We at Ivy Coach believe that the Universal College Application is a superior product to the Common App.
Yes, we’re all about writing about the Common App. this week! Our Founder, Bev Taylor, has an article up today on “The Huffington Post” entitled “The Common Application: A Violation of Restraint of Trade?” that we wanted to share with our readers. In the past, we’ve written about how some believe that legacy admission is a violation of tax law. How so, you ask? Well, alumni donate money to the college and receive tax write-offs to do so because they don’t receive compensation for these donations. But you — loyal readers of our college admissions blog — know this isn’t the case. Of course these donors quite often receive compensation for their sizable donations. They receive this compensation when their children — with significantly lower grades and SAT or ACT scores are admitted over more deserving applicants. It’s tremendous compensation that their children can benefit from for a lifetime and it will likely be reflected in their lifetime earnings.
Today, Bev asks if you think that the Common Application, Inc. is in violation of the restraint of trade. Essentially, universities that offer the Common Application and an alternative to the Common Application (i.e., the superior Universal College Application) are incentivized to offer the Common App. on an exclusive basis. Universities that offer both the Universal College Application and the Common App. are financially penalized by the Common Application, Inc. Does that sound like a restraint of trade to you, our readers?
We’re curious to hear what you have to say about the piece in “The Huffington Post” and we’re eager to hear whether or not you think this is a violation of the restraint of trade in our proudly free market economy. So let us know your thoughts on these subjects by posting below!