Harvard--Had No Idea Things Were This Bad

<p>^^It looks like Dartmouth is going to “tweak” their financial aid. Who knows how big a change “tweak” is a code word for? From the link in post #311:</p>

<p>'Kim emphasized that the College’s commitment to need-blind admissions will remain unaffected.</p>

<p>“I can’t imagine being part of a college that is only open to people who can pay,” Kim said. “So we will absolutely maintain our commitment to need-blind admission.”</p>

<p>Kim said that there may be ways in which the College’s financial aid program can be “tweaked” such that it works “more effectively.”</p>

<p>"We are going to make sure people who are currently Dartmouth students don’t find themselves unable to afford a Dartmouth education,” he said.'</p>

<p>^How, exactly, does one “tweak” an FA program to save money without affecting the school’s affordability? For example, inevitably some Dartmouth students are just barely affording the school on current FA and any “tweak” might push them over the edge.</p>

<p>^^Well, any time you spend less on finaid, someone is getting less money. That’s an unavoidable fact. I suppose the “tweak” will consist of adjusting the eligibility and/or size of the awards. </p>

<p>There has been an arms races in recent years among the Ivys and other highly-selective schools to lower EFC to zero for every accepted student whose family income is below some level. For Dartmouth I think the current cut-off is $75k. This is only my own speculation, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see Dartmouth and many of the other schools retreating from this arms race - going back to cut-offs and awards more like they were 4 or 5 years ago.</p>

<p>Took a look at the percentage of assets in risky, hard to value, illiquid Tier 3 from some of the schools that have reported so far:</p>

<p>Yale 80%
Columbia 78%
Harvard 66%
Duke 66%
Dartmouth 60%
Rice 41%
Haverford 39%</p>

<p>Personally, I think anything above 50% reflects an awfully aggressive allocation.</p>

<p>Wesleyan 42% (based on Oct `09 endowment level)</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.pionline.com/article/20091116/PRINTSUB/311169934[/url]”>http://www.pionline.com/article/20091116/PRINTSUB/311169934&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Article says most of the recent private equity IPO’s are being done to lower debt not send money back to their limited partners(endowments and pension funds).</p>

<p>do the limited partners own a direct stake in these companies once they go public? what’s the ratio of “sponsor” owned stock to outstanding capital?</p>

<p>[New</a> York State Pension Returns 18% During Six Months (Update1) - Bloomberg.com](<a href=“Bloomberg Politics - Bloomberg”>Bloomberg Politics - Bloomberg)</p>

<p>Pension funds and endowments are the biggest purchasers of private equity and other alternative investments. I find it interesting that the new york pension fund has less than 10% of its assets in alternative investments, and because of the market rebound it is doing just fine. There was never really a bubble in the stock market, it was taken down by the real estate and private equity bubble so endowments that had a reasonable allocation to the stock market are doing just fine.
It really makes you wonder what these endowments that have 65-80% of their money in alternative investments plus significantly more money obligated to capital calls by pe firms were thinking.</p>

<p>In my opinion, no private elite will take back financial aid policies for current students unless things become mush worse than they are.
As an aside, Dartmouth has been basing its planning on 5% endowment returns this fiscal year and next. So far this fiscal year, domestic markets are up 20%, with foreign markets up more, and commodities up still more.
The steps Dartmouth and others are making are long overdue, but are unlikely to be as draconian as feared.</p>

<p>[Bids</a> on Stanford Assets Top $1 Billion - WSJ.com](<a href=“http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704533904574544130849517044.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_business#articleTabs%3Darticle]Bids”>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704533904574544130849517044.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_business#articleTabs%3Darticle)</p>

<p>Kind of hard to tell what’s going on with the bids but it looks like Stanford is close to finalizing things here.</p>

<p>[Tufts</a> Says Wealthy College Endowments Should Take Less Risk - Bloomberg.com](<a href=“Bloomberg Politics - Bloomberg”>Bloomberg Politics - Bloomberg)</p>

<p>This guy really gets it. Interesting info. on needs-blind going forward. Once again, shows Yale in denial.</p>

<p>[The</a> Harvard Law Record - Lessig’s focus on corruption may have uncomfortable implications for Harvard](<a href=“http://www.hlrecord.org/news/lessig-s-focus-on-corruption-may-have-uncomfortable-implications-for-harvard-1.937178]The”>http://www.hlrecord.org/news/lessig-s-focus-on-corruption-may-have-uncomfortable-implications-for-harvard-1.937178)</p>

<p>Another excellent article that, IMHO, really hits the mark</p>

<p>Harvard is going to cut faculty size, mostly through attrition and maybe early retirements, to help with the crunch:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/19/faculty-professors-smith-retirement/[/url]”>http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/19/faculty-professors-smith-retirement/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Dartmouth is taking a phased approach in deciding where to cut next:</p>

<p><a href=“http://thedartmouth.com/2009/11/19/news/budget[/url]”>http://thedartmouth.com/2009/11/19/news/budget&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I think that at Harvard, the goal is to bring the size of the faculty to what it was before the rapid expansion of both faculty and endowment. But it is easier to expand a faculty in a rational way as programs are launched and gaps in offerings are filled than it is to shrink it, especially through retirements and/or moves.</p>

<p>I see that Harvard said it had an average return on its endowment of 8.9% a year for the last 10 years.</p>

<p>I noticed Harvard did not state its compounded returns.</p>

<p>Average returns are a very tricky thing.</p>

<p>I make 100% on my money the first year and then lose 50% the second year. With average returns I made 25% a year.
100%- 50% divided by 2.</p>

<p>Isn’t that great… I made a 25% average return.</p>

<p>How much did I really make though?</p>

<p>Lets’ use numbers.</p>

<p>I start out with 1 million dollars.
I make 100% on my money the first year…so I double my money. I now have $2 million.
Then I lose 50% the second year. 50% of $2 million is $1 million.</p>

<p>So I made 50% over a 2 year period. 25% average return a year. </p>

<p>And I made no money.</p>

<p>Because Harvard had the big percentage loss when it had the most money…I wonder what Harvard’s investment returns really are and how they are calculated.</p>

<p>When you read about Warren Buffet’s returns… he uses compounded returns. Which is why Buffett is Buffet.</p>

<p>[Breitbart.tv</a> Dramatic Footage: Near Riots at UCLA Over Proposed 32% Tuition Hike](<a href=“http://www.breitbart.tv/raw-footage-32-inflation-in-ucla-tuition-causes-riots/]Breitbart.tv”>http://www.breitbart.tv/raw-footage-32-inflation-in-ucla-tuition-causes-riots/)</p>

<p>Coming soon to a college campus near you.</p>

<p>dstark, if you did not point this out, I would always automatically assume that Harvard and other institutions were talking about compounded returns.</p>

<p>Well… then I’m glad I pointed this out. </p>

<p>If Harvard’s average numbers are legit…</p>

<p>Started with $100… ended with $189, $89 profit divided by 10 years…Average return 8.9%.</p>

<p>The compounded return is close to 6% a year.</p>

<p>Harvard took a lot of risk…to get bond market returns.</p>

<p>If Harvard states that they had an average annual return of 8.9% over the last ten years than it is a compounded annual rate of 8.9%.</p>

<p>No it isn’t.</p>

<p>Harvard is a great school, but it doesn’t get to set the definitions of average and compounded returns.
Did Harvard state what their compounded returns are?</p>

<p>“Harvard treasurer James Rothenberg said in an Oct. 16, interview with the Harvard Gazette, a university publication, that over 10 years Harvard generated an average annual return of 8.9 percent, including last year’s losses.”</p>