MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: theBabyDavid on January 05, 2019, 01:48:14 PM
-
I recently received correspondence from both Harvard and Michigan regarding endowments and strategic plans for the next decade. Harvard has an endowment of more than $40 B while U of M's chest now has more than $14 B. Both universities seek to double their endowments by 2026.
Endowments, especially for private schools, is the sole guarantor of future viability.
My oldest lives in Italy and his Middlebury mail makes it my address. I noted that all of the "Little Ivies" has an endowment in excess of $1 B now.
Marquette's Endowment is still shy of half a billion but there seems to be some muscle movement towards increasing that to above $700 M. I think the administration is making the right moves; they need to because Marquette's stature as a leading private, Jesuit college is at stake. Marquette is decidedly behind its peer group - BC, GU, SLU, UND, Fordham, Holy Cross but has plans that might not bridge the gap but will provide sufficient buffer for remaining competitive for staff, programs, facilities, and students.
But for other schools the future is less clear. What will become of the Ripon's, St Norbert's, Beloit's, and Lawrence's? What is the future for smaller private colleges with underfunded endowments? Can they or will they survive?
There are dozens of small private colleges with robust endowments in excess of $1B. Can a St Norbert's survive into this century?
-
Pretty tough for schools with less than $150 mil, aina?
-
It’s starting already out here in the Boston area. Three lower tier private colleges have closed in the past 18 months. Mt Ida closed and the land was bought by UMass, Wheelock College was absorbed and taken over by Boston Univ, and Newbury College just announced that its done at the end of the year.
Colleges pay their bills in a variety of ways. Research grants, endowment, tuition $, donations, loans (from fed or privately)...colleges like those above were HIGHLY dependent on tuition dollars, specifically those of wealthier students who pay nearly full freight to keep the lights on. Not enough rich kids to pay $40,000 a year for a lower tier private education, money runs out pretty quickly. All of the closures above were announced with 6 months or less notice.
-
A couple of years ago, St. Joseph's College in Rensselaer, Indiana closed. Most people know it as the former location of the Chicago Bears' training camp and where "Brian's Song" was filmed. I went to school there my freshman year.
Frankly, I don't know why it took so long for schools like St. Joe's to start shutting down. I saw the warning signs even in 1980. It relied mostly on huge scholarships to attract students (funded by renting out farmland that they owned) and they were having trouble attracting quality faculty to its remote location. Most of my classes were a joke. I partied a lot, barely studied,and still managed to pull a 3.8 GPA.
You are going to see a lot more schools closing in the next few years.
-
There are about 100 schools with $1B or more, though a number are part of a collective endowment like the University of Texas system, Texas A&M system, Tennessee, California, Pennsylvania and others.
MU about $700M.
-
A couple of thoughts about St. Norberts and small schools in particular.
Liberal Arts Schools Like St. Norbert Are Fine
I think St. Norbert's will be fine for a long time. Their endowment is over $100M (or very close to it), which, IMO, is solid for a good-but-not-elite liberal arts college. St. Norbert's has a strong alumni base that support the school. Every St. Norbert's grad that I know LOVES the school.
There was a school in VA a few years back (Sweet Briar College) that threatened to close down. The alums rallied and saved the school--at least for now. I figure that if a school in rural VA can survive, so can a better school in semi-rural WI.
Furthermore, I think there will always be a market for smaller schools for at least two reasons.
1) Smaller class sizes with profs who put teaching above research
2) Sports: Kids love sports, want to keep playing, but aren't good enough to play at a D1 level
Liberal Arts Schools Like St. Norbert Are Not Fine
There are some structural problems that indeed threaten small schools.
1) The Midwest is losing people to the Sun Belt at breakneck speed. There is a clamor within smaller schools to start recruiting students who live outside of the Midwest. There is also a push to focus heavily on the existing regional students, "first generation" and Hispanics in particular. Hence, you see Marquette's push to become a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI). It's no coincidence that MU has also recently been pushing its Catholic identity hard over the past few years.
2) Religiosity is dropping among HS grads (and their parents). Small, private schools are almost always Mainline Protest, which is the fastest sinking ship in the Christian Ocean. This is true for Catholic schools as well, though, IMO, less so. Given what I said about Hispanics above, I wonder how Evangelical schools like Wheaton and North Park are faring.
3) Now more than ever, people (read: parents) are questioning the value of a liberal arts degree. "History? What are you going to do with that?" Schools have responded. Take a look at the Superbar thread on UWSP, which is now essentially a trade school. Look at St. Norbert. They have recently started an MBA program. To many folks, "liberal arts MBA" sounds like an oxymoron. Carthage College added nursing as a major. Several other smaller schools that I know of are starting engineering programs.
Anyway.
-
How duz USNWR rank dem, hey?
-
I have said it here before: getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time . An MBA should be a differentiating credential. An MBA from Saint Norbert’s has little more value than one from the University of Phoenix.
Instead, get a masters in a discipline which bolsters ine’s credentials as a subject matter expert in a particular field (ie Biology, chemistry, physics, etc. )
An MBA from a UW Whitewater, for instance, Is unlikely to open the big career doors. An MBA from a Michigan or a Stanford is a very different story .
