<p>and the one naive kid who ends up applying to a reach school only because he/she received mail...gets in....cures cancer?</p>
<p>"How is it a scam?" Because if you received a mailing from Ford or Victoria's Closet and then tried to order their product, you would not be told -" Sorry, we will sell our product to only 10% of those interested, based on factors largely out of your control, and you do not qualify to purchase our product"</p>
<p>The best defense against deception is, often, common sense.</p>
<p>"The best defense against deception is, often, common sense."
Something that many 16-17 years old's are lacking!</p>
<p>Who here has learned of a school's existence because of a mailing?</p>
<p>LOL at kelowna's suggestion of playing hard to get.</p>
<p>I share soozie's frustration of signing up for e-mail lists -- showing demonstrated interest -- and still not getting anything. My ds's no. 1 choice has only sent him one thing since we toured 18 months ago. But my friend's ds in Cali, whose scores and GPA are lower than my son's and who has never set foot on campus, gets tons of stuff from them. It's location, location, location. Lots of kids from our area apply to this school but not as many from Cali do.</p>
<p>I guess my point of disagreement here is that I do believe that colleges can "help it" is their materials are interpreted as encouraging students to believe they will be accepted. In fact, I think the personalized letters begging the kid to apply because he is fabulous in every way are precisely designed to make the kid believe they will be accepted.</p>
<p>Over on the Tulane thread there are some very upset students who were encouraged, begged, entreated to apply via a barrage of letters and emails. Many have now been waitlisted and they feel substantially misled. In Tulane's case, at least the applications were free. Most of these schools are $60 or so an ap, plus the fees for sending scores, transcripts, etc.</p>
<p>Soozievt,
The problem is that many "newby" students and parents DON'T REALIZE that the brochures ARE "marketing materials"! They may be the first pieces of "business" mail a student has ever received! So of course they are naive- they don't know how the whole college application business works! How could they, unless they have been through the process before, or learned about it from an outside source, or another parent who has gone through the process? I sure wouldn't have been able to figure it out all on my own without the help of CC.</p>
<p>So is the primary objection to the mailings the fact that they arrive, or what they say?</p>
<p>vossron, ds definitely has gotten mail from places I'd never heard of.</p>
<p>For me, what they say is very important. They need to use words like "may" and "if." Perhaps most of them do.</p>
<p>
[quote]
"How is it a scam?" Because if you received a mailing from Ford or Victoria's Closet and then tried to order their product, you would not be told -" Sorry, we will sell our product to only 10% of those interested, based on factors largely out of your control, and you do not qualify to purchase our product"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Brava! Finally, what I could not get into words. Thank you.</p>
<p>vossron, I object to the language, which often skirts outright lying, and the sheer volume. </p>
<p>I mean, my goodness, even if my son had not heard of NYU, do they really want a student who is so forgetful that apparently he needs seven reminders of their existence over a two month period? And let me be perfectly clear that my son's only "contact" with NYU was checking the box on the PSAT. </p>
<p>If the schools were on the up and up, they would not be hiring firms to improve their stats. I can see money being spent on trying to narrow down who would be a good match so that material is not wasted but how in the world does the full multi-media press accomplish that? It just doesn't. That, in my opinion, is an admission of guilt that their intent is not primarily informational.</p>
<p>I think there would be no controversy if the "marketing materials" had clear disclosure information with them regarding who mailed them and the % of applicants actually accepted by the college. Enclosing the admissions information contained the Common Data set would be a good start. But of course this will never happen, because the whole intent of the mailings by the marketing firms is to encourage as many applications as possible.</p>
<p>My objection is only to the letters, emails from highly selective colleges that rave about kid's qualifications, but make no mention of how low the school's acceptance rate is. I also question the motives of a school that rejects 90% of applicants beating the bushes to find more applicants.</p>
<p>lol.. it is no more a scam then those government ads for the New York state lottery.... "Hey, you never know"</p>
<p>^^ if colleges used the word "lottery" in their mailings, then I would agree!</p>
<p>pugmadkate- I'm laughing at your reference to NYU. It's become a running joke in our house...."Here's another NYU mailout! Let's put it in the pile with the other thousands of brochures!"</p>
<p>The back of my lottery ticket has this on it, "Odds of winning the jackpot or top prize are approximately; 1:175.7 million for Mega Millions; 1:25.8 million for Lotto Texas" and so on.</p>
<p>When did colleges start printing their admission stats on the back of applications?</p>
<p>I think a lawsuit is in order.</p>
<p>re post 98- bingo! most colleges don't want you to know the "odds" of acceptance.</p>