<p>Okay, not really... BUT...
How much better are my chances (in general) if I don't apply for any financial aid at these schools?</p>
<p>This question annoys me, especially since its so common sense. Would a school rather have a kid who needs to borrow massive amounts of money from them, or a kid who can pay fully and the school doesn’t need to lend out any money.</p>
<p>Obviously the lack of need for financial aid isn’t going to mask poor stats, nor will it be considered too important, but of course a school would accept a kid who requires no borrowed money over a kid with similar stats that requires a lot of money.</p>
<p>This question annoys me, especially since its so common sense. Would a school rather have a kid who needs to borrow massive amounts of money from them, or a kid who can pay fully and the school doesn’t need to lend out any money.</p>
<p>Obviously the lack of need for financial aid isn’t going to mask poor stats, nor will it be considered too important, but of course a school would accept a kid who requires no borrowed money over a kid with similar stats that requires a lot of money.</p>
<p>bumpy bump?</p>
<p>depends on whether the school is need-blind or not. If it’s need-blind, then it makes absolutely no difference. This is true for Penn and I think Brown as well, not sure about Vanderbilt</p>
<p>Plus, it doesn’t affect the desirability of a school at all; it affects the chances of only a small portion of applicants, those on the cusp when the financial aid budget is exhausted.</p>