Good point, @JHS . I’ll bet you could get David Brooks, Bret Stephens, Nate Silver or Ana Marie Cox out to such an event. Not to mention one of many distinguished profs and a playwright or two - say, David Auburn.
^ Good points. Probably comes down to the goals of the event. If that’s fundraising, not sure if trotting out David Brooks or Nate Silver is helpful LOL. But they certainly have been invited to share their insights in other ways, including speaking on campus.
Would love to attend an admissions event with a variety of influential UChicago alums - of all stripes and trades. Hopefully, not everyone from NY area is interested in Wall St. or consulting.
Somehow I don’t see Nate Silver being particularly enthused about serving as a prop for UChicago’s Office of Institutional Development. I’d be surprised if Bret Stephens and David Brooks weren’t somehow involved, though, given how much they love being Zimmer’s lapdogs.
No disagreement there-
uh…okay. I can think of a few negatives, personally.
Nate Silver did come back to campus a couple of weeks ago and I presume @HydeSnark was likely at the Keller Center that time.
I think for the right exposure Nate Silver will work with UChicago Office of Development. He is running a political and sports website but it is still a business. I would guess he will want to meet some media big shots and big hedge fund managers to either promote or expand 538.
I don’t really have anything to back this up other than my gut, but I would bet that willingness to help with fundraising is based on more of an ideological affinity with the cause than any sense of personal gain. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that so many finance people are there, since they are, in my experience, most ideologically aligned with the modus operandi of the university’s higher administration.
And of course this goes both ways. UChicago needs to find people that aren’t critical of the institution (at the very least - preferably they should be enthusiastic about it). There is no way UChicago would want me talking to donors, basically, regardless of what I end up doing.
I attended this same event 3 years ago with my son who was admitted EA. The lunch was also held at Stone Barn and was hosted by John Liew. There were a number of young alumni at the lunch and it appeared many of them worked for John Liew at AQR. These young alumni mingled with admitted students and their parents and were helpful in answering questions and providing insight to UChicago. All in all, it was a wonderful event and John Liew was a gracious host. The fact that he is a billionaire really had no bearing at all in terms of how I viewed that event.
In the admitted student portal is a link to all of the student receptions around the country that are open to attend. We attended one at a “bougie” country club. It was beautiful, with very gracious, non-bougie hosts. Some of the students there were ED, and others were EA. A 7% acceptance rate announcement was made. Dean Nondorf hosted one of these events in NY, but it was not the one referenced in the maroon article above. My daughter just got invited to two more local receptions that have not been posted in the portal yet, and we are going to try and attend another so she can meet more students before the year starts. There were alumni at the event we attended, but no particular reference was made to them by anyone from the university.
^ Yay - Numbers!
Assuming that 7% was the overall rate for the early pool (ie ED1 and EA), that’s something like, what, 1100 accepteds out of a pool of 15,000? Way more interesting than figuring out which admitted reception wins the “bougie” prize.
Agree with the comments that graciousness tends to make a bigger impact than specific locale or the personal wealth of the host at these events.
Hello - I was at this event last year (2018). It was one of the accepted student receptions. All of the early admits were given invites.
The event was held at the same place, and similar format. It began with a cocktail reception where alumni, students and parents mingled around for a bit. John Liew and Nondorf were at the entry door welcoming everyone in. Most of the alumni who were invited worked in the finance field in NYC. Two recent alumni were paired at each table, assigned seating. At the end of the meal, each of the alumni got up and introduced themselves. Most of them were in the finance field (investment banking, consulting, sales/trading, etc). About half-way through the introductions, Nondorf actually got up and joked that UChicago alumni have a wide variety of interests – not just finance.
Overall it was a well-done event. I had no idea that John Liew was a billionaire until I saw this article. He seemed very laid back and approachable to me. It definitely helped tip UChicago over the edge for me.
@JHS wrote:
At my reception, there were a handful of non-finance types. The snapchat person was at the event last year as well. During the table introductions, I estimate about 20% were non-finance. Sorry I didn’t keep detailed notes.
Your description is fine – it sounds like at least there was some acknowledgement that the University of Chicago does not exist solely to supply finance and consulting firms with cannon fodder. I understand that if the goal is to have a bunch of young alumni present to help recruit admittees, it’s a lot easier for Liew to produce young alumni who work for him and will go where he tells them to go, and other young alumni who work in fields where he is a god, than to go find a wide range of young alumni and convince a bunch of them to come. And I fundamentally like the idea that Chicago is continuing to “recruit” students who applied ED, were accepted, and are committed to enroll.
Don’t sell yourself short, @HydeSnark ! You are never less than thoughtful, measured, articulate, and high-minded. You are a tremendous advertisement for the University of Chicago. I suspect donors, in general, would love you. As would incoming students and prospects – at least the ones who are constitutionally suited to appreciate the university.
@Hydesnark , in a very recent thread that disappeared on us you made some very cogent observations about a Chicago-style education with its “life of the mind” aspirations and how this could relate to working in the more practical world that follows graduation. You were debunking the assertion, as I recall it, that there was a discontinuity between the two things. That is definitely a message worth hearing.