Calling Chicago GSB 2008 applicants

oh yeah, I left LA before that became an official "season". I think it replaced riots?

Actually I have skied pretty much every where, Colorado, Cali, Utah, the Pacific Northwest, Canada, Europe, Japan...and of course out here. I made a good deal of money in competitions and sponsorships in college but now I am old, fragile, and have responsibilities.

I live a mile from the beach...but the water is cold and its not very sandy so you win on that one for sure. More dogs swimming in the water this time of year than bikini clad women.

Nice! I wish I were that good at skiing or snowboarding.

It's probably good you're not near the beach here, otherwise your wife might not be too happy about the bikini-clad women

I'm surprised by these comments. Chicago certainly holds its own, but to suggest that your odds are better at Kellogg seems unlikely. Kellogg has had a long standing reputation as a top school and has for many many years had 4500+ applicants. Chicago, though they don't release the figures, I believe had less in past years. Although it is likely that Chicago will see at least some kind of spike in applicants given its BW rank -- I can't see it jumping so much that it makes Kellogg a safer bet (in any kind of statistically significant way). To put it differently, Chicago and Kellogg will likely get a similar number of applicants, and although it is possible Chicago may get a marginally higher number, the acceptance rates are not going to differ dramatically.

I can understand tossing Chicago out of the game to put in a more reasonable backup - something with a substanially higher admit % - but to toss it out to replace it with Kellogg will do absolutely nothing (from a statistical perspective) to your odds.

Apply to whatever schools you like most - and certainly consider % rate when you do.

Make sure you keep an eye on their other stats like AVG GMAT and also placement. Duke has a pretty high acceptance rate because it is a pretty common backup school for people who are applying to top 5 programs. Its yield is not nearly as high as almost any other other top school, it doesn't seem to be guilty like some other schools about rejecting people who are "too qualified."

Comparing a school like Duke to Michigan State (Broad) is a great example. Duke actually has a higher acceptance rate and a lower yield rate but there is a 60 pt difference in their GMAT scores and like 20 spots in the ranking polls. To think someone's chances are better at Duke than Michigan state just because of the acceptance rate seems a little off.

Rhyme,

I didn't mean to suggest that Kellogg was easier to get into or is a inferior program to Chicago. I just thought that after Chicago's recent rankings and the publicity it generated more people would be applying to Chicago. If that is the case (and I don't know if it is) then I thought that Kellogg would be a better bet in R1. I like both programs equally, each has its own strengths but for my post grad plans (consulting) both schools would be just as good. That being said, I just thought that it may be better to avoid the rush and apply to Kellogg as I would be just as happy to attend it than Chicago.

Alrite!! things are heating up. Decisions, Indecisions, Decisions. As long as people start switching from Chicago to Kellogg, lesser competition for me.

As for bikini clad women, I think they should have one B-school in Bermuda or Barbados. Other than the occassional tornado, perfect weather, lots of banking jobs, and bikini clad women

Barbados outside of the resorts is not the greatest place to be...its actually pretty bad in most spots. Its a lot of sugar cane farms and poor people.

Now the Cayman Islands is where to put in a school since its where so many companies are setting up offshore headquarters and shell companies.

A valid point - all I was trying to say was that Kellogg has (historically) had more apps than Chicago - so while Chicago may equal or beat Kellogg this year in terms of #s, both are going to be similar in terms of acceptance % - and thus, you should just apply wherever you want (either, neither, both)

I didn't know that...thank you for the info Rhyme. I'll have to rethink my decision.

Based on the 2006 data, both Kellogg and Chicago's acceptance rates were in the low to mid-20's... that's pretty high, isn't it? Is there a reason why their selectivity is so?

that year Kellogg had roughly 4000 applicants. If last year it was 4500, with their yield of roughly 70%, they accept roughly 930 students. So last year's selectivity was 21%. Let's say this year is a hot year, and it goes up to 5000 applicants, the rate is still 18-19%.

That's still a pretty high acceptance rate... any comments on that?

I don't think Kellogg has a 70% yield...I think they are actually less than 60%. They don't have the reputation like Columbia of dinging people who they don't think will attend. As an M7 school its probably a pretty typical backup for a lot of H/S/W applicants, who if they get into one of the top 3 reject their acceptance.

You may find this interesting:

https://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... engineered

A for an admit % of 20% or so... you might think thats high... I don't.

By comparison...

Wharton is 21%
Harvard about 15%
Michigan 28%
Stanford 10%
MIT 20%
Duke 36%
Columbia 17%
NYU 22%
Cornell 36%

river: well, BW said it's 57%, but if you take 4000 applicants for the 2005-2006 season, multiply that by their 24% acceptance rate, you get roughly 960 acceptances... We know Kellogg enrolls about 650 students a year, so the yield is automatically 67.7%

I highly doubt Kellogg's yield is at the same level as schools like UCLA and even Haas (roughly 50%), since it is an M7 school.

rhyme: Interesting link... I'll have to read through that in detail. But what I'm saying is that their acceptance rates are all pretty high, except for Harvard and Stanford. Even Cal's acceptance rate is only 18% for 2006 and 15% for 2007..

I'm wondering, if they say roughly 50% of all applications are "junk" either because of the essays, recommendations or grades/GMAT, that means the acceptance rate for all the top schools are roughly doubled for people like us who are spending time revising and editing our essays over a period of months. If our GMAT/GPA are pretty decent, and our recommenders know to write very specific examples, and we don't bomb our interviews (since supposedly doing well in interviews doesn't change that much), then we probably have a 40% chance of admission to the top 15 schools.

Yes, it's a rough sketch and there are some amazing candidates out there, but in the end, most of each class in all the top 15 schools are probably "normal" over-achievers like ones we find here on GMATClub. Not everyone can be Iraq veterans, Olympic medalists, or Orphanage leaders...

Just a thought.

Kryzak,

I don't think 20% is too high. Aside from H/S most of the top schools have acceptance rates around 20%. I do agree that the acceptance % may be higher for people on this board (for the same reasons you cited) but personally I'm just going with the official stats.

Thank you for just making my day. Serious.

That's always what I've wondered....I would think the top schools get tons of "junk" applications from people who really have <1% chance accepting, but just apply because it's Harvard. Maybe, maybe not. But if that's the case, I wonder what the actual chances are for people like us who do put a lot of work into it. Harvards 15% rate sort of deters me from applying, but if it's actually 30% for people who have a decent application, I would consider applying.