-
but the unnie of Phoenix has its own dome man!
-
A couple of thoughts about St. Norberts and small schools in particular.
Liberal Arts Schools Like St. Norbert Are Fine
I think St. Norbert's will be fine for a long time. Their endowment is over $100M (or very close to it), which, IMO, is solid for a good-but-not-elite liberal arts college. St. Norbert's has a strong alumni base that support the school. Every St. Norbert's grad that I know LOVES the school.
There was a school in VA a few years back (Sweet Briar College) that threatened to close down. The alums rallied and saved the school--at least for now. I figure that if a school in rural VA can survive, so can a better school in semi-rural WI.
Furthermore, I think there will always be a market for smaller schools for at least two reasons.
1) Smaller class sizes with profs who put teaching above research
2) Sports: Kids love sports, want to keep playing, but aren't good enough to play at a D1 level
Liberal Arts Schools Like St. Norbert Are Not Fine
There are some structural problems that indeed threaten small schools.
1) The Midwest is losing people to the Sun Belt at breakneck speed. There is a clamor within smaller schools to start recruiting students who live outside of the Midwest. There is also a push to focus heavily on the existing regional students, "first generation" and Hispanics in particular. Hence, you see Marquette's push to become a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI). It's no coincidence that MU has also recently been pushing its Catholic identity hard over the past few years.
2) Religiosity is dropping among HS grads (and their parents). Small, private schools are almost always Mainline Protest, which is the fastest sinking ship in the Christian Ocean. This is true for Catholic schools as well, though, IMO, less so. Given what I said about Hispanics above, I wonder how Evangelical schools like Wheaton and North Park are faring.
3) Now more than ever, people (read: parents) are questioning the value of a liberal arts degree. "History? What are you going to do with that?" Schools have responded. Take a look at the Superbar thread on UWSP, which is now essentially a trade school. Look at St. Norbert. They have recently started an MBA program. To many folks, "liberal arts MBA" sounds like an oxymoron. Carthage College added nursing as a major. Several other smaller schools that I know of are starting engineering programs.
Anyway.
Norbie's endowment is in Elite hands. Aina.
-
Tyme will tell, hey?
-
I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
(https://frinkiac.com/gif/S14E04/693568/698364.gif?b64lines=IE1vbSwgd2hhdCBoYXBwZW5lZD8gWW91cgogZW5kb3dtZW50J3MgYmlnZ2VyIHRoYW4KIEhhcnZhcmQncy4=)
-
The Small private schools are evolving with the times and putting in programs that make sense. One of the things that many are doing is heavily investing in athletics, as pointed out above, that is very popular with kids. For example there are 250 d3 football programs and more coming.
On a larger scale, there are small schools like High Point University , who have made a major push to upgrade facilities to the point of having a country club atmosphere. They utilize these assets in their majors. For example they have a steak house on campus, that the hotel and restaurant major utilizes for training. They also proudly occupy the low end of D1 which is very enticing to a lot of student athletes.
There is tremendous loyalty to these small schools. I am very familiar with some of the people that rallied to save Sweet Briar. There was no way they were going to let it go down. College of New Rochelle almost folded , then an anonymous donor came in and saved the school.
My sense is a quite a few schools will opt to merge where it makes sense if they can work through the emotional issues. Some of the deals could actually be pretty good. The merger of the University of Detroit and Mercy College for example has worked out well over time.
-
St. Norbert’s is still around? I thought they went off the air.
-
The problem with the 11th hour Hail Mary bail outs is that they address immediate cash flow issues but not the underlying reasons of the dilemma.
Endowments need to be substantial enough to meet longer term strategic objectives without touching principal.
-
Good start to trim the fat would be by getting rid of most of the classes or departments that end with the word, ‘studies. Next up, bowling, crochet, the wonders of ear hair, how to pop pimples in the dardest places, the meaning of pop art by babies, how to sell swamp land to your best friend...well you get the drift 😳
-
I have said it here before: getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time . An MBA should be a differentiating credential. An MBA from Saint Norbert’s has little more value than one from the University of Phoenix.
Instead, get a masters in a discipline which bolsters ine’s credentials as a subject matter expert in a particular field (ie Biology, chemistry, physics, etc. )
An MBA from a UW Whitewater, for instance, Is unlikely to open the big career doors. An MBA from a Michigan or a Stanford is a very different story .
Two SVPs I deal with at HBO, both have MBAs from Univ of Phoenix. I generally get what you are saying, but doesn't make it universally so.
-
Two SVPs I deal with at HBO, both have MBAs from Univ of Phoenix. I generally get what you are saying, but doesn't make it universally so.
Tell those guys to settle their beef with Dish Network so I don't miss the new season of Game of Thrones.
-
Tell those guys to settle their beef with Dish Network so I don't miss the new season of Game of Thrones.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/Xxei1HDpBhMys/giphy.gif)
-
I have said it here before: getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time . An MBA should be a differentiating credential. An MBA from Saint Norbert’s has little more value than one from the University of Phoenix.
