<p>USC was fourth last fiscal year among all universities/colleges in fundraising.</p>
<p>The university was not founded and endowed by a rich philanthropist, but by three men in the late 1800s who donated the property to found USC. The university did not start out with a huge amount of funds. </p>
<p>The latest number I could find was for 2011. SC was ranked #21 in endowment among the US colleges/universities. </p>
<p>From the WealthX,2013 website SC was tied at #7 for producing billionaires.</p>
<p>brojan claimed SC alumni did not support the university financially. A quick search found these contributors listed below. In the Campaign for USC now in progress there have been thousands of INDIVIDUAL contributors. </p>
<p>Major ALUMNI contributors to USC:</p>
<p>David Dornsife—Early contribution—$21 million Later contribution—$200 million
Ming Hseih----$85 million
George Lucas—$175 million
John Mork----Early contribution—$15 million Later contribution—$110 million
Andrew Viterbi—$52 million
Herman Ostrow—$35 million
Mark Stevens—$22 million
Ken Klein—$8 million
Michele Engemann—$16 million
Sonny Astani—$17 million
Bryan Singer—$5 million
Frank Fertitta—Not disclosed but funds a large new complex for Marshall School of Business
Verna Dauterive-$30 million</p>
<p>im saying USC alumni do not support USC as much as schools like HPYSM, Williams amherst swarth/midd do. this is a well known fact…OP should know that history has told everyone that graduates of these schools end up contributing enormous amounts PER PERSON. yes, PER PERSON is the only statistic that matters…I sure hope that USC can muster up the same endowment as schools much smaller lol?</p>
<p>doesnt it make you think why ? why dont usc alumni support usc as much as these schools? The age argument doesnt really work as USC had a decade+ head start over stanford yet pales in comparison in alumni sucess</p>
<p>huh? USC is not in the top 10 fundraising per capita this year…unless you have a link that shows that? if you divide USC’s endowment contributino this year divided by living alumni, its extremely low comapred to middlebury. I dont know why this is, but middlebury alumni are clearly more sucessful and contribute more per capita to their school. This could be a factor in OP’s choice, that history has shown that midd has more sucessful alumni per capita.</p>
<p>brojan, you initially said USC alumni weren’t wealthy and didn’t feel like giving back to the school. Then it was shown that USC finished 4th in the country in university fundraising in 2012. You were embarrassed at being proved wrong, so now you’re trying to convince people you were talking about alumni giving per capita - even though you never said anything about that originally.</p>
<p>No one’s buying what you’re selling. </p>
<p>And stop pretending you’re a USC student. You sound like someone who was rejected for admission, and haven’t yet gotten over it.</p>
<p>A recent gallop poll found that the average American thinks that Pennsylvania State University is more prestigious than the University of Pennsylvania. I’ll bet someone in middle America would think that University of Massachusetts at Amherst is more prestigious than Amherst College. IMHO, you should be more concerned about the opinions of folks who admit people into grad schools or do hiring for fortune 500 companies. I guarantee you they’ve heard of Middlebury and Bowdoin and Williams (and yes, Amherst).</p>
<p>Care to prove how endowments are directly related to study abroad programs?</p>
<p>Care to provide evidence of these colleges you’re betting on that have year-long exchanges in Nordic countries?</p>
<p>If spending a semester/year in Reykjavik or Odense was so important to you maybe you should have taken 5 minutes and researched that before coming to SC (if indeed you are a student at SC).</p>
<p>Thank you arcadia, I didn’t have the fortitude to engage with SeattleTW any further. Perhaps a ■■■■■? No other explanation for such inflammatory ignorance.</p>
<p>@simba9 - I believe brojan was a transfer from another school, didn’t do the due diligence on USC before transferring in, and now after 1 year is transferring again as the grass is greener someplace else.</p>
<p>bottom line is, middlebury is far holds far more prestige in the eyes of people who matter-elite grade schools such as HBS/YLS etc, elite employers such as MBB. When i came to USC, i thought it was an elite private school. Until i realized that with graduating classes as big as 3,000+, an extremely small percentage get elite employment (MBB etc) or elite grad schools… people here tend to settle, for a small LA firm , etc. and not shoot for the stars.</p>
<p>i am certain that a larger % of people in midds graduating class this year gain elite employment or elite grad admissions -USC has more people, but usc’s graduating class is also 4-5 x larger and certainly doesnt send 4-5x more people to top programs.</p>