Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

Princeton alum here and I agree. Would rather see both my kids at SLACs.

The market doesn't agree with you much.
It all depends on the kids. My kids would not like SLACs.

The imaginary market in your head, maybe?

What do you mean imaninary??
It's realy business and people are paying real money.

I have no idea what you mean about the market agreeing with you that SLACs aren’t liked, because obviously the enrollment and applications numbers show otherwise. Therefore the market must be imaginary and in your head.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

Princeton alum here and I agree. Would rather see both my kids at SLACs.

The market doesn't agree with you much.
It all depends on the kids. My kids would not like SLACs.

The imaginary market in your head, maybe?

What do you mean imaninary??
It's realy business and people are paying real money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are the US News Top 100 National Universities (private only). Not talking SLACs. I broke them into three groups but they stay in ranking order, all of group 2 is higher ranked than group 3.

If you could, almost all would pay for Group 1.
I agree that Group 2 is more and more popular, with UMC families and they are often choosing ED to lock in a slot, when they think they won't get into Group 1.
Of Group 3, which would you pay full price? I think this is the group that Jeff Selingo is talking about people preferring a state school, though some of these schools are extremely popular.

Group 1: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth,MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, U Chicago, Rice

Group 2: Vanderbilt, ND, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory, WashU St.Louis, USC, NYU, BC, Tufts, BU

Group 3: Lehigh, Rochester, Wake Forest, CWRU, Northeastern, Brandeis, RPI, Santa Clara, GW, Syracuse, Villanova, Tulane, Pepperdine, Stevens Inst. Tech, WPI, Marquette, Fordham, SMU, Baylor, Gonzaga, LMU, Drexel, RIT, TCU, USD

But Group 3 tends to be where the merit money comes into play. So the question is really (assuming most people would pay for Group 1 if possible) would you full pay Group 2 or look for merit in Group 3? Group 3, so far for my kids, is coming in between 50-60K a year (the ones they applied to, obviously not all of them). Which is still expensive, and may not end up being enough merit money, but a lot better than the 85-90k a year in Group 2. Mine did not apply to any in Group 2 because there is no chance of merit.

Anonymous wrote:Here are the US News Top 100 National Universities (private only). Not talking SLACs. I broke them into three groups but they stay in ranking order, all of group 2 is higher ranked than group 3.

If you could, almost all would pay for Group 1.
I agree that Group 2 is more and more popular, with UMC families and they are often choosing ED to lock in a slot, when they think they won't get into Group 1.
Of Group 3, which would you pay full price? I think this is the group that Jeff Selingo is talking about people preferring a state school, though some of these schools are extremely popular.

Group 1: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth,MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, U Chicago, Rice

Group 2: Vanderbilt, ND, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory, WashU St.Louis, USC, NYU, BC, Tufts, BU

Group 3: Lehigh, Rochester, Wake Forest, CWRU, Northeastern, Brandeis, RPI, Santa Clara, GW, Syracuse, Villanova, Tulane, Pepperdine, Stevens Inst. Tech, WPI, Marquette, Fordham, SMU, Baylor, Gonzaga, LMU, Drexel, RIT, TCU, USD

Anonymous wrote:Here are the US News Top 100 National Universities (private only). Not talking SLACs. I broke them into three groups but they stay in ranking order, all of group 2 is higher ranked than group 3.

If you could, almost all would pay for Group 1.
I agree that Group 2 is more and more popular, with UMC families and they are often choosing ED to lock in a slot, when they think they won't get into Group 1.
Of Group 3, which would you pay full price? I think this is the group that Jeff Selingo is talking about people preferring a state school, though some of these schools are extremely popular.

Group 1: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth,MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, U Chicago, Rice

Group 2: Vanderbilt, ND, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory, WashU St.Louis, USC, NYU, BC, Tufts, BU

Group 3: Lehigh, Rochester, Wake Forest, CWRU, Northeastern, Brandeis, RPI, Santa Clara, GW, Syracuse, Villanova, Tulane, Pepperdine, Stevens Inst. Tech, WPI, Marquette, Fordham, SMU, Baylor, Gonzaga, LMU, Drexel, RIT, TCU, USD

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are the 26 schools that chose Emory.

Do you agree?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dvXhTuwq3H8IVltOwZe6_payqYt9l6Jx/view?usp=sharing

In fact, I learned that Emory is very poor in terms of peer assessment.

Emory people are so dumb that they provided counter evidence LMFAO

What?! I think you have mental illness. 8 of those schools are T25, 1 is a T10. What's there to disagree with? Just say you went to NYU and go.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not paying for 90% of group 2. NFW for group 3

But plenty of other people do. I think they’ll be fine without your money.

Who is paying for group 3?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

Princeton alum here and I agree. Would rather see both my kids at SLACs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not paying for 90% of group 2. NFW for group 3

But plenty of other people do. I think they’ll be fine without your money.

Who is paying for group 3?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not paying for 90% of group 2. NFW for group 3

But plenty of other people do. I think they’ll be fine without your money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

Princeton alum here and I agree. Would rather see both my kids at SLACs.

The market doesn't agree with you much.
It all depends on the kids. My kids would not like SLACs.

The imaginary market in your head, maybe?

Anonymous wrote:lost decade was 99-09. down -1%.

https://wealth.amg.com/blog/the-lost-decade-revisited/

we were lucky our kids were born in 2005-2010.

of course, Japan has had a lost generation. nothing is guaranteed.

dont confuse luck w skill

Anonymous wrote:I’m not paying for 90% of group 2. NFW for group 3

Anonymous wrote:Here are the US News Top 100 National Universities (private only). Not talking SLACs. I broke them into three groups but they stay in ranking order, all of group 2 is higher ranked than group 3.

If you could, almost all would pay for Group 1.
I agree that Group 2 is more and more popular, with UMC families and they are often choosing ED to lock in a slot, when they think they won't get into Group 1.
Of Group 3, which would you pay full price? I think this is the group that Jeff Selingo is talking about people preferring a state school, though some of these schools are extremely popular.

Group 1: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth,MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, U Chicago, Rice

Group 2: Vanderbilt, ND, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory, WashU St.Louis, USC, NYU, BC, Tufts, BU

Group 3: Lehigh, Rochester, Wake Forest, CWRU, Northeastern, Brandeis, RPI, Santa Clara, GW, Syracuse, Villanova, Tulane, Pepperdine, Stevens Inst. Tech, WPI, Marquette, Fordham, SMU, Baylor, Gonzaga, LMU, Drexel, RIT, TCU, USD