Anonymous wrote:As a parent who just went through the admissions cycle for a rising 9th grader -- there is demand. Many top name schools receive at least five qualified candidates for each spot. I am sure that GDS has plans for a fabulous campus with thought to the neighborhood. They are building a school for goodness sake -- why so much negativity?!

What makes you sure of that?

GDS may not yet have endowment of a St Albans or a Sidwell, and may not yet have the household name that Sidwell got because of the Obama (and Clinton) factor. But among those who matter, including discerning parents who value The best education and Ivy/SLAC admission officers, GDS has rocketed to the top echelon of selective Washington independent schools.

Anonymous wrote:You write like you know something about real estate finance and development, but I respectfully doubt that you have anywhere near the experience and savvy of the GDS trustees and advisors who put this once-in-a-generation transaction together. This is an incredible opportunity for GDS. Very transformative.

OTOH, I'm not hoping to get a piece of the action, which makes me more objective than the "machers."

What's been striking to me about this whole thread is that the person or people who keep(s) promoting this deal can't seem to marshall any data or provide any analysis that suggests that the project makes sense from either a financial or a facilities POV (when one would hope it makes sense from both). Instead we get this endless parade of superlatives from a poster or posters who seem(s) to hold up Enron and Donald Trump as models of how to do business.

As a parent who just went through the admissions cycle for a rising 9th grader -- there is demand. Many top name schools receive at least five qualified candidates for each spot. I am sure that GDS has plans for a fabulous campus with thought to the neighborhood. They are building a school for goodness sake -- why so much negativity?!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As public schools in DC improve and charters become more popular, GDS may have trouble filling the younger grades. This could effect enrollment in the middle school ie. the Flint Hill effect. Given recent trends, I agree that is a lot of debt to take on, but I wish GDS the best.

GDS has about the same number of applicants per spot per grade as Sidwell. It's considered top tier and places are quite sought after, so I don't worry about DC charters or other factors impacting GDS' financial health or its selectivity. If anything, the new campus will increase interest in the school.

I don't think GDS has the same name recognition as Sidwell or Cathedral schools. GDS is good, but it does not have the endowment of Sidwell and the Cathedral schools. It is taking on a lot of debt in the face of decreasing demand. The "machers and shakers" crowd will probably go to GDS no matter what, but a lot of young DC families are not interested in private schools.

You write like you know something about real estate finance and development, but I respectfully doubt that you have anywhere near the experience and savvy of the GDS trustees and advisors who put this once-in-a-generation transaction together. This is an incredible opportunity for GDS. Very transformative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how much money is needed to still be raised for Wisconsin Ave. campus project?

$40 - 70 million for construction. And that amount won't be offset by the sale of the MacArthur campus, which is unlikely to cover the $40 million already spent for land acquisition (financed by debt). Judging from the last publicly available 990, prior to that purchase, GDs had about $29 million in outstanding bond debt (from the 2005 HS renovations, I'd guess).

There's a big difference between spending a $20 million gift (money pledged by 2 donors) to add a new middle school and trying to raise 3-5x that much to rebuild programs and facilities you already have on a smaller footprint.

That's a lot of debt for a school to get into. They will need to increase enrollment to service future debt payments.

How will they do that when the consolidated campus space appears to be tight, using current enrollment numbers? Don't you think that the revenue stream from "GDS Towers" (or a lump sum if GDS sells its project interest) will go to service and reduce the debt?

No one has said GDS will have an equity stake in the mixed-use project -- just a land lease. And we've been told the revenue stream from that will go to financial aid and preventing/minimizing increases in the cost of tuition.

And if the land is to be sold, then why did GDS buy it in the first place? Land speculation isn't really part of a PreK-12 school's mission. GDS purchased the property for more than any developer was willing to pay ($11.7 million), took on debt to acquire it, and is apparently willing to cover the costs of the PUD (upzoning process). So add a few years of interest, property taxes, and predevelopment costs to the purchase price to get a sense of what the school would have to recoup just to break even on this deal.

Anonymous wrote:As public schools in DC improve and charters become more popular, GDS may have trouble filling the younger grades. This could effect enrollment in the middle school ie. the Flint Hill effect. Given recent trends, I agree that is a lot of debt to take on, but I wish GDS the best.