Well, Crash, all I'll say is that my daughter got her MBA from a program nowhere near the top 20 and it has helped her career.
As usual, generalizations always suck.
-
There are about 100 schools with $1B or more, though a number are part of a collective endowment like the University of Texas system, Texas A&M system, Tennessee, California, Pennsylvania and others.
MU about $700M.
Keep in mind that until the late 1960s/early 1970s the Jesuit schools purposely did not have endowments. They raised enough to fund the school and used the rest to assist the poor.
So MU and the other Jesuits only had 50 years to build the endowment.
-
I have said it here before: getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time . An MBA should be a differentiating credential. An MBA from Saint Norbert’s has little more value than one from the University of Phoenix.
Instead, get a masters in a discipline which bolsters ine’s credentials as a subject matter expert in a particular field (ie Biology, chemistry, physics, etc. )
An MBA from a UW Whitewater, for instance, Is unlikely to open the big career doors. An MBA from a Michigan or a Stanford is a very different story .
Soon we might only have 20 MBA programs left.
Universities Take a Harder Look at Whether M.B.A. Programs Are Worth It
At many schools, the degree brings in little more than prestige, pressuring administrators to rethink their offerings
https://www.wsj.com/articles/universities-take-a-harder-look-at-whether-m-b-a-programs-are-worth-it-1509556122?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=2
Deans and industry-watchers have been bracing for a shakeout in business education. And with Wisconsin School of Business debating the future of its core business degree, administrators now wonder whether more schools will follow the University of Iowa, Wake Forest University and others in ending their M.B.A. programs.
Since the end of the recession, the number of people willing to exit the job market to pursue full-time master’s degrees in business has shrunk. While top-ranked programs with large M.B.A. classes like University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School and Harvard Business School continue to rake in applicants and revenue, overall enrollment in two-year, full-time M.B.A. programs in the U.S. fell by more than a third from 2010 to 2016, according to a survey by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, an accreditor.
“Every U.S. program outside of the top 20 highest-ranked schools is under a lot of pressure right now to decide what to do” with full-time M.B.A.s, said Chip Hunter, dean of Washington State University’s Carson College of Business. The school graduated its last class of full-time M.B.A.s in August, but still offers a part-time program.
-
Keep in mind that until the late 1960s/early 1970s the Jesuit schools purposely did not have endowments. They raised enough to fund the school and used the rest to assist the poor.
Seems like a much better use.
-
Keep in mind that until the late 1960s/early 1970s the Jesuit schools purposely did not have endowments. They raised enough to fund the school and used the rest to assist the poor.
So MU and the other Jesuits only had 50 years to build the endowment.
I was not aware of this. It is actually breathtaking when you think about it.
In the case of MU, it does need to keep up with the Joneses (BC, Holy Cross, SLU, Fordham, GU) if it wishes to remain in the top tier of Jesuit colleges. Presently, these peer institutions have significantly larger endopwments. Factor in Marquette;'s size and the disparity becomes even greater.
-
Two SVPs I deal with at HBO, both have MBAs from Univ of Phoenix. I generally get what you are saying, but doesn't make it universally so.
I know several senior execs at MSFT, Amazon, and Starbucks who never set foot on a college campus, much less were matriculated from one.
Different industries have unique requirements which establish competence for operational staff.
1's and 0's tech is characterized by coding academy grads more than degree holders from legitimate traditional 4-year colleges. The power generation world requires advanced engineering degrees (unless one is on the SCADA side.)
I have no idea about the entertainment industry but last I checked Barbara Streisand, Robert DeNiro, Mark Ruffalo, et al last walked across the stage as high school students (which might explain their insipid pronouncements on actual current events...)
-
Well, Crash, all I'll say is that my daughter got her MBA from a program nowhere near the top 20 and it has helped her career.
As usual, generalizations always suck.
Mike,
Generalizations, such as your comment above, are almost always indicative of reality.
Let's try this: Imagine your daughter's career trajectory if she had a degree from Wharton.
There are always exceptions to every rule.
-
Mike,
Generalizations, such as your comment above, are almost always indicative of reality.
Let's try this: Imagine your daughter's career trajectory if she had a degree from Wharton.
There are always exceptions to every rule.
I can imagine a lot of things, including if she were born into money instead of being my kid, if she were an award-winning actress, or if she were a 6-foot-9 man with Kevin Durant's ability. It's a silly exercise. She's doing great without the silver-spoon childhood, the acting ability, Durant's height (and gender), and the Wharton degree.
-
I can imagine a lot of things, including if she were born into money instead of being my kid, if she were an award-winning actress, or if she were a 6-foot-9 man with Kevin Durant's ability. It's a silly exercise. She's doing great without the silver-spoon childhood, the acting ability, Durant's height (and gender), and the Wharton degree.
I think you are,missing the point there mike. Crash never said your daughter was a piece of schmit or anything. She is probably doing as well as she wanted to do and that’s cool. However, what he is saying is, if she or anyone else for that matter, got their MBA from a top 20 or better, bigger and better opportunity would have fallen into their laps by default. Whether or not said person decides to follow those bigger and better opportunities is up to them of course.
