<p>Best guess is 9.9% again for Yale, and Harvard jumping from 10.3% to 9.0%.</p>
<p>I think you are in the ballpark - with a few caveats:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The RD pool may not be quite as large as you project, because (a) not every EA-deferred accepts a spot in the RD pool, and (b) the actualy number of RD apps may drop a bit, as the "withdrawns" and "incompletes" are netted out.</p></li>
<li><p>There were 1,958 admits last year, and 1,305 matriculants, for a yield rate of 66.65%. They did raise the percentage of the class admitted EA this year, which should help the yield rate, but the overall yield of 68% which you project may be a bit optimistic. To achieve a 68% yield, my guess is that they'd have to "go light" on initial RD admits, and draw more from the waitlist (with its attractive 100% yield.) It may happen.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I also thought that with Harvard being so competetive this year that Yale would have a larger pool to draw from without competing with Harvard (i.e. a larger Harvard reject pool) - increasing its yield. Anyway, the sad thing is the drop in minority applications which is proof that Yale should implement better Financial Aid policies. They did propose (and I think it will be fact) to fund a summer of study/travel abroad to everyone on financial aid, a research grant, sort of.</p>
<p>Yale definately is falling behind Harvard, and especially Princeton, in terms of aid. Eliminating student loans like Princeton would result in a huge increase in apps, I think.</p>
<p>I thought about your first point, and there may be something to it, but didn't include it as a factor because (a) its so speculative, and (b) the overlap group may not decline that much if both are zeroing in on a limited group of "superstars" at the top. </p>
<p>I think most common admits are in the "superstar" category. The size of the overlap group has not really declined, I don't believe, as apps have increased at each school in recent years.</p>
<p>I recognize that recruiting from the Harvard "reject" pile is not the same thing as competing for common admits.</p>
<p>I agree that "sexing up" the financial aid program would boost Yale app numbers, but you have to recognize that that Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, etc (and even Brown, thanks to the Gray Goose money) are not going to be standing still. (At Princeton, financial aid is 100% endowed!)</p>
<p>Yale increased the draw from the endowment from 5% to 5.2% for FY 2005, but the extra money isn't available for financial aid, since its ticketed to help pay for the ongoing renovation of the physical plant.</p>
<p>time for a new fundraising campaign!</p>
<p>Yale has roughly as much money per student as Harvard does... I doubt with over $1 million per student that it needs a new fundraising campaign to adopt a new policy. You mention Brown as not standing still, and they have less than 1/5th the money that Yale does per student ($200,000 at Brown versus $1,120,000 at Yale).</p>
<p>Brown just received a $100,000,000 gift expressly for the purpose of increasing financial aid. </p>
<p>And "endowment per student" - while a useful yardstick for some purposes - doesn't directly relate to financial aid, since there are many claims on the endowment, including help in underwriting the operating budget.</p>
<p>$100,000,000... lol! Yale has $12,700,000,000 and you are saying that Brown's $100,000,000 financial aid endowment makes a difference? That's <1% of Yale's endowment, I think Yale can afford more financial aid. Yale has roughly twice as much money as Stanford, for instance.</p>
<p>You don't think there are many claims on the endowment at Harvard? Again, Harvard has the same amount of money available for financial aid, building maintenance, salaries, etc. that Yale does.</p>
<p>Schools do not have as much flexibility as you may think when it comes to withdrawing money from the endowment in order to pay ongoing expenses. That's what I tried to explain earlier. </p>
<p>For example, Princeton has more "endowment per student" than anybody, but they just voted to increase tuition to cover a projected $5 million shortfall in the operating budget. The anticipated income from the endowment was already fully committed, and couldn't be spent for this purpose.</p>
<p>I see Byerly's point. That's the reason why they have an endowment. If they kept withdrawing money from the endowment in order to pay for financial aid and operating costs, they would not remain a school with a big endowment. Brown on the other hand, has the money exclusively for financial aid.</p>
<p>Allow me to make it even plainer. Yale and Harvard have the same amount of money for each student. Harvard raised the amount of aid available. Yale should follow suit. Both schools have far more that they can set aside than Brown's tiny FA endowment. Harvard did it without the tiny $100m endowment for financial aid, Yale can do the same.</p>
<p>For the umpteenth time, Yale can do anything with financial aid that Harvard can, and both can do a lot more than Brown can. I understand they can't spend their whole endowments, I've taken plenty of economics. Harvard isn't spending their whole endowment, hardly a fraction of the annual draw. The same would be true for Yale.</p>
<p>Yale (or Harvard) could <em>easily</em> set aside a >$200 million endowment exclusively for financial aid (compared to Brown's $100 million they now have).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Schools do not have as much flexibility as you may think when it comes to withdrawing money from the endowment in order to pay ongoing expenses. That's what I tried to explain earlier.</p>
<p>For example, Princeton has more "endowment per student" than anybody, but they just voted to increase tuition to cover a projected $5 million shortfall in the operating budget. The anticipated income from the endowment was already fully committed, and couldn't be spent for this purpose.
