FB: Empire 8

[Yanks 99]

Bombers and Ethelred the Unready,

Good observations...and I agree with both of you.  There will almost always be certain situations where a kid will "know" or have an idea about what they really want to do, and that will help dictate where they end up.  In Phil Neumann's case...assuming that you are correct in why he decided to go to Ithaca...it makes perfect sense. 

I had no idea going into college, or at least could have been easily swayed in several directions...I got lucky, and things worked out.  My younger brother knew exactly what he wanted to do going into college, and is still in that profession today. 

If a kid/recruit wanted an engineering degree, my guess is they would focus on RPI or Clarkson (obviously, not a football school).  Physical Therapy or Communication/Journalism, probably Ithaca.  Teaching, probably Cortland.  Business degree...that gets tricky.  Maybe there is a measuring stick somewhere out there that says one undergraduate business school or degree is vastly better than another (comparing E8 and LL schools only here).  My guess though is that Ithaca's, SJFC's, RPI's, Union's, Hobart's, and SLU's are all at least similar, or at least comparable.  Yet the range of costs for these school goes from about $37,000 a year (SJFC) to the almost $53,000 a year (LL schools).  That's a pretty big gap...

Just some food for thought on a general thought of the current state of the LL...

[dlippiel]

+k to the page for a very good discussion.

[Doid23]

Liberty League:

RPI: $53,575
Union: $54,273
Hobart: $53,767
SLU: $53,740
Rochester: $53,922
WPI: $51,384
MMA: $2,200 (additional suck not added)

We're #1 at something!!! Go U!!!

Good post, the only thing that I would add is that need-based financial aid does affect the cost, especially in regards to elite student athletes that a school wants.

[pumkinattack]

Good points.  My only comment is that undergraduate business degress are hardly worth pursuing.  I've worked with a lot of kids/guys from UVA, UMich and many of the ivies and the ones that excelled (investment banking/structured finance) weren't the ones with undergraduate business degrees.  Same reason people are questioning the value of an MBA (I don't simply because its a sunk cost and I drink enough already). 

Then again, while I realize kids pick school for athletics often, if that's the reason someone picks a school, irrespective of cost and, more importantly perceived value (because it can't really be calculated until after the fact) then they've gotten what they've paid for whether its 10k/yr or $50k/yr.

[AUKaz00]

Two thoughts to add to the discussion:

Endowment.  This plays into the financial aid point which has been raised.  I wonder what the correlation is between endowment size and listed cost of an institution.

Perceived value.  Another issue which has been broached, but using the art-house side of Alfred as an example I think it is a valid point.  A senior painter had trouble selling her pieces at her show last year and my wife pointed out that while her work was some of the best in the show, it was priced too low.  She doubled the prices and sold 3 in a week.  People with means want to spend more for the prestige that comes with the purchase.

[Bombers798891]

Perceived value.  Another issue which has been broached, but using the art-house side of Alfred as an example I think it is a valid point.  A senior painter had trouble selling her pieces at her show last year and my wife pointed out that while her work was some of the best in the show, it was priced too low.  She doubled the prices and sold 3 in a week.  People with means want to spend more for the prestige that comes with the purchase.

This is an excellent point. There may be families out there who say "I'd rather spend more so my kid can go to school A than school B, even if the education is similar." It's sort of a shallow view from a consumer standpoint, but you see it in athletic ticket prices a lot at the D-I level. Schools will charge for admission, even if the sport isn't very popular, under the idea that if you make it free, people will have a negative view on its quality

[maxpower]

I wonder what the correlation is between endowment size and...

...boot size?

[AUPepBand]

I wonder what the correlation is between endowment size and...

...boot size?

Some of the well-endowed institutions are, in fact, D3 schools. Pep concludes that one can be small yet well-endowed. 

[pg04]

I agree that the prestige factor is big. In my own experience, I almost ended up at RIT, St. John Fisher or U of R... and those were, to be honest, my first choices (I wanted to be in the Rochester area).  Since I was far from athletic and my family was lower-middle class, my decision ended up being based on money.  The port offered me a full scholarship,  and while the other schools offered scholarships, there still was a big chunk left, and big chunk certainly > 0. 

In the end, things worked out OK for me, so I really never regret my choice (and it offered me the opportunity to work at the Brockport Radio station, one of the best times of my life to be honest!). Although I've gone back to school so what do I know 

[gordonmann]

This has been a really good, thoughtful discussion.

To bring it back to Yanks initial theory, as I understand it at least, he's saying that the prolonged recession has weakened the recruiting advantage that LL institutions traditionally had on lower cost competitors from the E8 and SUNY schools.  The other factors that people are bringing up -- endowment size, the ability to give need based aid, excellence of individual programs -- have always been present in some form.  Yank's point -- again if I understand it -- is that those factors don't matter as much righ now.  School X may have a bigger endowment, more generous financial aid policies and a better engineering program than School Y.  But if School Y is $10,000/year cheaper, none of that stuff matters as much (note the qualifier there) during a long recession.

