@observer12
No I think it’s a zero sum gain. ED doesn’t effect prestige at all imo. I still think you and some other posters focus way to much on inputs. What does the relative wealth (all elite schools have students bodies that are wealthy $100,000+) of the student body and the type of admissions have to do with anything if the desired result still occurs. So an institution filled with high stat poor students means their more elite???
@simba9
I did say I was willing to bet so you can look it up. Fact Books can be a little hard to find so I’m not inclined to research at the moment. However I will say depending on fundraising still leaves one in a precarious position.
I guess we should all be worried about the financial viability of Stanford and Harvard.
@simba9
Lol rolls eyes, how facetious. You’re right, I don’t really know because I don’t feel like researching, but I think there’s a reason why USC is so aggressive with fundraising. It’s quite obvious that H and S don’t need the extra money even though they’re able to raise it.
USC is raising funds to be able to compete with places like Stanford and Harvard. It’s not doing it to keep the doors of the school open, which is what you’re falsely trying to imply.
From what I can tell you’re still in college, so I’ll chalk up your misconceptions to youthful ignorance.
"You could even throw some shade at HYPS for using SCEA, which is kind of like ED in practical operation. And Gtown too, which uses “restricted” early action.
MIT is the purest elite I can think of."
Agree that an elite school would not need ED, Georgetown is open (or pure) EA like MIT, along with Cal Tech. Along with most publics, like Michigan 
The OP seems to have abandoned the thread over a week ago, and this has received quite enough responses for now.