长江2005学费22万RMB

sky_river

希望长江不要通过涨学费来涨奖学金。
长江的招生简章中有一条：申请时有五年左右的行业成功工作经历。长江现在的一届学生就有很多不合格。最好长江的能力和学费一样有所提高，否则华而不实的名声是去不掉了。

落花流水

据可靠消息称，去年长江的学生因不满学校的奖学金分配制度和人为操纵的评审体系，和校方管理层闹得不可开交。如果今年还继续在奖学金上大做文章，无异于玩火自焚。

wang16

以下是引用grossman在2005-2-15 6:42:00的发言：

I only include schools in which these people had tenure track positions. For example, Professor Lang Hsien Ping served on the faculty at Wharton as a lecturer and served on the faculty at Chicago as an visiting professor but those do not count. He was never a tenure-track faculty at Wharton or Chicago.  Similarly, Professor Arthur Yeung was an adjunct Professor at U. Michigan and that does not count either as there is no academic requirements for an adjuct professor. I will be surprised if Howard Ward or Arthur Yeung get tenure track offers from a top five hundred schools in US. Unfortunately, the Chinese media does not understand the difference.

From the web page of CEIBS, there is no message that Linda Sprague served on the faculty at MIT or Harvard. She has a Harvard PhD and an MIT Bachelor degree and did serve on the faculty in Stanford but it is not clear that whether it is a visiting position or not.

I believe that Professor Sprague is unlikely to be on the tenure track in Stanford. The two best journals in OM is operations research and Management Science but I cannot find any of her publications there. If you check professor Chen Hong, Professor Zheng Yusheng or Professor Li Lode, you will find each had more than ten papers in these two journals. You may ask others how Professor Sprague would compare with Professors Chen, Zheng and Li.

Finally, CK has decided to charge RMB 220,000. There must be a reason. It is still cheaper than top US schools. If the market is willing to pay such a price, then leave it to the market to decide. There is no reason to stop people from paying the price they are willing to pay. If someone is willing to pay 1 million RMB to buy a PP watch, it is their problem, not yours.

Finally, CK has decided to charge RMB 220,000. There must be a reason. It is still cheaper than top US schools. If the market is willing to pay such a price, then leave it to the market to decide. There is no reason to stop people from paying the price they are willing to pay. If someone is willing to pay 1 million RMB to buy a PP watch, it is their problem, not yours.

说It is still cheaper than top US schools有意义吗？

人家美国人一个月赚多少，我们一个月赚多少？？？

有钱去美国和欧洲读好的。。。为什么要在长江？

难道长江的教授比欧美还好？

难道长江的教学环境比欧美还好？所以，market will give CK a lesson...

that's the only thing will happen to 2005 CK　MBA program.

现实一点。。。这本身就是一个现实的社会。。。

wang16

以下是引用lukrenee在2005-2-15 20:34:00的发言：

FYI, guys, I once phoned CK to ask application info, one officer implied they would give each student who might get the admission schorlarship, but to my inquiry of the exact sum they might offer, he commented they would give in accord with different cases, in a word, no confirmed program yet.

Tell you the truth, I will try to get the offer from CK and I would not care how much they will offer for the schorlarship...

As soon as I get the CK offer, I would play open card with Ceibs people, and tell them if I were offered by Ceibs, I would not hesitate to change my mind even without schorlarship...

Reason is simple, I lost my trust in CK as CK is loosing good candidates via stupidly trying to test the marketing reaction...  

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-2-16 20:43:20编辑过]

晓路

看不懂，难以想象

grossman

With the exception of London Business School and Insead, Europe does not have any good business schools. Insead has been around for only 40 years.

CK cannot compete with the US top 25 business schools now. However, in the near future, with the commitment of Li Ka-Shin foundation, CKGSB should be comparable with reasonable US public schools such as Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State.

If you can get in LBS, Insead or top 25 US schools, then you should go there. If you get admitted in schools such as OSU, PSU, MSU, then CK could be a better choice for some people.

Again, I do not think we should feel so inferior relative to US or Europe. Yes, we are not as good now in terms of our economy. However, we need to put things in perspective and do not be short-sighted. China had enoyed a superior economy in most of the last two thousand years with the exception of the last three hundred. If China keeps developing at the current speed, we should be an equal player with US and Europe in about fifty years. Remember, it took Han Dynasty 70 years to develop and eventually beat the Huns out of Northern China. Europeans and Americans will be humming to come over to China to study then.

