Thank you for the explanation. I see the reason for your reaction. I think it is valid and I appreciate the call out. I think the AI component is a minor thing of this but it doesn’t make the information less important.
Yes, there’s only a small group of people who really care about this because I don’t think test takers do. Just like restaurant customers if you saw details such as there are 20% fewer Restuarant goers, what do you do with that information?
At the same time, I’ve published this report and details in my analysis of it for the last number of years, there’s one from last October when this report came out. I’ve been waiting for it for about two weeks now .... this is an important report for the industry. So I will continue posting about it and I do feel this is a super important trend indicator. I think it would be inappropriate to not mention it and not bring it up as pretty substantial news in the space.
In terms of applicant confusion, it’s something that we try to resolve by bringing information up rather than hiding and explaining what this means and so the goal of my post is to bring it up and as a community to digest and understand what these things mean. I may not see the full picture but someone else may contribute more and Together we can be more productive. People can share multiple perspectives which is what you’re doing right now and that’s a productive dialogue 💪
PS.. Again, I don’t think a regular user would care or have much action to take besides filing this information in the back of their mind or perhaps commenting but seeing a 20% decline is not something that happens on the regular basis and because the application is such a black box and so little information is available about it, any concrete detail especially such as test volume it’s kind of a big deal. Maybe it’s just me but this is basically the most anticipated number in the GMAT space.... Do you see other indicators that you feel are equally or more important perhaps? I know a lot of people let on to application numbers but I feel that’s a lot more vague and concrete because number of applications does not mean different number of applicants because if each applicant applies to one extra school that’s an extra 10 or 20% of applications, especially when schools provide application fee waivers and that makes it challenging to track things reliably.
MyMBAPath
My reply (sorry to tell you and you probably know this but the platform is clunky in that it doesn't show you clearly who I'm responding to) was to ManishaPrepMinds saying "the insight that test volume is down by a concrete 19% for this specific cycle is what's new".
This is the wrong interpretation and exactly the kind of thing that creates useless noise for MBA candidates. Because yes, some of these test takers will indeed apply in the current cycle but many have already applied in the previous one. I know very well from 16 years of experience and from having seen how that volume is spread over a 12-month span.
Frankly, my strong reaction was due to the attempt to sensationalize the framing of "AI leaked data". I personally believe we should all be much more responsible in how we position our statements.
I speak with MBA candidates every day - the last 7 days alone I've been in front of many hundreds over several of my workshops - and they come and say "but so and so said test taking is down THIS cycle" because they see headlines like this. As experts, we have a responsibility to present things with rationality and more thoughtfully.
Sorry if this all sounds patronizing, it wasn't my intent per se.