Thread regarding Education Management Corporation layoffs

The primary difference is where the money they bring in is allocated. For profit do not have nearly as high as an financial investment in students as non-profit colleges do. Also, endowment is a strong indicator of how success/strong a non-profit college is, where as at South University I can not find an endowment listed anywhere. The money is used to pay high salaries but if you are good at your job you deserve it.

Who says we don't also have a problem with for-profts turning into non-profits? The issue is that for-profits have aided in driving up costs all around. Not saying they are the only factor, but they play a large role in it. The problem with for-profits is also the fact that the educational standards are sub-par, they prey on low income people for their pell grants, they care more about their profit for their investors than they care about students.... for-profits spend FAR less on education for students than they do on advertising. For-profits turning into non-profits is another issue that also needs to be addressed, but for the entire educational system to change, the for-profit sector must fall first.

Give me a break on universities turning people away in droves. State schools take pretty much anyone. You'll have Ivy League turning people away but the majority of universities will take nearly any warm body to get that sweet financial aid money.

All the bitching seems to be about the "for-profit" education business. Someone please explain the difference between a for-profit school verses a non-profit school. Case in point: ECMC bought out CCi and transformed 56 schools over to non-profit status under a subsidiary called Zenith Education Group. Zenith Education Group still has an executive board making millions in salary, a chain of managers making big money, field recruiters targeting the same student pool that CCi did, the same schools teaching the same curriculum with the same instructors that CCi did and still being accredited by the same agencies that accredited the schools under CCi. In most cases the tuition is the same price as it was under CCi and is being raised this year. So why is Zenith being celebrated by the federal government as being a great example for a career school while EDMC, UTI, ITT and others being targeted by the same government agencies that took down CCi? The ONLY difference between Zenith Education Group and the others is Zenith is not a publically traded company. The executive board can keep all the money since there are no share holders.

It's like spending 200,000 on a car. One is built by hand in a small company the other is mass produced. The one built by hand is a Ferrari the other one is a Chevrolet Vega.

The difference is, public university are not corporate entities. Enrollment is based on GPA and talent. They are not trying to become a milt-national billion dollar corporation. Therefore there is no need to target vulnerable people. They actually turn most people would shouldn't be there away. Their goal is the highest quality graduate, not highest income revenue stream.

EDMC is unconscionable!

@Fe2q7KL-xde, that's a technique of neutralization. Other companies are doing it, so what's the issue? There are tens of thousands of students facing a lifetime of DEBT PEONAGE, and you wonder what their beef is? Let me tell you, the student debt strike is getting bigger by the day, and EDMC is one of the first targets. Together with the Debt Collective, the student resistance group "I Am Ai" is recruiting students for a "defense to repayment" with the claim that they were defrauded.

What corporate entity doesn't target all customers like you mentioned?

I really want to know what the root of all the hate it. Recruiting was exposed and punished to the tune of 100 million.

Is it cost? What is it? Is it actually reaching out to customers and bringing the product to them? Is it that they're for-profit while other universities charge similar tuition?

Apparently there are still recruiters who are able to rationalize their work. They are masters of the "techniques of neutralization." The more they protest, the more apparent these techniques of neutralization become. I understand that people need to feed their families, but should they be working in an industry that targets vulnerable people (military veterans, single moms, people with disabilities, immigrants, people of color) and disproportionately undermines its customers?