[/quote]
Actually Byerly, the <em>only</em> reason Princeton and Yale continue to increase tuition is that someone out there can afford to pay. It's simple economics -- to not raise tuition is to leave money on the table. No entity, private or nonprofit, wants to decrease revenue. This way they can increase financial aid and pay for a lot of it with the ever-higher revenue from the Grandpa Gilmore set who can pay 100% of the tuition no matter how high it goes.</p>
<p>I think the primary flaw in your thinking here is that somehow in your world, Harvard has either more $$/student or more flexibility in spending its endowment than Yales does. Neither of these is true. Period.</p>
<p>Read these stories for starters.</p>
<p>"Yale Can't Afford to Follow Pack on Aid Reform"</p>
<p>See also -</p>
<p>"Financial aid woes point out system's flaws"</p>
<p>So you agree with me now, Byerly? My point is that Yale, if it so chooses, can easily match anything that Havard, Princeton, or Brown can put forth in terms of financial aid. It has nothing to do with "a new fundraising campaign" as you made the mistake of recommending because Yale already has way more than enough money to set any FA policy it chooses. Do you now reconsider what you said?</p>
<p>I totally agree with the article. Yale can't afford to fall behind in the financial aid "PR game". Because in $$$ terms, it can afford anything that Harvard can. Maybe now that you've read the articles you just linked, you know that Yale should at least match Harvard's financial press release game (because it obviously can if it chooses).</p>
<p>
[quote]
To achieve a 68% yield, my guess is that they'd have to "go light" on initial RD admits, and draw more from the waitlist (with its attractive 100% yield.) It may happen.
[/quote]
That is just plain cruel!</p>
<ul>
<li>would apparently cost Yale about $5.5 million a year.</li>
</ul>
<p><a href="http://www.yale.edu/oir/cds_2003-04.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.yale.edu/oir/cds_2003-04.pdf</a></p>
<p>Its easy for some CC poster like "breeze" - or even some liberal-minded Yale Daily News editorialist, to tell Yale what it can "easily afford". The reality is not so simple when you have competing needs such as: </p>
<p>(1) long-overdue building renovations; </p>
<p>(2) employees who would like pay increases; </p>
<p>(3) a city government which thinks Yale could "easily afford" to pay it more money every year in lieu of taxes; </p>
<p>(4) an athletic program operating at a substantial deficit; and </p>
<p>(4) myriad other bright ideas for things it can "easily afford" to do, such as rebuilding the crumbling Yale Bowl.</p>
<p>Or about ~0.0% of the endowment. To be exact, 0.04%. You mentioned raising endowment spending by 0.50% just recently for new construction and extensive renovations (about $70-80 million a year)... less than a tenth of that would equal Princeton's grants</p>
<p>So you finally see it for what it is. The smallest drop in the ocean you can imagine, in Yale's (or Harvard's, or Princeton's) terms.</p>
<p>I'm shocked you think $5.5 million is something Yale can't afford, being than its net worth is more than 2,000 times that. I just don't think you have a mind for the math of this situation. I have a degree in Economics.. does that make me a liberal-minded editoralist? From your comments, it's obvious you didn't study Economics at Harvard. I don't think you'll be at HBS either, based on your understanding of these finances.</p>
<p>AGAIN - Where do you think Harvard found the money? For at least the fifth time, I'll repeat Harvard has the same money Yale does for each student, no more and no less, and Harvard has the same renovations that need to be done to its campus. If anything, H's campus is even more overdue in needed physical improvements. Your silence on this fiscal comparison is deafening.</p>