Let’s say your daughter had aspirations to working for an Eli-Lilly or Procter & gamble as a “big dog”. Now compare MBA’s from st. Norbert’s and Stanford and...now, as you’ve stated, she’s doing very well and is content with where she is with her MBA from something short of the big 20-you as her father should be very proud
-
One of the most amazing networks I’ve seen is with Texas A&M. The alumni network is very tight, and they take care of their own.
-
I think you are,missing the point there mike. Crash never said your daughter was a piece of schmit or anything. She is probably doing as well as she wanted to do and that’s cool. However, what he is saying is, if she or anyone else for that matter, got their MBA from a top 20 or better, bigger and better opportunity would have fallen into their laps by default. Whether or not said person decides to follow those bigger and better opportunities is up to them of course.
Let’s say your daughter had aspirations to working for an Eli-Lilly or Procter & gamble as a “big dog”. Now compare MBA’s from st. Norbert’s and Stanford and...now, as you’ve stated, she’s doing very well and is content with where she is with her MBA from something short of the big 20-you as her father should be very proud
Actually, what Crash said was: "getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time"
Based on personal experience, not just with my daughter but with CEOs and other "important folks" that I know, I happen to disagree strongly that an MBA from the 21st-best or 100th-best program is automatically a "waste of time."
If he had made an argument similar to yours -- that my daughter might have gotten better opportunities with an MBA from Wharton -- I wouldn't disagree with that. But that's not what Crash said. He said a degree from any non-Wharton-ish institution is a "waste of time."
He's obviously wrong, as every CEO of every major corporation, every high-level politician, every university president, etc, did not come from a top-20 MBA program. The programs they went through obviously were not "a waste of time."
I like Crash, we agree on much and we have had many friendly conversations, and I probably should have said all I had to say in a PM to him. But when you come out with an easily disproven generalization worded as strongly as his comment was, you have to expect some blowback.
-
ND sucks.
-
I have said it here before: getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time . An MBA should be a differentiating credential. An MBA from Saint Norbert’s has little more value than one from the University of Phoenix.
Instead, get a masters in a discipline which bolsters ine’s credentials as a subject matter expert in a particular field (ie Biology, chemistry, physics, etc. )
An MBA from a UW Whitewater, for instance, Is unlikely to open the big career doors. An MBA from a Michigan or a Stanford is a very different story .
Brother David, I totally disagree. I have an undergrad from Marquette in Journalism and an MBA from Loyola Chicago (aka The University of Sister Jean). My Loyola MBA made an incredible difference. Loyola is very good but not Top 20. Without the MBA laid atop my skills and network, No way I’d be where I am.
Perhaps where we agree is than an MBA from a run of the mill school is not going to change someone’s fortunes who has no experience or no network. If you are doing an MBA only for a credential, maybe we are more in agreement than I’d admit.
-
Actually, what Crash said was: "getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time"
Based on personal experience, not just with my daughter but with CEOs and other "important folks" that I know, I happen to disagree strongly that an MBA from the 21st-best or 100th-best program is automatically a "waste of time."
If he had made an argument similar to yours -- that my daughter might have gotten better opportunities with an MBA from Wharton -- I wouldn't disagree with that. But that's not what Crash said. He said a degree from any non-Wharton-ish institution is a "waste of time."
He's obviously wrong, as every CEO of every major corporation, every high-level politician, every university president, etc, did not come from a top-20 MBA program. The programs they went through obviously were not "a waste of time."
I like Crash, we agree on much and we have had many friendly conversations, and I probably should have said all I had to say in a PM to him. But when you come out with an easily disproven generalization worded as strongly as his comment was, you have to expect some blowback.
Have to agree with this....every bit. Not a waste of time, a Wharton MBA likely more valuable, but that wasn’t what was said which is why people reacted.
-
I have no idea about the entertainment industry but last I checked Barbara Streisand, Robert DeNiro, Mark Ruffalo, et al last walked across the stage as high school students (which might explain their insipid pronouncements on actual current events...)
Good point. Your pronouncements on current events, by contrast, have been dead on.
(Now that North Korea’s no longer a threat, mullahs up next, eh?)
-
Actually, what Crash said was: "getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time"
Based on personal experience, not just with my daughter but with CEOs and other "important folks" that I know, I happen to disagree strongly that an MBA from the 21st-best or 100th-best program is automatically a "waste of time."
He may have exaggerated in his boundaries but his greater point has merit. For example, his background is in Fortune 100 management. I know from experience at one of those companies that grass from the top 10-15 MBA programs were treated very different than lesser MBAs, even when holding the same roles and responsibilities. If your aspiration isn’t big company management, then it might not be as necessary.
