Calling Chicago GSB 2008 applicants

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.

I'm still a little confused on if there are 4299 applicants in 2004 (according to BW), 23% acceptance, why is the yield 57%? 4299 x 0.23 = 989... 625/989 = 63%...

Anyway, rhyme made my day with his analysis last year... quoted for your benefit here:

Kryzak- I checked Kellogg's statistics on US news ( I am a paid subscriber) and this is what I see for Fall 06 admissions:

Applicants for full time = 4072
Acceptances for full time = 977
Enrolled = 556

giving us an acceptance rate of 24% and yield of 57%. I think you could be counting the 1Y program students (usually around 75) in your number of 625.

That was conservative... If you look further down, see pelihu's (better) analysis.

I guess that's what confusing me... the numbers are all different in BW, US News, and Kellogg's own stats... sometimes they include 2Y only, sometimes they include MMM and 1Y... very confusing.

Ok, lower yield is good, for us

I love you pelihu! You just made my day.

Playing with percentages can give us a false sense of security. So, lets take a specific example. Let's take Kellogg. Assume that there are 4000 applicants and 960 get acceptance - giving a 24% acceptance rate.

Also assume that profiles of 50% of applications are weak in one or more areas. So, 960 applicants get accepted out of 2000 applicants who have good work-history, GMAT/GPA, recommendations, essays and interviews .. i.e. overall strong profiles. From a percentage point of view, we have a 48% chance of getting selected, which seems very high. But from a sheer numbers point of view, we have to beat 1040 very strong applicants (Who, just like you, do not lack in any area) to get accepted.

So, turning a 48% chance into a 100% chance of getting selected by the time your application gets reviewed is a hell lot more difficult than turning your 24% chance into a 48% chance.

kind of odd to hijack GSB's thread to discuss K but here goes:

Latest "Facts and Figures" for K:

https://kellogg.northwestern.edu/admissi ... 07_web.pdf

Well does not look like a huge jump in number of applicants to me: around 100 more overall when compared to 06 (around 70 in the 2Y and MMM pool). I am not sure about the acceptance % but the GMAT score bands are interesting.

I did the same analysis as Rhyme and came up with this.

640- = 12% acceptance
650-690 - 18%
700-740 - 27%
750+ - 30%
So what it shows I think is that over 700, your GMAT score does not really matter much.

I would take this as just a directional analysis. I assumed yields of 80%, 70%, 60% and 50%. Came up with a total of 961 admits and 589 enrolled (~62% yield).

dosa: you should look at pelihu's analysis with the yield numbers. It makes sense and is supported by good logic. With that yield, your 700+ acceptance rates should go up to 40-50%.

mNeo: You are correct, competing against the 2000 applicants will require us to be better at essays, recommendations, and interviews. That's why I said this is just to help us sleep better at night, but doesn't mean our work is over!