<p>The bolded are all assumptions. If they really are looking for a diamond in the rough – and I don’t know that they are are are not – then those assumptions don’t apply. :)</p>
<p>The fact that families on cc receive such letters is meaningless. CC is a very narrow slice of the potential applicant pool, which could be as low as 1800 for a really hooked candidate (see the heated exchanges about Ivy athletic recruiting).</p>
<p>Retail marketing is expensive with very low yield. Obtaining that last customer can be extremely expensive (one reason that retail-focused medical insurance companies are really scrambling bcos their marketing costs are higher than 15%/marginal customer).</p>
<p>How could it be an assumption when it was written in a form of a question? There is no declaration of facts here, just as there is no proof at all that they are looking for a “diamond in the rough”.</p>
<p>And let’s think for a moment here. If they are really trying to find diamond in the rough, how could it be that the average recipients are comprised mostly of those diamonds in the rough? That does not make any sense. How do they know apriori that certain individuals are diamond in the rough?</p>
<p>They don’t and that’s the whole point, IMO. They are searching high and low for a gazillion apps, out of which they may find a few diamonds. Or, they may not. But since the colleges in question are richer than say, Warren Buffett, they have money to burn. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How do we know who are the “average recipients” of this marketing campaign?</p>
<p>And at the same time create this useless culture of hyper competition that serves very little in terms of education at not only at their expense but at the expense of the whole population.</p>
<p>Don’t get too carried away. The percentage of the “whole population” that cares about who applies to Harvard and who gets accepted there is teensy-tiny. The “useless culture of hyper competition” affects very few people.</p>
<p>(And whether it’s really useless or not is a matter for some debate. I tend to be a dove in the competition controversy, but I know lots of people who are hawks, and they have plenty of good points to make. At my kids’ very diverse high school, the faculty spent a good deal of effort introducing students and their families to the notion that competition is a good thing, and it helps us grow and achieve more. Believe it or not, many 9th graders, even at this academic magnet school, showed up not understanding that attitude.)</p>
<p>Aren’t they buying their mailing list from College Board or ACT by score band? So maybe the crux of the matter is defining the lowest score band we think is fair game for receiving a college’s marketing blitz. Per Harvard’s CDS, the middle 50% is 690-800 CR, 700-790 M and 710-800 W. ACT composite is 31-34. So are we okay with Harvard contacting kids at the 25% mark? Does it feel better if Harvard starts at their median?</p>
<p>I doubt the final December mailout is a big budget item, i.e., considering the way marketing firms structure campaign costs, once a school has already bought the package for initial and follow-up mailings to a particular class (beginning post-junior year PSAT), the $ figure put on that last one is likely de minimis.</p>
<p>oh please. The typical HS in the US is trying to take an accurate daily attendance so the district doesn’t lose out on state and federal funds due them. They give a %^&* about the tiny, tiny slice of the population who gets in a lather over Harvard vs. Hopkins or Wellesley vs. Williams and which is more prestigious. Your typical HS principal would fall over laughing reading about the endless rehashs on CC over “Does Swarthmore have a higher per capita PhD production than Reed” or “can my kid major in math at Bowdoin even though the department isn’t as highly rated as it is at Middlebury.”</p>
<p>You guys need to get out more.</p>
<p>It matters not a whit in the grand scheme of things if there is one more overwrought parent in Scarsdale or Belmont who sees a letter from Harvard and thinks that means little Suzy has a shot at getting in to Harvard. Harvard can do whatever it likes as long as it’s legal… and apparently it is still legal to conduct a mass mail campaign encouraging college seniors to apply, even if we, the collective elders of CC think it’s shameful that a senior would wait UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE to fill out their Harvard application. That kid should have spent the summer writing the supplemental essay for god’s sake so the HS English teacher could “lightly edit it” for grammar/syntax, and then the college adviser could “lightly edit it” for content, and then the 'copter parents could “lightly edit it” for structure. It is shameful. Everyone knows that in order to actually get in to Harvard you have to have sent off the application by October 1st even though those dopes in Cambridge claim you have until January. But what do they know, they only work in Harvard admissions, where the people are so stupid they waste good money encouraging kids to apply who have absolutely no chance of getting in. Those dopes.</p>
<p>Personally I liked the old days better when the headmaster at Groton and the headmaster at Exeter decided who could apply to Harvard and who to Yale and who would be the slugs ending up at Denison and Lehigh. That was much more democratic then encouraging any HS senior with a pen and a stamp-or a laptop and a modem- to apply. It’s Harvard, people. Those kids from schools which don’t even have a college advising department need to know their place and we’re only encouraging them to dream big when we suggest they apply to need blind universities who will make it possible for them to attend if admitted. Those kids should all be at University of Phoenix or hairdressing school anyway.</p>
<p>As long as our progeny don’t feel stressed by the extra competition to get into an ivy league school. That’s the most important thing.</p>
<p>Using your tactic, how do you know there are a few or how many the practice generates? Again, read the study and the comments by the director many pages ago what they (the admission people) think of many of their practices.</p>
<p>bluebayou, as I said upthread, I don’t object to the practice. I’ve actually seen Dec. mailings produce results for kids (and I don’t care if the school’s primary motivation is ratings or other business end). I just wanted to see if those who object could draw the line.</p>
<p>ROFL! Among a very small slice of the population, perhaps. If there were such a truly prevalent “useless culture of hyper competition,” then you wouldn’t HAVE kids who live on ranches in Oklahoma who don’t really think of Harvard as the kind of place that’s for them. Don’t you just love the upper-middle-classist assumptions that the Ivy mania that pervades a few privileged places is a Huge Problem in the US?</p>
<p>It matters not what “we” think of H contacting kids at the 25% mark. It only matters what H thinks. H has the right to buy a mailing list with whatever criteria they so choose.</p>
<p>I fully admit that I have no idea. But I’m guessing no one else on this thread has the number either. And since the data are not available, it’s hard to make any point whatsover point about “hyper competition”…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, it’s a tough business, which is hard for ‘academics’ to accept. They like to believe that their DNA is above “bidness”. Regardless, adcoms continue their practices. Even our friend at Reed, while disparaging USNews, complies with their reporting requirements (for ranking purposes).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry, I misinterpreted your post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Me neither. And, btw, if HYP really wanted to increase their applications, all they would have to do is waive the app fees (ala Tulane). Voila, hundreds of thousands of apps.</p>