schools who are positioned like Syracuse-- mid-sized enrollment, moderately selective, longstanding top tier programs (Newhouse, Falk, Maxwell), large deeply loyal alumni base, winning athletic tradition, national brand, and strong school spirit. What are the comparable schools? SMU? There are a host of schools that come close but are more selective-Villanova, USC, BC, and Miami. Syracuse has a strong niche. There is no death spiral here

Yes, it's expensive but for a student who wants smaller class sizes and a relatively more intimate environment it may be worth the money.

I wrote the post you’re responding to and I totally agree with you. I really like Syracuse. My daughter applied and would have been happy there. She would not have been happy at most state schools. It’s a good fit for lots of kids!

State schools suck. I guess they're ok if you're broke. But they have decaying infrastructure, overcrowded everything, insufficient housing, huge classes, difficulty registering for classes, classes taught by TAs, and worst of all, you're surrounded by plebs. Syracuse offers a much superior experience to those who can afford it.

Stare schools had the best infastructure of the schools we looked at.

The private schools except for Northwestern and Notre Dame were either falling apart, or in run down northeastern half abandoned towns, or both.

Heck, one of the state schools even had a lazy river and tiki juice bar through its pool complex.

You are clearly not visiting anywhere midwest or south if you think state schools are run down and private schools are in great shape.

Can you name the private universities you toured? Unless they’re low tier, I’ve never heard of a private institution “falling apart.”

Also it sounds like LSU you’re talking about- which was just a charge added to student fees for a lazy river. Most schools have a pool or multiple pools for students to access, so I guess it’s really cool if you
Really like lazy rivers

There are two state schools with lazy rivers?

The one I mentioned was in the midwest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminate the administrative bloat, slash need-based financial aid, and drop the sticker price to $65k. The solution is easy. But they won’t do it.

You are terribly uninformed and have never really examined the economic situation of a complex university. There is bloat and waste for sure, just like in any other large organization, but your proposed solution is impossible to execute.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminate the administrative bloat, slash need-based financial aid, and drop the sticker price to $65k. The solution is easy. But they won’t do it.

You are terribly uninformed and have never really examined the economic situation of a complex university. There is bloat and waste for sure, just like in any other large organization, but your proposed solution is impossible to execute.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People keep blaming the “demographic cliff” for enrollment declines, but schools in the SEC and other popular schools have had enrollment increases.

The schools that are being hurt are the too expensive for what they’re worth, like Elon and Syracuse.

People talk "on average". The enrollment decline will eventually happen at these SEC schools as well. It's related to the actual number of college eligible people. That number is declining due to trending lower fertility rates. It's not fiction it's fact. Newsflash people have been have fewer kids.

The Southern states have growing populations and economies and popularity. As real estate is all about location, location, location, so are colleges. Just as the population decline isn't likely to affect Harvard, population declines aren't uniform nationally. And in this day and age of mobility, people are also self-segregating to a greater degree than in the past.

What's not really being commented because people are afraid to mention it is that southern SEC schools have also become popular nationally for offering a pragmatic and relaxed college experience that shies away from ideologies. Many students who'd have happily gone to northern universities and LACs in the 1990s are now going to the SECs, especially the boys. I live in an affluent Maryland suburb and the change is notable. The sons and daughters of people who went to the NESCAC, people who consider themselves moderate to conservative, are increasingly going south over northern schools. One of my interns last year went to Alabama and he's from Connecticut and I asked what made him go south and he echoed the same thing I heard from others, low key (aka no politics) fun time. And he's a great guy.

Anonymous wrote:Google tells me that Syracuse's discount rate is 45% -- that means (if I'm understanding correctly) that the average student pays only 55% of the 100Kish sticker price.

Wouldn't it be bold for Syracuse, or some other private, to slash cost of attendance, say, by 35%? I'm not sure how the math would math but I think a much lower initial sticker price would attract a lot of donut hole families/ make them competitive with the SEC schools. . . .

Anonymous wrote:Eliminate the administrative bloat, slash need-based financial aid, and drop the sticker price to $65k. The solution is easy. But they won’t do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not all colleges are being impacted. Some like Tulane, Syracuse, UVM are being hurt. Colleges like Florida, Georgia, SMU, are getting more and more applications. The Boston colleges are doing great and all getting record application. NYU isn't having trouble.

The ones struggling have some pointed deficiency. Syracuse's location doesn't help it, just like Tulane's after Katrina. UVM and Syracuse both suffer from the same isolated hinterland stigma.

Fordham had an 11k applicant increase this year