However, I do agree that many MBAs are lacking in value. Getting an MBA to check a box is a concerning phenomenon and part of the cause of so much tuition inflation. My old roommate, who is a very smart guy, is currently getting a part-time MBA from St Francis. I originally assumed the small D-1 basketball school out east, which seemed odd as he lives in Chicago, but fair enough. But no, University of St Francis in Joliet. I can’t see him extracting value from that, and it was largely motivated by a colleague (not manager) at the Big 4 firm he works at telling him an MBA is “something he should do”. MBAs should provide extra skill sets and growth opportunities, a professional network, and exit opportunities. It should not be just another certificate, which is what many are starting to feel like
-
Actually, what Crash said was: "getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time"
Based on personal experience, not just with my daughter but with CEOs and other "important folks" that I know, I happen to disagree strongly that an MBA from the 21st-best or 100th-best program is automatically a "waste of time."
If he had made an argument similar to yours -- that my daughter might have gotten better opportunities with an MBA from Wharton -- I wouldn't disagree with that. But that's not what Crash said. He said a degree from any non-Wharton-ish institution is a "waste of time."
He's obviously wrong, as every CEO of every major corporation, every high-level politician, every university president, etc, did not come from a top-20 MBA program. The programs they went through obviously were not "a waste of time."
I like Crash, we agree on much and we have had many friendly conversations, and I probably should have said all I had to say in a PM to him. But when you come out with an easily disproven generalization worded as strongly as his comment was, you have to expect some blowback.
so much for me trying to keep you from cutting yourself again
-
Let me put it this way - the skills I learned in running an enterprise were not necessarily from the MBA classroom but, rather, in the day in/day out immersion in the cultures of two exceptionally well run organizations. The classroom exercise provided perspective on how to frame problems then make effective decisions for the ultimate test of working in a company.
I would contrast that with what is needed to perform as an engineer. The classroom material was crucial for mastering the challenges of the lab, the production floor, and the field.
An engineering degree is essential; the business degree is far less relevant to long-term success. It is far more certain that a degreed engineer will find success than the non-engineering degreed individual. A business degree isn't particularly essential for success in the business world.
-
Brother David, I totally disagree. I have an undergrad from Marquette in Journalism and an MBA from Loyola Chicago (aka The University of Sister Jean). My Loyola MBA made an incredible difference. Loyola is very good but not Top 20. Without the MBA laid atop my skills and network, No way I’d be where I am.
Perhaps where we agree is than an MBA from a run of the mill school is not going to change someone’s fortunes who has no experience or no network. If you are doing an MBA only for a credential, maybe we are more in agreement than I’d admit.
Nashville,
Let me first say that getting an MBA isn't a waste of time. People going at night or on-line to get a credential seems to be ticket punching. I question the motive or at the very least the effectiveness of their exercise.
On-line or night classes do not offer the impact of team-based learning which is the norm at top MBA programs. And that network pays dividends in spades over time. There is no way on-line learning or part-time platforms can replicate that dynamic.
If people are looking to expand their knowledge base and add tools to the personal portfolio I would argue that getting an skills-based advanced degree is far more useful. Getting a masters in biology, chemistry, finance, statistics, etc... is far more effective for improving one's skills and isn't as dependent on brand or marquee as the more comprehensive MBA program.
MBAs from the top programs provide access to leading corpporations and financial institutions. If that isn't important to an individual then don't bother trying to get in. But I would strongly encourage those who go after an MBA to ask themselves if an advanced technical skills degree would not be more effective for facilitating career performance.
Frankly, not everyone is cut out for working as an I banker nor do they want to work in a large multi-national. And even if they do go the large corporation route, not everyone will climb the ladder beyond mid management. One does not need a Top 20 MBA but having one most certainly increases the likelihood of career advancement.
-
Good point. Your pronouncements on current events, by contrast, have been dead on.
(Now that North Korea’s no longer a threat, mullahs up next, eh?)
Any more insights on what the 4th RTBn is all about? I mean, I know the closest you got to Ranger training was standing outside the gate at Benning but you speak out as if you actually know what the f#ck it's about.
Better yet, what are your thoughts on the tactical doctrine which characterizes Ranger-TACP operations in the SWA AOR? After all, you did deploy, right?
-
One does not need a Top 20 MBA but having one most certainly increases the likelihood of career advancement.
This I can (and do) agree with, my friend.
-
I know several senior execs at MSFT, Amazon, and Starbucks who never set foot on a college campus, much less were matriculated from one.
Different industries have unique requirements which establish competence for operational staff.
1's and 0's tech is characterized by coding academy grads more than degree holders from legitimate traditional 4-year colleges. The power generation world requires advanced engineering degrees (unless one is on the SCADA side.)
I have no idea about the entertainment industry but last I checked Barbara Streisand, Robert DeNiro, Mark Ruffalo, et al last walked across the stage as high school students (which might explain their insipid pronouncements on actual current events...)
I was having lunch on the upper east side of New York in the middle 80s . Barbara Streisand and her son, were in the booth next to me. They were trying to calculate the tip for several minutes and eventually they reached over to me and asked for help. Not much going on upstairs.
-
Yeah, but how was their body language?
-
Any more insights on what the 4th RTBn is all about? I mean, I know the closest you got to Ranger training was standing outside the gate at Benning but you speak out as if you actually know what the f#ck it's about.
Better yet, what are your thoughts on the tactical doctrine which characterizes Ranger-TACP operations in the SWA AOR? After all, you did deploy, right?