GDS has about the same number of applicants per spot per grade as Sidwell. It's considered top tier and places are quite sought after, so I don't worry about DC charters or other factors impacting GDS' financial health or its selectivity. If anything, the new campus will increase interest in the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand the GDS obsession with Sidwell and the idea that this campus changes its competitive position. Even after the construction, several other schools will rommier, greener campuses. STA, NCS, Beauvoir, Sidwell, Field, St. pat's, Maret. Each of these schools has more room per student than GDS

Please cite examples of the obsession

You scan through this thread yourself but the two major themes are, possibly I guess from one poster, is that GDS will have a competitive advantage over Sidwell with a consolidated campus and, oddly, if it weren't for the campus the First family would be attending GDS now.

I should've used facts. Posts in a thread are not facts. Who knows who've made them.

fact: GDS has a high percentage of families in every grade that applied to Sidwell but didn't get in. Hence the rivalry

fact: the sky is green. Oh, you need a citation?

Parton, Dolly. "The Grass is Blue," Nashville: 1999.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand the GDS obsession with Sidwell and the idea that this campus changes its competitive position. Even after the construction, several other schools will rommier, greener campuses. STA, NCS, Beauvoir, Sidwell, Field, St. pat's, Maret. Each of these schools has more room per student than GDS

Please cite examples of the obsession

You scan through this thread yourself but the two major themes are, possibly I guess from one poster, is that GDS will have a competitive advantage over Sidwell with a consolidated campus and, oddly, if it weren't for the campus the First family would be attending GDS now.

I should've used facts. Posts in a thread are not facts. Who knows who've made them.

fact: GDS has a high percentage of families in every grade that applied to Sidwell but didn't get in. Hence the rivalry

fact: the sky is green. Oh, you need a citation?

As public schools in DC improve and charters become more popular, GDS may have trouble filling the younger grades. This could effect enrollment in the middle school ie. the Flint Hill effect. Given recent trends, I agree that is a lot of debt to take on, but I wish GDS the best.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how much money is needed to still be raised for Wisconsin Ave. campus project?

$40 - 70 million for construction. And that amount won't be offset by the sale of the MacArthur campus, which is unlikely to cover the $40 million already spent for land acquisition (financed by debt). Judging from the last publicly available 990, prior to that purchase, GDs had about $29 million in outstanding bond debt (from the 2005 HS renovations, I'd guess).

There's a big difference between spending a $20 million gift (money pledged by 2 donors) to add a new middle school and trying to raise 3-5x that much to rebuild programs and facilities you already have on a smaller footprint.

That's a lot of debt for a school to get into. They will need to increase enrollment to service future debt payments.

How will they do that when the consolidated campus space appears to be tight, using current enrollment numbers? Don't you think that the revenue stream from "GDS Towers" (or a lump sum if GDS sells its project interest) will go to service and reduce the debt?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't understand the GDS obsession with Sidwell and the idea that this campus changes its competitive position. Even after the construction, several other schools will rommier, greener campuses. STA, NCS, Beauvoir, Sidwell, Field, St. pat's, Maret. Each of these schools has more room per student than GDS

Please cite examples of the obsession

You scan through this thread yourself but the two major themes are, possibly I guess from one poster, is that GDS will have a competitive advantage over Sidwell with a consolidated campus and, oddly, if it weren't for the campus the First family would be attending GDS now.

I should've used facts. Posts in a thread are not facts. Who knows who've made them.

fact: GDS has a high percentage of families in every grade that applied to Sidwell but didn't get in. Hence the rivalry

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how much money is needed to still be raised for Wisconsin Ave. campus project?

$40 - 70 million for construction. And that amount won't be offset by the sale of the MacArthur campus, which is unlikely to cover the $40 million already spent for land acquisition (financed by debt). Judging from the last publicly available 990, prior to that purchase, GDs had about $29 million in outstanding bond debt (from the 2005 HS renovations, I'd guess).

There's a big difference between spending a $20 million gift (money pledged by 2 donors) to add a new middle school and trying to raise 3-5x that much to rebuild programs and facilities you already have on a smaller footprint.

That's a lot of debt for a school to get into. They will need to increase enrollment to service future debt payments.

Out-Trumping Trump is an interesting metaphor. Isn't he known primarily for ruthless self-promotion and for bankrupting his companies while protecting his personal assets?