I think you could test this theory by taking it outside the region.

Have we seen lower cost colleges in other places catch up to or pass their higher cost regional competitors?  Has the MAC or NJAC gotten stronger relative to the Centennial Conference?  How about the OAC relative to the NCAC?  Or the WIAC relative to the MIAC or MWC?  Or the ASC relative to SCAC schools like Trinity and Austin? If so, how much is the economy a factor?

Of course every region has its own set of conditions, but it's an interesting question to think about. 

[Mr. Ypsi]

Perception often trumps reality.  What many hs students (and, at least as importantly, their parents) don't realize is that the high list-price schools will almost invariably also have much higher financial aid (relatively few students pay full list price), so the NET price difference is generally MUCH less than the list-price difference.  But many, many potential students never get past the 'sticker shock' to realize this.

North Park U a few years back tried a different approach.  They dramatically lowered the list price (with, of necessity, a corresponding reduction in financial aid).  As I understand it, enrollment increased significantly, yielding enough extra 'net' tuition dollars that they can still do 'need-blind' admissions yet are still ahead financially.

This is not a viable approach for all - sometimes high tuition IS the appeal!  (I recall the classic illustration of a Scotch - I forget which one - who a number of years ago had slumping sales.  Without changing the product at all, they doubled the price.  Sales sky-rocketed! )  We've all been trained since birth that 'you get what you pay for'.  And we all have a bit of the snob in us, however deeply buried.  But the NPU approach might be something for schools to consider.

[Jonny Utah]

Perception often trumps reality.  What many hs students (and, at least as importantly, their parents) don't realize is that the high list-price schools will almost invariably also have much higher financial aid (relatively few students pay full list price), so the NET price difference is generally MUCH less than the list-price difference.  But many, many potential students never get past the 'sticker shock' to realize this.

North Park U a few years back tried a different approach.  They dramatically lowered the list price (with, of necessity, a corresponding reduction in financial aid).  As I understand it, enrollment increased significantly, yielding enough extra 'net' tuition dollars that they can still do 'need-blind' admissions yet are still ahead financially.

This is not a viable approach for all - sometimes high tuition IS the appeal!  (I recall the classic illustration of a Scotch - I forget which one - who a number of years ago had slumping sales.  Without changing the product at all, they doubled the price.  Sales sky-rocketed! )  We've all been trained since birth that 'you get what you pay for'.  And we all have a bit of the snob in us, however deeply buried.  But the NPU approach might be something for schools to consider.

Many of these private liberal arts colleges have high tuition rates for the simple reason that the richest people in this country are always going to have kids going to college.  It doesn't matter if the yearly cost is 50k a year or 90k a year.  Both prices are easy to pay for the rich in this country.  So why not squeeze all you can out of these people?  It just leaves more aid for those in the "middle class".  And by "middle class" I'm talking about 3 children families who make $150K to 250K a year or less.  I mean, what is 4 years of college for 3 kids at the high prices?  600K?  If that is a housing price, a family making 200K isn't going to afford that either.

[pumkinattack]

Without stepping out too far into the political realm, one could consider the impact of decades of subsidies (stafford, ffelp and other programs) on the cost of tuition.  Non-profits, operating far from regulatory scrutiny, with every president stumping on education and getting a college degree, while subsidizing the cost via grants and cheap loans has driven the cost up.  I know guys that worked as financial advisors and they're taught to model 7% tuition growth into perpetuity.  I realize that profession is far from analytical finance, but still, that's a retarded situation to be in.  What company on earth has that kind of pricing power? 

[Jonny Utah]

Without stepping out too far into the political realm, one could consider the impact of decades of subsidies (stafford, ffelp and other programs) on the cost of tuition.  Non-profits, operating far from regulatory scrutiny, with every president stumping on education and getting a college degree, while subsidizing the cost via grants and cheap loans has driven the cost up.  I know guys that worked as financial advisors and they're taught to model 7% tuition growth into perpetuity.  I realize that profession is far from analytical finance, but still, that's a retarded situation to be in.  What company on earth has that kind of pricing power?

Meanwhile Harvard saw 7.2% gains in its endowment in fiscal 2011 going from 28 billion to 32 billion.  Every school lost money in 2009, but I wonder how the rest of them stacked up they last two years.

pumkinattack has something though.  I have a feeling that we aren't seeing 7% cuts in tution prices. 

[fisheralum91]

Good morning all!
Safe travels to all heading out this weekend!
Ill see many of you at the Fisher/Hobart game!
20 yr reunion...god its been 20 years?