Testy! There’s little shame in simply admitting you got duped. Lots of good, salt of the earth folk did too.
-
so much for me trying to keep you from cutting yourself again
Whether teal or not, I have no idea what this means.
-
I was not aware of this. It is actually breathtaking when you think about it.
In the case of MU, it does need to keep up with the Joneses (BC, Holy Cross, SLU, Fordham, GU) if it wishes to remain in the top tier of Jesuit colleges. Presently, these peer institutions have significantly larger endopwments. Factor in Marquette;'s size and the disparity becomes even greater.
It's true. With the exception of ND and BC, Catholic universities are by and large much poorer than their non catholic peers. Georgetown's endowment only crossed the billion threshold in the last 5 years I believe, and a strong case can be made that the Marquette endowment ($668M) is in a stronger position than Fordham ($739M) on a per capita basis given Fordham's slightly larger size and location smack dab in the middle of the philanthropy capital of the U.S. if not the world! Villanova's endowment is less than ours and Fordham's despite it's higher ranking and prestige compared to both. Does anyone on here who works in higher education fundraising know to what degree having a medical school impacts endowment? Neither Fordham, Villanova or us have one, but LUC and SLU do. Probably not a coincidence that LUC ($750M) and SLU ($1.1B) have larger endowments than Nova, Fordam and us but curious what others think.
-
I have said it here before: getting an MBA from anything less than the top 20 program is a waste of time . An MBA should be a differentiating credential. An MBA from Saint Norbert’s has little more value than one from the University of Phoenix.
Instead, get a masters in a discipline which bolsters ine’s credentials as a subject matter expert in a particular field (ie Biology, chemistry, physics, etc. )
An MBA from a UW Whitewater, for instance, Is unlikely to open the big career doors. An MBA from a Michigan or a Stanford is a very different story .
If you're talking about leaving a steady job for two years to go back to school for a full time MBA program, I not only agree, but would say you're being extremely generous when you say it's worth it only for a top 20 program. I would argue it's only worth it for top 10, maybe top 12-15 if you're being extremely generous, but I don't even think it's worth it at the 12-15 raking range.
That said, I completely disagree that getting a part time MBA from any local university is a waste of time and effort, especially if your employer is willing to pick up some of the tab. There is an intrinsic value to the education that can only help and I've even read articles on Poets and Quants.com of all places, which only caters to students applying to the most elite B schools, that says research indicates that MBA's can be tremendously helpful in one's career, regardless of the institution granting it. Not everyone wants to go into Investment Banking or work at McKinsey and it's absoultely true that no one that doesn't hold a blue chip credential could even get an interview, much less a full time job at a place like that, but most people don't work at those firms or aspire to a high finance job in New York, London, Hong Kong or Singapore and their ilk. From everything I've read, MU's part time MBA program is thriving. Again I would never encourage anyone to quit their job and go to MU for a Full Time MBA, that would be a waste of time in my view, and you're not going to impress anyone at Goldman Sachs but if you're a local professional in the greater MKE area or Chicago, and just want to increase your chances of further advancement where you are, I have no doubt that a Marquette MBA will pay dividends down road.
-
If you're talking about leaving a steady job for two years to go back to school for a full time MBA program, I not only agree, but would say you're being extremely generous when you say it's worth it only for a top 20 program. I would argue it's only worth it for top 10, maybe top 12-15 if you're being extremely generous, but I don't even think it's worth it at the 12-15 raking range.
That said, I completely disagree that getting a part time MBA from any local university is a waste of time and effort, especially if your employer is willing to pick up some of the tab. There is an intrinsic value to the education that can only help and I've even read articles on Poets and Quants.com of all places, which only caters to students applying to the most elite B schools, that says research indicates that MBA's can be tremendously helpful in one's career, regardless of the institution granting it. Not everyone wants to go into Investment Banking or work at McKinsey and it's absoultely true that no one that doesn't hold a blue chip credential could even get an interview, much less a full time job at a place like that, but most people don't work at those firms or aspire to a high finance job in New York, London, Hong Kong or Singapore and their ilk. From everything I've read, MU's part time MBA program is thriving. Again I would never encourage anyone to quit their job and go to MU for a Full Time MBA, that would be a waste of time in my view, and you're not going to impress anyone at Goldman Sachs but if you're a local professional in the greater MKE area or Chicago, and just want to increase your chances of further advancement where you are, I have no doubt that a Marquette MBA will pay dividends down road.
If you saw the WSJ story on page 1, Iowa and Wake Forest closed their MBA programs. Bucky thought about it and has not (yet?)
It is not just get an MBA from a top 20 school or don't bother, some are even questioning the value of any MBA at all.
Data science degrees have supplanted MBAs and the current "must have" degrees.
Employers are more and more balking at paying for a 20 course general MBA. They will pay for a 8 to 10 concentration in finance, marketing, operations, etc. So an MBA is turning into a very focused high level vocational training, more than it has ever been.
Oh, and more and more these programs are online. Can get the degree with ever setting foot on the campus.
