Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
If he was on a scholarship, wouldn't he most likely stay at Newington as a boarder?
School sporting scholarships/recruitment
- Thread starter observer
- Start date
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Certainly they might, it was a question, not a statement on my part. It's been asserted that there a boys from Tonga on scholarships reside in the boarding house at Newington, I was just querying as whether his departure might signal that he wasn't on a scholarship. Of course, I don't know either way.
Freddo Frog
Ward Prentice (10)
I don't know where Bradley is from but I know he wasn't a boarder.
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
Hamilton Boys High School is one of the "better" rugby schools in NZ. It is in the heart of the Chiefs franchise.
They regularly win the Super 8 Rugby competition against all of the "name" Boys High Schools in the North Island (outside Auckland and Wellington).
Young Bradley could get a decent rugby "education" over there, after the Kiwis get over asking him about "Fush and Chups" and expecting to hear "Fesh and Cheps", "six/sux/sex" etc.
They regularly win the Super 8 Rugby competition against all of the "name" Boys High Schools in the North Island (outside Auckland and Wellington).
Young Bradley could get a decent rugby "education" over there, after the Kiwis get over asking him about "Fush and Chups" and expecting to hear "Fesh and Cheps", "six/sux/sex" etc.
Rob hart
Ted Thorn (20)
Its all part of an all rounded education at Scots ....... if you want just academics send your son to Grammar the results of that are plain to see for all........ total juxtaposition to Scots........
It's about balance. Grammar is no more "just academic" than Scots is "just Rugby". The question is about a school spending big on sport training facilities while their academic results have markedly declined in just a few years, and whether that is wise. Grammar's decline in some sports (remember, GPS sports are not all about rugby, despite what some seem to think) reflect a generation and a half of a strongly academic selective process, rather than overspending on that area, or underspending on sporting facilities. It can be argued that the balance is a bit wrong there, too.
Of course, parents wanting a mainly academic approach can chase a selective high school, or selective private school. I suspect most parents sending kids to Scots want a real balance, not a bought rugby premiership, and would have some concern at academic results falling.
Jasdec
Ted Fahey (11)
Is that a genetically modified Grammar?
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Total?
TSC don't seem to have outdone Grammar on the river: the sport you can't recruit for.
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
What is in it for the schools?
Put simply, $.
Private schools are business. It is a very tough and congested market. Market behaviour is also emotive and influenced by perceptions rather than pure rationality. Arguably the Schools are not there to make a large profit, but if they do not at least break even, then they close.
Parents make decisions on where to send their boys, and pay very large sums of money for the privalege, based on a whole heap of factors with reputation being a key factor.
Someone more skilled in advertising will know the exact words to use, but the awareness of the Brand of the school is influenced by success in the schools academic, musical, sporting and co-corricular programmes.
Perceived success in these endeavours will positively influence a persons view of the "reputation" of the school.
Either develop the success organically, or buy some in. The latter can prove to be rather cost effective.
http://www.smh.com.au/data-point/private-school-fees-boom-20130125-2dc27.html
Using either school web sites or the SMH figures for year 12 for 2013, the Sydney AAGPS schools are competing for $240m of annual revenue.
These figures assume that all students are paying Yr 12 figures. This is clearly not the case, but near enough is close enough to illustrate the rough magnitude of the the AAGPS revenue.
Newington, 1600 students @ $27,369 = $43.7m
Joeys, 900 students @ $25,434 = $22.8m
Riverview, 1569 students @ $22,095 = 34.6m
Scots, 1800 students @ $30,900 = $55.6m
Kings, 1500 students @ $28,905 = $43.3m
Shore, 1600 students @ $25,200 = $40.3m
8969 student places, raising $240.6m @ an average of $26,830 per student.
The marginal cost of a boy on reduced funding to the school is nowhere near the cost of the revenue lost by that boy occupying a slot that full fee paying boy would notionally contribute.
Many boys on "scholarships" are on reduced funding with the parents/benefactors paying anywhere between 0% and 75% of the fees paid by the others.
If School X decides to "lose" the opportunity to raise revenue from 10 students ($26830) by waiving fees to 10 students that will somehow enhance the reputation of School X in the eyes of 100 prospective parents for a Year 7 intake to an extent that 50 enroll, then that is a rather rational economic decision.
Similar argument would apply for the Briabane GPS schools.
Economic rationalists would be proud of what they have achieved.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Where's Grammar?
Grammar, Kings, Scots, Newington & Shore start at Kindy and fees paid in Prep are considerably lower than Year 12.
Consider also that about half of the Year 7 intake at these schools come from their Prep schools.
Are these schools having that much trouble filling their Year 7 spots?
I do think that they all have slack in the boarding sections though
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
I left Grammar out of my OP on costs because they are not currently "playing with the big boys" in the hunt for the AAGPS rugby title. Secondly the school in recent times has demonstrated that it is happy to rely on reputation and prowess in areas outside of Rugby to recruit their students.
