An interesting viewpoint abt fee cut in IIMs

[ajeeshnair]

Originally Posted by WIZ_Aashish

A nice reply from my friend Abhishek and yes I totally agree with his viewpoint that MMJ should go but the fee cut should stay.
I myself am joining IIML and do hope that I don't have to pay over Rs. 1 lakh for the fees anually.

I have the IIML offer letter but there is no mention of how I can get a scholarship from the institute in case the fees is high.

Hope you will get a better solution on 25th June...

All the best..!!!!

bye

me

[voodoochild]

Originally Posted by ajeeshnair

agree with aashish and abhishek, the hue and cry over the fee cut raised by iims has got more to do with mr dholakia's ego than concerns over autonomy... and all the talk of 'need-based' scholarships and banks queuing up to give loans is hogwash... IIMs offer a full fee waiver to students whose family income is less than 1.5 lakhs.. for one a family with an annual income of even 3 lakhs can hardly afford to pay those kinds of fees and bear the living expenses... secondly, most banks are finicky about sanctionining loans without a security, even with RBI rules specifying to the contrary...

vishal

[RahulSharma]

A report in ET today says 32 students from IIMB have defaulted on education loans they took from Canara Bank.

[somudada]

Just stumbled upon this article. in the second last para the prof says that an increase in the uncertainity or a decrease in one of the key drivers in the delivery of management education would reduce present value of earnings by a huge amount. i don't disgree that increasing the risk or decresing the strarting sal would be detrimental to the total lifetime earnings, but no where in the article does the author mention why/how a decrease in fees would be affecting these two variables. the causality isn't clear. to be frank the prof has looked at the problem from the pov of the student but what about the pov of the insti. the question to be asked is what % of gross revenues do fees comprise? will a 70% drop(not 14.5%) in revenues from this stream make the operational budget infeasible. iimk currently has 120 students. with fees of rs 100,000 per student per year from pgp1 & pgp2 that equals 2.4 crores. according to the v k shunglu report the income of iimk during 2002-03 was 24.98 cr. the govt of india grant was 20.46 cr for the same period. a 70% loss in the 2.4 cr fig = 1.68 cr. can't the govt increase it's grant by 1.68/20.46 = 8.2% to meet the expected fall in revenues? if such a loss in fees doesn't lead to any loss in total revenues for iimk how will risk or starting salary be affected?
on a related note the prof would have a very hard time explaining the correlation between the two variables & a (modest) loss in revenues. having to do away with some of the frivolous expenditures might not be a bad thing. the iims want to to become financially autonomous but that is unlikely with govt grant amounting to nearly 30% (refer to report) for iima. with income from post graduate courses amounting to 7.83 cr they would have to almost double the fees across the board. are the students game for it? or theyu would have to double their consultancy income as well(it will take some time).
my guess is that if iima wants to keep up with the current level of subsidies as it increases it 's class size it would have to launch new non-subsidized courses. pgpx is an excellent step in that direction. more short term & industry focussed programmes could also be explored.
i think prof damodaran should have explored these themes as well in his article. even though with the upa govt at the helm of affairs one might not think too much of this post, we should not forget that mmj is still alive & kicking & could come back in 2009.