<p>"And I don't think anyone questions that at every college, all legacies are not created equal. Money talks." Exactly! So, OP, if Stanford has not had contact[ contributions] from your family[ especially your parents] recently, then being the nephew of a SRI founder won't mean much, unless he has no children, has donated millions to Stanford, and has contacted the Development office specifically about you. There are now tens of thousands of Stanford alumni in the SF region who have kids applying to Stanford, and who have been donating to Stanford regularily. Just being the child of a Stanford alum these days doesn't mean much to the admissions office. .</p>
<p>
[quote]
Having recently spent time with a group of Stanford profs, I can tell you that their kids have a high bar to get in.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you get within 500 yards of any group of Stanford applicants, you will first detect the wailing and lamentation about the difficulty of admission, which as you come closer will become a cacophonous dirge. Legacies? Check. Asians? Roger. Californians? You betcha. Hookless high stats? Ditto. </p>
<p>That these Stanford profs bitterly complain is a given, whether their charges have an easier or harder time than unaffiliated applicants or legacies is unknown.</p>
<p>I think it has to do with just how special the particular prof is to them, just like the particular legacy:)</p>
<p>Even if being a legacy meant double the acceptance rate, it would still mean that 8 out of 10 legacies would be rejected.</p>