-
Whether teal or not, I have no idea what this means.
the teal implies that my statement was meant to be light hearted. the statement itself is an assumption that you deal with issues by "self-harming" yourself, especially when dealing with negativity or pressure to perform.
-
I know several senior execs at MSFT, Amazon, and Starbucks who never set foot on a college campus, much less were matriculated from one.
Different industries have unique requirements which establish competence for operational staff.
1's and 0's tech is characterized by coding academy grads more than degree holders from legitimate traditional 4-year colleges. The power generation world requires advanced engineering degrees (unless one is on the SCADA side.)
I have no idea about the entertainment industry but last I checked Barbara Streisand, Robert DeNiro, Mark Ruffalo, et al last walked across the stage as high school students (which might explain their insipid pronouncements on actual current events...)
I would agree with this, different requirements for different orgs.
On the entertainment industry, about $1.8 Trillion market value last year, expected to hit $2 Trillion by next year.
-
the teal implies that my statement was meant to be light hearted. the statement itself is an assumption that you deal with issues by "self-harming" yourself, especially when dealing with negativity or pressure to perform.
Oh. Your inaccurate silliness is duly noted.
-
This I can (and do) agree with, my friend.
Mike,
As you know, I am a big fan of technical education and vocational training. I believe the European model of O levels/A levels has tremendous merit; our distaste for anything less than a "college degree" works against us as a society properly prepared to address the requirements challenges of a diverse work force.
People get 4 year degrees that do not prepare them for an increasingly technical world. I believe a liberal arts major is less able to contribute than someone who learns to code at one of the 1's and 0's tech schools now popping up in places like Redmond and San Jose.
There was a book written about 20 years ago that made the case for trade schools - how the plumber, HVAC repairman, etc... earned far more over a career than did the arts major. Furthermore, from a societal contribution standpoint, the plumber provides a genuine service valued by the majority of society versus the guy fund raising for a third rate college or working the phones at a collection agency.
By extension, the reflexive end point for those looking to get a master's degree is to get an MBA. Because most will never use the skills imparted in an MBA program it is likely a better investment of time and lucre to get a deeper understanding of a specific vertical - ie stats, chemistry, etc...
For some reason, the MBA has become the supposed "must have credential" but the reality is that most people will never benefit from the effort. MBAs are to prepare one for general management; most folks never get that far in a career.
-
One of the most amazing networks I’ve seen is with Texas A&M. The alumni network is very tight, and they take care of their own.
Yea, but they are f#cking Aggies...
-
Testy! There’s little shame in simply admitting you got duped. Lots of good, salt of the earth folk did too.
Duped? I love the guy who never went to Ranger school nor worked in the teams offer their expert opinion on said operations. As a Ranger-tabbed TACP who was the CAS Chief for III Corps I think your perspective on Spec Ops is limited to what you see in third-rate Cannon Group movies.
You are what is called a wanna-be. I beg you to hang outside the gate of Hurlburt Field, D-M AFB, Ft Hood or Ft Lewis with a Ranger tee shirt on your scrawny a$$. The beat down you will receive would be f#cking hilarious to witness.
-
If you're talking about leaving a steady job for two years to go back to school for a full time MBA program, I not only agree, but would say you're being extremely generous when you say it's worth it only for a top 20 program. I would argue it's only worth it for top 10, maybe top 12-15 if you're being extremely generous, but I don't even think it's worth it at the 12-15 raking range.
That said, I completely disagree that getting a part time MBA from any local university is a waste of time and effort, especially if your employer is willing to pick up some of the tab. There is an intrinsic value to the education that can only help and I've even read articles on Poets and Quants.com of all places, which only caters to students applying to the most elite B schools, that says research indicates that MBA's can be tremendously helpful in one's career, regardless of the institution granting it. Not everyone wants to go into Investment Banking or work at McKinsey and it's absoultely true that no one that doesn't hold a blue chip credential could even get an interview, much less a full time job at a place like that, but most people don't work at those firms or aspire to a high finance job in New York, London, Hong Kong or Singapore and their ilk. From everything I've read, MU's part time MBA program is thriving. Again I would never encourage anyone to quit their job and go to MU for a Full Time MBA, that would be a waste of time in my view, and you're not going to impress anyone at Goldman Sachs but if you're a local professional in the greater MKE area or Chicago, and just want to increase your chances of further advancement where you are, I have no doubt that a Marquette MBA will pay dividends down road.
The strength of a Top 10 MBA is the connections one makes that have national and international reach. It is a great door opener but having an out-sized network one can tap into is a huge asset.
In the same way, I believe if one has any degree from a school in a particular region with a strong alumni network the degree has an intrinsic value that delivers significant returns. I know that if one is graduated from any of the larger state schools in Texas (UT, A&M, TT) there is an invaluable network which will benefit one's career.
As Dgies pointed out, his Loyola MBA paid him back in spades as he climbed the ladder in Chicago.
-
Mike,
As you know, I am a big fan of technical education and vocational training. I believe the European model of O levels/A levels has tremendous merit; our distaste for anything less than a "college degree" works against us as a society properly prepared to address the requirements challenges of a diverse work force.