What I like about CK is its ambition, self-respect and self-confidence. CK's root is in china and it demands all the permanent faculties to spend 100% of their time in China. We Chinese are as good as Europeans or Americans. With a good system, we can perform as well. We can. We must. We will. Of course, Rome is not built overnight and only time will tell if CK is successful.

For people who think 220,000 RMB is too high, you probably should contact the admissions office to see if there could be help with scholarships or zero-interest loans. US schools oftern provide student loans or scholarships for qualified individuals.

花则不累

to bargain with CEIBS by the offer of CK is not a good idea... Adcom, I bet, never think of CK as one of its competitors, the one result is that you are a good negotiator, nothing else.

The fact CK raise its tuition might be the strategy of segmentation and target market after compeletly SWOT analysis. CEIBS will not be thought as the most expensive B-school in Mainland China any more, at least right now. It is the right and best oppotunity to apply CEIBS, I m think it will also raise its tuition next year, due to the fast growing ranking.  

grossman

花则不累 is right. Bargaining using another school's offer may backfire.

CEIBS is a pioneer in MBA education in China. They had this great idea while no body realized there was a market for MBA education in China.  In this respect, it deserves the ranking by FT.  

However, China has a big platform for many players to be successful. CKGSB differentiates from other Chinese schools in emphasizing high caliber research about Chinese Business from an international perspective and deep knowledge about international operations from the Chinese perspective.

Let's hope that CEIBS and CKGSB both become leading world class business schools, in the league of Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, Chicago and MIT. China deserves a few heavy weights.

mooncake

it is normal to increase tuition fee by 4-5% annually and it is what most business schools all over the world do. but, soaring from 150k to 220k.......just doesn't make sense.

also get confused by grossman's words. it is good to hear someone cry out his ambition - at least we should not deny his courage. but only courage is not enough to be successful, or even to survive. Shouldering world top business school is not achieved by empty talking such as "we can, we will and we must", or charging a high fee, or any single-sided expectation. Sadly i found nothing concrete in grossman's words but exactly what as mentioned above any mature or sensible business should avoid.

ckgsb should bear in mind that market will not be altered by one single business and market will not spare those who run off track.

pizi

以下是引用grossman在2005-2-17 0:33:00的发言：

With the exception of London Business School and Insead, Europe does not have any good business schools. Insead has been around for only 40 years.

CK cannot compete with the US top 25 business schools now. However, in the near future, with the commitment of Li Ka-Shin foundation, CKGSB should be comparable with reasonable US public schools such as Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State.

If you can get in LBS, Insead or top 25 US schools, then you should go there. If you get admitted in schools such as OSU, PSU, MSU, then CK could be a better choice for some people.

Again, I do not think we should feel so inferior relative to US or Europe. Yes, we are not as good now in terms of our economy. However, we need to put things in perspective and do not be short-sighted. China had enoyed a superior economy in most of the last two thousand years with the exception of the last three hundred. If China keeps developing at the current speed, we should be an equal player with US and Europe in about fifty years. Remember, it took Han Dynasty 70 years to develop and eventually beat the Huns out of Northern China. Europeans and Americans will be humming to come over to China to study then.

What I like about CK is its ambition, self-respect and self-confidence. CK's root is in china and it demands all the permanent faculties to spend 100% of their time in China. We Chinese are as good as Europeans or Americans. With a good system, we can perform as well. We can. We must. We will. Of course, Rome is not built overnight and only time will tell if CK is successful.

For people who think 220,000 RMB is too high, you probably should contact the admissions office to see if there could be help with scholarships or zero-interest loans. US schools oftern provide student loans or scholarships for qualified individuals.

我不知道你是否知道奖学金和助学金的区别。

赞同你中国要自强的观点，但别把问题的角度提得太高，老老实实做自己的工作，做一个合格的螺丝钉，机器就能好好运作。比如我厌恶日本人，但人家的确比我们强大，有好多东西不得不先学习，好的习惯不得不养成。你要引用历史的话，欧洲的发展源自于一次又一次的革新，日本的崛起也是源自于明治维新，包括周朝、秦朝的崛起也源自于阿拉伯国家把新的科技引入到中国。不如别人的地方是需要我们虚心引入学习再超越的。小日本当年不就是在唐朝的时候一批批地向中国人求学、请老师的么？

要想成功是要耐得住的，盲目的冒进、自大，后果很严重。:-)

题外话：你提到了汉朝驱赶了匈奴，知道给欧洲带来了什么影响么？哈哈。