Last visit was: 18 May 2026, 10:23 It is currently 18 May 2026, 10:23
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
theK
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Last visit: 30 Jan 2022
Posts: 126
Own Kudos:
41
 [1]
Given Kudos: 67
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
WE:Management Consulting (Consulting)
Posts: 126
Kudos: 41
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
TheFool
Joined: 10 Dec 2012
Last visit: 08 Jan 2016
Posts: 41
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 27
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V41
GPA: 3.53
WE:Marketing (Real Estate)
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V41
Posts: 41
Kudos: 14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
OptimisticApplicant
Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Last visit: 22 Jun 2014
Posts: 81
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 11
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
GPA: 3
WE:Marketing (Computer Software)
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
Posts: 81
Kudos: 42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
theK
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Last visit: 30 Jan 2022
Posts: 126
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 67
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
WE:Management Consulting (Consulting)
Posts: 126
Kudos: 41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
OptimisticApplicant
Pretty hard to interpret this graph without any indication of applicant quality...E.g., HBS received 1,500 more applications than they did 6 years ago, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the program is more competitive...what if they have just been marketing towards a lot more "low quality" applicants in an effort to decrease their acceptance rate (and increase their selectivity ranking)...

Well, having knowledge about the applicant quality would be great as that will give us better insights. However, we're faced with two challenges:
1. 'applicant quality' might be a bit hard to define. Some might say that the GMAT is the best indicator of applicant quality. I'd disagree with this since I believe quality is a combination of work experience, GMAT, GPA and community work.

Nevertheless, it'd be great to see a breakdown of these net applicants VS GMAT score ranges and distribution.

2. Unfortunately, not all schools publish their applicant pool's GMAT score ranges and distribution.
User avatar
OptimisticApplicant
Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Last visit: 22 Jun 2014
Posts: 81
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 11
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
GPA: 3
WE:Marketing (Computer Software)
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
Posts: 81
Kudos: 42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
theK
OptimisticApplicant
Pretty hard to interpret this graph without any indication of applicant quality...E.g., HBS received 1,500 more applications than they did 6 years ago, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the program is more competitive...what if they have just been marketing towards a lot more "low quality" applicants in an effort to decrease their acceptance rate (and increase their selectivity ranking)...

Well, having knowledge about the applicant quality would be great as that will give us better insights. However, we're faced with two challenges:
1. 'applicant quality' might be a bit hard to define. Some might say that the GMAT is the best indicator of applicant quality. I'd disagree with this since I believe quality is a combination of work experience, GMAT, GPA and community work.

Nevertheless, it'd be great to see a breakdown of these net applicants VS GMAT score ranges and distribution.

2. Unfortunately, not all schools publish their applicant pool's GMAT score ranges and distribution.

Completely agree that the applicant quality data is not available and that it is challenging to define applicant quality metrics. My argument is that any insights gleaned without a sense of applicant quality aren't particularily useful. I don't think you can say "School X is doing something right" or "School Y is doing something wrong" soley because of their changes in application volume.

For example, CBS applications are down 19% year-over-year - on the surface, that seems like a really bad thing for CBS...however, the class profile for the Class entering 2011 and Class entering 2012 aren't that different in terms of GMAT/GPA:

2011: average GMAT: 716, average GPA: 3.5
2012: average GMAT: 715, average GPA: 3.5

So if the quality (in this case defined by GMAT/GPA) of the class is more or less the same, is it really a "bad thing" for CBS that their applications are down 19% year-over-year? I'm not really sure.
avatar
TheFool
Joined: 10 Dec 2012
Last visit: 08 Jan 2016
Posts: 41
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 27
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V41
GPA: 3.53
WE:Marketing (Real Estate)
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V41
Posts: 41
Kudos: 14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
OptimisticApplicant

Completely agree that the applicant quality data is not available and that it is challenging to define applicant quality metrics. My argument is that any insights gleaned without a sense of applicant quality aren't particularily useful. I don't think you can say "School X is doing something right" or "School Y is doing something wrong" soley because of their changes in application volume.

For example, CBS applications are down 19% year-over-year - on the surface, that seems like a really bad thing for CBS...however, the class profile for the Class entering 2011 and Class entering 2012 aren't that different in terms of GMAT/GPA:

2011: average GMAT: 716, average GPA: 3.5
2012: average GMAT: 715, average GPA: 3.5

So if the quality (in this case defined by GMAT/GPA) of the class is more or less the same, is it really a "bad thing" for CBS that their applications are down 19% year-over-year? I'm not really sure.

I think it's more indicative of the demand for a CBS education, rather than the quality of the student body or of the value of an MBA from CBS.

Any way you slice it, we're talking a drop in 1,260 applications for Columbia year-over-year. That means that fewer applicants are buying what Columbia's adcom is selling - a shot at a CBS education - along with $315,000 in lost revenue from app fees (assuming everyone pays the fee).

As you mentioned before, the school has an incentive from rankings to get more applications simply so that they can reject more applications. I'm not sure if that really has an effect on the quality of the student body or the teaching, given that their acceptance rate's still in the teens, but the school will definitely be in trouble if the blip turns into a trend.
User avatar
OptimisticApplicant
Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Last visit: 22 Jun 2014
Posts: 81
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 11
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
GPA: 3
WE:Marketing (Computer Software)
GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42
Posts: 81
Kudos: 42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
TheFool
OptimisticApplicant

Completely agree that the applicant quality data is not available and that it is challenging to define applicant quality metrics. My argument is that any insights gleaned without a sense of applicant quality aren't particularily useful. I don't think you can say "School X is doing something right" or "School Y is doing something wrong" soley because of their changes in application volume.

For example, CBS applications are down 19% year-over-year - on the surface, that seems like a really bad thing for CBS...however, the class profile for the Class entering 2011 and Class entering 2012 aren't that different in terms of GMAT/GPA:

2011: average GMAT: 716, average GPA: 3.5
2012: average GMAT: 715, average GPA: 3.5

So if the quality (in this case defined by GMAT/GPA) of the class is more or less the same, is it really a "bad thing" for CBS that their applications are down 19% year-over-year? I'm not really sure.

I think it's more indicative of the demand for a CBS education, rather than the quality of the student body or of the value of an MBA from CBS.

Any way you slice it, we're talking a drop in 1,260 applications for Columbia year-over-year. That means that fewer applicants are buying what Columbia's adcom is selling - a shot at a CBS education - along with $315,000 in lost revenue from app fees (assuming everyone pays the fee).

As you mentioned before, the school has an incentive from rankings to get more applications simply so that they can reject more applications. I'm not sure if that really has an effect on the quality of the student body or the teaching, given that their acceptance rate's still in the teens, but the school will definitely be in trouble if the blip turns into a trend.

That all make sense to me. I guess my contention is really with U.S. News for ranking on the selectivity variable - why should any stakeholders (applicants, recruiters, etc.) care about all-in demand for the education if it doesn't impact the quality of the degree?