People get 4 year degrees that do not prepare them for an increasingly technical world. I believe a liberal arts major is less able to contribute than someone who learns to code at one of the 1's and 0's tech schools now popping up in places like Redmond and San Jose.
There was a book written about 20 years ago that made the case for trade schools - how the plumber, HVAC repairman, etc... earned far more over a career than did the arts major. Furthermore, from a societal contribution standpoint, the plumber provides a genuine service valued by the majority of society versus the guy fund raising for a third rate college or working the phones at a collection agency.
By extension, the reflexive end point for those looking to get a master's degree is to get an MBA. Because most will never use the skills imparted in an MBA program it is likely a better investment of time and lucre to get a deeper understanding of a specific vertical - ie stats, chemistry, etc...
For some reason, the MBA has become the supposed "must have credential" but the reality is that most people will never benefit from the effort. MBAs are to prepare one for general management; most folks never get that far in a career.
My daughter graduated college in 2009 and went to work. She didn't go for her MBA for several years, and her employer paid a pretty nice chunk of it. That led to her getting a promotion and a nice pay bump, and she loves her employer. It's all good!
-
Duped? I love the guy who never went to Ranger school nor worked in the teams offer their expert opinion on said operations. As a Ranger-tabbed TACP who was the CAS Chief for III Corps I think your perspective on Spec Ops is limited to what you see in third-rate Cannon Group movies.
You are what is called a wanna-be. I beg you to hang outside the gate of Hurlburt Field, D-M AFB, Ft Hood or Ft Lewis with a Ranger tee shirt on your scrawny a$$. The beat down you will receive would be f#cking hilarious to witness.
-
Couple quick thoughts on this topic:
1. Keefe is 100% right that if your goal is to work for a Fortune 500 company or a consulting firm, an MBA from anything but the most prestigious of schools isn't going to cut it. However most people don't work for those type of firms. They are working for local or regional firms where an MBA can make a difference. It can HELP you get that promotion or next job that will pay you $15-20,000 more a year. So it's not hard to do the math. Is it as important as it was 20 years ago? No. Is it a guaranty? No. But programs wouldn't be as popular as they are unless they made a difference. The marketplace has spoken.
2. The key to financial health of a private school isn't simply its endowment size, but how flexible it is. Donor agreements limit the use of the endowment. So for instance, an endowment that is primarily made up of scholarships can help recruit students, but it doesn't provide extra income to the school. Endowments that are dedicated toward operations (professorships, etc.) or without any restriction at all, give schools much more flexibility.
3. It's also important to look at how much debt schools are carrying. St. Joseph's in Indiana was carrying a bunch of debt AND operating at a loss. There are schools that are smaller, but run much better, have a more flexible endowment, and are largely debt free, that are going to be around a LONG time. Look at Ripon College. It only has 800 students, a $85 million endowment and mostly liberal arts programs. Reading the comments here, you'd think they'd be in huge trouble right?
Hardly. According to their 990 in 2015-16, they turned a $7 million profit on an expense budget of $44 million. (Granted that was during a good year investment wise, but even if they returned 0% on their endowment, they STILL would have turned a profit.) They hardly have any debt and raise about five times more a year than St. Josephs did. And it is much easier to accomplish this when you only have to recruit a freshman class of about 200 to be profitable.
And according to the Princeton Review, "Ninety-six percent of alumni are employed, in graduate school or student-teaching within six months (of graduation.)" Not bad for a small school with a small endowment that is about as traditional liberal arts as you can imagine.
The reasons why these schools survive or fail are more complex than is being portrayed here. I'm certainly not disputing however that you will see more college closures in the next few decades. And that's OK - no different than most industries out there. But it isn't going to be a massive wave of closures unless the country incurs a financial crisis much more than it did in 2008.
-
3. It's also important to look at how much debt schools are carrying.
This made me think about High Point, which Herman mentioned earlier in the thread. As he mentioned, they've really invested in their campus. It's undeniably beautiful, but seemed a little over the top in many respects (to me). It would appear that they spared no expense. But to me it just really felt like they were trying too hard to show how much money they had spent. In some cases (some beautiful buildings and landscaping), to great effect. In other places (the 26 flagpoles in one parking lot (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.9698812,-79.9933702,3a,75y,160.51h,83.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sj-VLeOesTa4X5cweLaGu8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) come to mind), not so much. It's hard to describe, but the entire place felt kind of surreal.
But I can't help but wonder if it's a sustainable model. There was a Bloomberg article (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-04-19/bubble-u-dot-high-point-university) several years ago discussing it that referred to it as "Bubble U." I'm curious how they are doing. I just checked, and saw reports of an endowment ranging from $57 to $65 million. That seems awfully low, and with what they did to their campus, I'd think that have a lot of debt...but don't know. The article linked above from 2012 said they'd already spent $700 million and planned to spend $2.1 billion by 2020. I remain curious to see if they succeed.
-
Well, Crash, all I'll say is that my daughter got her MBA from a program nowhere near the top 20 and it has helped her career.
As usual, generalizations always suck.
They especially suck when they're as condescending as the one you quoted. Embarrassingly insecure, but that's just keefe being keefe i guess