As I said in the OP I deliberately ignored the fact that fees in Yr's 7 - 11 are considerably cheaper than the Yr 12 fees, and I don't have the time nor need to be totally accurate in the revenue predictions of the schools, suffice to say that the revenue from the 6 division 1 rugby AAGPS schools is probably more than $200m and less than $300m. i.e. pretty serious sort of money.
With individual schools pushing $30m revenues, then there is a sound economic rationalist argument to ignore (or obfuscate) Heads of Schools agreements, and throw a bit of marketing money towards recruiting talented students to maintain the market presence and "brand" perception of the School.
Some 80 years on, there is a certain Private School that is still suffering some Brand perception problems that the staff, students and alumni would rather not have, "If you can't get a girl, get...."
Not saying that it is the right thing to do, but do you think that is is worth spending a bob or two to fix up Brand Image issues with your school?
Economic survival (as well as ego) is a fairly significant factor why schools do this.
As I said in the OP I deliberately ignored the fact that fees in Yr's 7 - 11 are considerably cheaper than the Yr 12 fees, and I don't have the time nor need to be totally accurate in the revenue predictions of the schools, suffice to say that the revenue from the 6 division 1 rugby AAGPS schools is probably more than $200m and less than $300m. i.e. pretty serious sort of money.
With individual schools pushing $30m revenues, then there is a sound economic rationalist argument to ignore (or obfuscate) Heads of Schools agreements, and throw a bit of marketing money towards recruiting talented students to maintain the market presence and "brand" perception of the School.
Some 80 years on, there is a certain Private School that is still suffering some Brand perception problems that the staff, students and alumni would rather not have, "If you can't get a girl, get...."
Not saying that it is the right thing to do, but do you think that is is worth spending a bob or two to fix up Brand Image issues with your school?
Economic survival (as well as ego) is a fairly significant factor why schools do this.
Rob hart
Ted Thorn (20)
Scots have been improving very much in the rowing......... i would be surprised if Grammar had outdone us...... apart from the one off first 8 win a few years ago........ happy to be corrected by facts............
Rob hart
Ted Thorn (20)
I agree broadly with your comments but I make the following points, the First 15 at Scots is organic any suggestion that they are not is a blight on a champion team, Newington is the team that deserves the scrutiny...... my point with Grammar is just simply that in the 60' and 70's (and for a long time before this) they were a very strong sporting school and still had the academic strength they have always had ............ i wonder where it all changed........
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
From 1969 when A M Mackerras became the headmaster. As far as I could tell he hated all sport and thought rugby was particularly barbaric. Not, however, sufficiently barbaric to put him off his afternoon tea following the 1st XV.
Curiously, he demanded a broad minded acceptance of the views of others - but did not extend his broad mindedness to those with a different view to his in relation to the role of "games" in education.
Vegas
Chris McKivat (8)
HJ - you had me at "put simply ... " !!
I am afraid that you then lost me - economic rationalist I am not, pragmatist hopefully . (Maybe I just nodded off for a moment trying to follow your figures !! - although I do think your proposition is reliant on a schools full capacity and output gap , and I am unsure of these stats ).
Call me simple - I can't for the life of me see how buying players can be more cost effective than growing them organically - and its certainly not more satisfying. Nor can I see how buying a rugby premiership, ( or, more particularly, the chance of winning one ) can be accretive to a school's brand - I think the contrary - I think that this whole process is deteriorating the brands that these schools have espoused for over 100 years.
Isn't it about sustainability ?? These schools have been around a long time, and their brands have been built up over that period, not bought.
Similarly, isn't it far more sustainable , and I think a far better bet at success, to build a rugby team rather than buy one ??
you are going to have to define "organic". You have failed to answer my previous post on how their no. 10 has turned up organically and conveniently just before the season started. As stated before he received a phone call the day before Easter,and started the day after Easter.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Wouldn't the same logic apply to Shore? They have a similar approach to Grammar, but just have a stronger rugby demographic which gets them through, to an extent anyway.
Also, of the schools that you quoted, New, Scots, Kings and Shore are K-12, so their aggregate numbers include around 500-600 primary students. Including them skews the figures IMO.
Rob hart
Ted Thorn (20)
That is news to me, but I stand corrected, a pity really the side was good enough and did not need this stimulus.......
Brian Westlake
Arch Winning (36)
I love this line... "Organic". Is the 1st V "organic"? Was 12/13 1st XI "organic"?
Please describe, in twenty words or less "Organic"
As the string section wander aimlessly up Birriga Rd to the lights... Awaiting the maestro. Where is the percussion so they can march?
To skew your figures further you have 360 boarders at kings paying $20k, riverview with 340 paying $16k, scots with 250 paying $22.5k ( taking their fees to over $50k), shore with 200 paying $23k and joeys with 600 paying $11k. Figures thanks to "the land". Scots works out to be the dearest of all the boarding schools published through NSW, Qld and Vic.