<p>Who do you think the donor is? Ellison? He did just rescind a 100M donation to Harvard. Hmm, it makes a lot of sense.</p>
<p>Ah! Wait, I'm insane! Reading it again, I'm pretty sure it will apply to us. In fact, it pretty explicitly says that. </p>
<p>Now that I've got that straightened out, that's pretty amazing. As one of the infamous under-$60,000s, this could make a huge difference. Kudos to anonymous!</p>
<p>(Don't blame me, I have a cold. :P )</p>
<p>Ellison seems too flamboyant to give such a large donation anonymously.</p>
<p>That's Great! I love UChicago like 10x more now....</p>
<p><a href="http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/07/070530.gift.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/07/070530.gift.shtml</a> </p>
<p>Cool.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ellison seems too flamboyant to give such a large donation anonymously.
[/quote]
I agree, very few people are in a position to donate 100M though. That indicates a net worth that is likely higher than 500M. UofC can't claim very many of those.</p>
<p><em>Sigh</em> I'm one of those lower income group people too, but unfortunately my parents own farm land which they rent out (which is how they get money for their retirement), so I will still be getting 0 from the school and a lot of $$$ from the bank.</p>
<p><em>Sigh</em> Worth it though.</p>
<p>As one of those under $60,000 people (hell.. under $20,000 and for a few years during high school, net income of $0), that's great. I wish more schools could afford to offer something like that.</p>
<p>Now That Is What We Call Cool!!!</p>
<p>There are several possible candidates for the donor. I know of a 1983 graduate who formed an investment group, raised money and bought a great deal of property between the South Loop and Hyde Park in the 80's. He cleverly found Hong Kong investors looking to move their money into long term investments before the Chinese take over of Hong Kong in 1997. There were some other very clever aspects to the investment as well. The investments ultimately totaled 100's of millions, they must have made billions as anyone familiar with that area can attest.</p>
<p>Huh, I wonder how this donation will affect international financial aid?!</p>
<p>No, it wasn't Crovitz. First, he's the wrong year. Second, he's a journalist, meaning he gets paid chump change.</p>
<p>Fall of 2008, though, seems to apply to next next year's graduating class (i.e. not us rising seniors, who will be applying fall of 2007)...</p>
<p>The Scholarships will be available to both new students and returning students in the fall of 2008. I'm pretty sure that refers to people going to the school in '08, not people applying in '08/'09. Even if it does mean that though, we still get three years in the program, which would still be awesome.</p>
<p>That's true :D</p>
<p>This program will be offered in perpetuity, so it is available to everyone from now on. </p>
<p>Unfortunately it does not mean yet that we will be able to offer more money for international financial aid.</p>
<p>...rich allumnus...why does he want to remain anonymous..</p>
<p>Recognition that the gift should be the focus not the donor. Giving anonymously
is very satisfying.</p>
<p>It also helps protect the donor from being hounded by family, friends, acquaintances, strangers, and other non-profits for money. Imagine everyone finding out you just donated $100 million dollars. Everyone is going to start asking for money. "If you can donate $100,000,000, then what's $1,000? $100,000? $1,000,000? for my struggling family, my new business, our important cause, etc." There have also been cases of kidnapping members of the wealthiest families to try to get money.</p>
<p>In summupance:
The University of Chicago has been given $100 million, and this year is the recipient of a record number of applications which are $65 a peice (somewhere in the ballpark 20,000). Basically, there is a huge financial influx this year that hasn't been there before.
So my question is this:
Why does it cost $50,800 to attend? Instead of accepting a more wealthy pool of applicants (one poster said 25% of applicants have incomes <$75,000, when the average American income is somewhere around 50K), wouldn't a University benefit more in the long run by accepting a class which will most likely, as a whole, 'succeed' (in the monetary sense), and donate funds back to their schools? Instead they limit their population to those who are a) able to pay for it b) have enough financial need to afford it or c) are willing to accumulate debt. Where does all this money go, if it isn't to the undergrad population? To graduate students? To new buildings? To the teaching assistants? To advertisements which will increase that 20,000 number next year? Think, between application fees (lets say 18,000*65) plus 100,000,000, over 1990 student years could be paid for at $50800 each. I'm assuming with the reputation of the UChicago economics program that the present financial ways of the college are, indeed, sensical - I would just like to hear that rationale. I understand Chicago is a quality school dedicated to education, I would just like to see some more evidence that there is a financial department to match. Anyone have encouraging info?</p>