<p>GT had a record number of applications which lowered the acceptance rate quite a bit, lowered the yield but now it looks like "actual enrolled" took a hit. Even though GT went deep into their wait list, they didn't go far enough, falling about 40 short of their 2650 enrollment target. This translates into at least a $1 million hit to tuition revenue. </p>
<p>If they had gone a little deeper into the wait list, my son would have enrolled, if offered. Now he's happily attending UIUC.</p>
<p>Interesting. I just read that this was the peak year for hardest to get into college and that it will be easier every year for the next few years. Maybe they shouldn’t have waitlisted so many.</p>
<p>Granny, do you have a link for the article you read?</p>
<p>I do not have a link, but I read it this week. I do know of someone with a 1470 (math/verbal) and a GA Tech GPA of 3.7 who was weight-listed but did not accept a position on the waitlist.</p>
<p>Without having made the detailed calculation, I would challenge the statement “This translates into at least a $1 million hit to tuition revenue.” </p>
<p>40 students in total split up into ~25 in-state and 15 oos; 25 in-state would generate ~$250k and 15 oos (15*~25=375). So, in tuition this would be a total of ~600-650k, and not 1 million. I assume you included room & board? </p>
<p>Anyway - falling only 40 short with about 2700 enrolled students (out of about 6500 accepted students - data from 2009) is not really bad …</p>
<p>Why would they take 25 in-state to fill up the 40? They’d take 40 OOS of the equal students I would think.</p>
<p>In order to maximize revenues, yes, GATech should take only OOS, but GATech is bound to a certain percentage of in-state. I believe this share is 60% - so I applied this ratio.</p>