May 18, 2012

Private Equity Investing in Education Companies Conference

ForProfitEDU would like to extend an exclusive invitation to you to attend The Capital Roundtable’s conference on Private Equity Investing in Education Companies, being held on Thursday, July 21 in New York City.

As a partner, we have the privilege to put your name on our VIP list, allowing you to register for a special rate of $995 — $400 off the standard registration price.

 

This day-long conference is being chaired by Daniel Black, Managing Partner at Wicks Group of Companies, and features 20 experts.

For registration or inquiries, just call Shaina Mardinly at 212-832-7333 ext. 0, or email her at smardinly@capitalroundtable.comPlease be sure to mention our name.

For more details, click here:

 

http://www.capitalroundtablemail.com/masterclass/Capital-Roundtable-Private-Equity-Education-Conference-2011.html?&tag=forprofitedu
I hope to see you on July 21 for what promises to be a great day.

P.S. Since we expect this conference to attract a strong attendance, please register as soon as possible to reserve your seat.

 

 

Gainful Employment rules out!

Yesterday the Obama Administration released final regulations requiring career college programs to better prepare students for “gainful employment” or risk losing access to Federal student aid.  Or at least thats how they put it…  Bottom line is that they eased a few caveats of the previous reg’s providing colleges with extended time for implementation, some flexibility on income data sources, interest only or income based payments, and minor changes to debt to income metric.

While this is at least a bit more manageable than the previous reg’s most believe it’s still harmful to many constituents in the lower income and minority segments.  Hopefully this will be a sign and more thought will go into future revisions.

 

link to the rules on ed.gov: http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/gainful-employment-regulations

Thiel Fellowship Pays 24 Talented Students $100,000 Not to Attend College

 

The winners were announced today for a new fellowship that has sparked heated debate in academic circles for questioning the value of higher education and suggesting that some entrepreneurial students may be better off leaving college.

Peter Thiel, a co-founder of PayPal, will pay each of the 24 winners of his Thiel Fellowship $100,000 not to attend college for two years and to develop business ideas instead

Doesn’t this continue to demonstrate that traditional education is not the right choice for everyone?  Career based education & accelerated paced degree programs commonly offered by for profit education firms are more aligned with the needs of many.  Watch and you will see many of the traditional colleges take another page from the for profit schools by offering accelerated programs 3 years for a bachelors, 18 months for an associates…

Good article from the chronicle: http://chronicle.com/article/Thiel-Fellowship-Pays-24/127622/?sid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en

Only 30% of schools see lead scoring as valuable or a must

value of lead scoringOver the last few years there have been tremendous amount of conversations over the need for and value of lead scoring.  While companies such as targus have secured  nice subscription based revenue models by charging for lead scoring service many don’t find them as necessary.  In the beginning vendors dismissed the value and accuracy of lead scoring as clearly they dented the “valid lead” pile.  Arguments ensued as to how you can say the lead is not valid when the data is accurate and the person initiated the action of requesting info from the schools.  Others claimed it was the equivalent of profiling and thus prevented equal access.

With the gainful employment regulations pending many more schools looked into it as they felt compelled to target a higher level (financially) demographic for fear the other could not afford an education.  Once again leave it to the Govt. to create rules that negatively effect those who need it the most… but I digress…

 

The results of the 2011 EDU survey showed that only 8.3%  considered lead scoring extremely valuable and 22.6% found it valuable.  Which means 70% don’t see much value or importance in it, especially for 2011.  While I am sure that targus folk will differ and many may be in arms regarding this post, we are simply reporting what the schools and industry responded in the 2011 EDU advertising and marketing survey!

 

EDU PE conference standing room only

The capital round table event last week at the University Club was standing room only.  They had to bring out additional tables to accommodate the surge in attendance.  Lots of strong speakers, companies & industry power players delivered yet another strong event.  Clearly the most influential gathering of PE investing in education and educational service companies. 

Here were a few of the speakers:

CHAIRED BY

 Bruce A. Eatroff, Partner

Halyard Capital

  •  Diane Auer-Jones, Career Education Corp.
  • Jonathan P. Barnes, Halyard Capital
  • Jay N. Bartlett, Parthenon Group LLC
  • Erik L. Brooks, ABRY Partners LLC
  • William C. Clohan, Assoc. of Private Sector Colleges & Universities
  • John F. Cozzi, AEA Investors LP
  • Christopher L. Curran, Education Growth Partners
  • Lincoln E. Frank, Quad Partners LLC
  • Marcelo Gigliani, Apax Partners LP
  • Michael B. Goldstein, Dow Lohnes PLLC
  • James J. Goll, BMO Capital Markets Corp.
  • Jonathan N. Grayer, Weld North LLC
  • Carter W. Harned, Leeds Equity Partners LLC
  • Robert Lytle, Parthenon Group LLC
  • Jonathon Newcomb, Coady Diemar Partners LLC
  • Jason Palmer, Kaplan Ventures
  • Chip Paucek, 2tor Inc.
  • Nina S. Rees, Knowledge Universe Education LP
  • Jason Rosenberg, Sterling Partners
  • Kenneth D. Salomon, Dow Lohnes Government Strategies LLC
  • Joshua N. Schwartz, East Wind Advisors LLC
  • Jeffrey M. Silber, BMO Capital Markets Corp.
  • Jason Stoffer, Maveron LLC
  • Peter O. Wilde, Providence Equity Partners LLC

