I am not really shocked at the GPA or GMAT since it is not that big of an increase. They were close to that level anyways 2009 gpa was 3.63 and gmat was 713. The fact that 41% of their class is so young is what shocked me the most and where the students are coming from shows heavy drawing from certain areas...heck there are more people coming from non-profit than investment banking. Tons of PE types and consultants (probably 85% of which are from M/B/B).
Per 2008 Us News.
HBS: 3.63 / 713
Stanford: 3.61 / 721
Wharton: 3.53 / 712
MIT: 3.5 / 705
Kellogg: 3.5 / 704
Chicago: 3.5 / 709
Tuck: 3.46 / 713
Haas: 3.57 / 710
Columbia: 3.4 / 707
NYU: 3.4 / 700
UCLA: 3.6 / 704
Ross: 3.3 / 700
Yale: 3.47 / 700
Cornell: 3.31 / 682
Known so far this year.
Harvard: 3.66 / ? (0.03+ / ?)
Wharton: 3.5 / 715 (-0.03 / +3)
Kellogg: ? / 712 (? / +8)
Yale: 3.5 / 718 (+0.03 / +18)
Cornell: ? / 695 (? / +13)
I hate to be the one to break it to you but the reality is if you have a 720 and a 3.5 you are basically going to be AVERAGE at best for most top 10 schools. And the honest answer is depending on your demographic and can be much higher or lower...schools wont tell you that but its true. Certain groups definitely bring up the averages for others.
One thing to remember about the ranges for HBS 50%, there are going to be far more 720s than 750s. Also there is probably one 550, maybe a few others in the 500s. They arent even underrepresented minorities necessarily...their dads could be the ruler of some foreign country or the CEO of a fortune 50 company. There are lots of reasons people with such low scores get in...in a class that large maybe HBS lets one low score in just so they can say, see we let in people with 550s.