<p>Did anyone notice that AMherst’s endowment is now $115,456,952. It was over a billion last year. What happened? typo?</p>
<p>Where are you getting that statistic? Did you go to the school's web page? Have you contacted the school's admission's office to ask that question? The new US News rankings list Amherst as #6 in financial resouces of the lacs and #4 in faculty resouces. The stock market and the school's portfolio is healthy. I would love to know the source of your statistic.</p>
<p>$993,418,000 is the number on Amherst's site as of 2004. </p>
<p>Methinks your number is a bit off.</p>
<p>Music - it's even higher than that now.</p>
<p>U.S. News has its number waaaaaay off. Amherst can't stop boasting about its $1billion endowment, and there's no way the school lost almost $900million in the span of 2 years. Especially since according to U.S. News, we haven't fallen off in terms of quality school either.</p>
<p>I wouldn't be just talking. It might have happened because of new policy of president Marx with his Marxists views.</p>
<p>He has put foreward a proposal to increase the class size to include low-income minoriyt kids...and I have read a number of articles abouth the decision of some alumns to boycott giving</p>
<p>No offense, but I would suggest cross-checking your sources instead of making up information based on suppositions and unfounded assumptions.</p>
<p>It wouldn't make sense for a college like Amherst, who is constantly tooting its horn on the fact that its alums love it to a fault, to blow almost $900 million in a year and risk losing the alum's trust and favor. The fact is that there seems to be a majorly misplaced comma in the US News number, as Amherst's actual endowment is</p>
<p>$1,154,569,523 (approaching $1.2 billion)</p>
<p>according to the following websites: <a href="http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0112636.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0112636.html</a>, <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_09/b3973087.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_09/b3973087.htm</a> (as of the end of February this year), among others that I'm not gonna copy and paste.</p>
<p>Sorry to burst your anti-Marxist bubble(s).</p>
<p>You can safely assume that US News slipped a digit on the "Amherst College at a Glance" page. If you go to the main US News rankings for "National Liberal Arts Colleges", you will also see that Amherst was also ranked #6 nationally in terms of "Financial Resources." Needless to say, that's a pretty high ranking, and it means ~ $1 billion endowment, which only a handful of LACs have (e.g. Grinnell, Williams, Wellesley, Pomona, and Swarthmore). </p>
<p>It should be obvious that a ~ $100 million endowment would not be consistent with a high "Financial Resources" ranking. Dozens of other LACs can beat that.</p>
<p>yea.... "some" alumni would never entail about 900 million dollars worth of alumni. It's a fishy number on the website, but I would never believe that Tony Marx's championing of increased class size would cause 90% of the donations to cease.</p>
<p>The original figure is a typo... Don't worry. Losing 900 million in one year is simply not possible</p>
<p>Uh you don't spend the principle of an endowment... that's why it's called an endowment. You spend the interest, or some of the interest. So yeah these guys are right.</p>
<p>Just wanted to make sure. I suspected a typo, but I had reasons to worry. Its not like there are many misprints on U.S news</p>
<p>usnews's information isn't exactly the most accurate. For example, UVa's endowment is 1.4 billion off, and its undergraduate population is about 1000 off.</p>
<p>the university of michigan's endowment is listed at 499 million...about 4.5 billion off.</p>
<p>I new I would be busted on the "misprints" statement. Good old CC.....</p>