Huffington Post Article about Kaplans “Bad Practices”

 

The Huffington post recently posted a strikingly negative article about Kaplan.  Link to article is below.  The industry is clearly headline material for tv, print and online articles all unfortunately negative, why cant the industry get some positive press?  Any of us who have actually been to a graduation at a forprofit school can attest to the lives that have been changed as well as the appreciation from the families and friends.   

At Kaplan University, ‘Guerilla Registration’ Leaves Students Deep In Debt

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/22/kaplan-university-guerilla-registration_n_799741.html?page=1

BMO Conference was Packed as expected!

Yesterday was the BMO annual Back to School conference in NYC.  As expected in this active political climate relating to the sector,  it was packed.  First I want to congratulate BMO for the excellent job they did, they not only put out a great agenda with the top tier participants, they also provided a quality environment for networking, private discussions and of course plenty of food & beverage. 

Almost every session was standing room only with people listening closely to what the power players were saying relating to current operations, government proposed changes and the potential effects on their businesses.  Also it was great to hear such organized demonstrations of the faults inherent within the proposed rule making.  I only wish many of the news outlets would broadcast those messages before the proposed changes become rules.  While CNBC was there networking and doing some interviews we have yet to see many of the concrete negative attributes of the proposed changes made public with the national media.  Hopefully that will change soon. 

Clearly there are many conflicts with the governments intended goals regarding educating America and the actual negative outcomes the proposed rules will result.  Who is going to push the value of college to those consistently neglected.  Who is going to take the risk of trying to educate those who need it most, but represent the biggest default risk?  Clearly there are many conflicts with the discussions relating to the cost/waste of tax payers money on the forprofits and the reality of actual cost to the tax payer without them.  Clearly they are not comparing apples to apples with the facts and figures, rather shouting sound bites and political buzz words to seek attention in the active political climate.

Also, Steve Eisman the industry short attended some of the conference, what are the odds his mind was open to any of the data presented…

University of phoenix & nexus research first report on most efficient systems of higher education

Two years ago, the founders of the University of Phoenix announced plans that they were going to create an independent, nonpartisan research institute to examine significant educational issues affecting nontraditional students and for-profit higher education. Industry analysts, excited to get a peek into the loads of data that Phoenix and other proprietary institutions track about their students and teaching methods,were excited about the news.

The report, “For-Profit Colleges and Universities: America’s Least Cost and Most Efficient System of Higher Education,” lofts praises of the University of Phoenix and other for-profit colleges. It postures that many of the problems of the industry highlighted in Congressional hearings and flow of negative news accounts are not systemic, and also dishes an attack on traditional colleges as “studies in inefficiency.”

the full report is available here: http://nexusresearch.org/1/NexusStudy8-31-10.pdf

dont miss todays Senate hearing at 10:00 on recruitment practices in forprofit education

Full Committee Hearing – For-Profit Schools: The Student Recruitment Experience

Committee:

Senate Committee on Health Education Labor and Pensions

Date:

Wednesday, August 04 2010, 10:00 AM

Place:

106 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Witnessesreturn to top

Panel I

  • Gregory Kutz , Managing Director, Office of Forensic Audits and Special Investigations, U.S. Government Accountability Office, Arlington, VA

Panel II

  • David Hawkins , Director of Public Policy and Research, National Association for College Admission Counseling, Arlington, VA
  • Michale McComis , Executive Director, Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges, Arlington, VA
  • Joshua Pruyn , former Admissions Representative, Alta College, Inc., Denver, CO

CPC vs. CPL? Does that even make sense?

On page 83 of the recent proposed rulemaking from the department of Education you will find:

Several negotiators were concerned about the impact of the proposed language on an institution’s Internet-based activities.  Negotiators asserted that the HEA permits advertising and marketing activities by a third party, as long as payment to the third party is based on those who “click” and is not based on the number of individuals who enroll.  The Department agrees and does not believe that the proposed regulatory language would prohibit such click-through payments.

Please explain to me how CPC makes more sense than cpl, other than with non-internet (call center) leads.  Anyone who can manage an efficient CPL program can just as easily manage a successful CPC program.  Still don’t see why internet driven CPL is being called into question especially for the lead provider who have zero interaction with the prospect who sought out, then filled out the lead form for the school.

 

To access the complete 500+ page doc Click: 

http://www.ed.gov/news/student-aid-rules-protect-borrowers-and-taxpayers

then click on the link in box on right: notice of proposed rulemaking.

208