Does anyone else think ETS is obscene?

  • Thread starter tenparsecs
  • Start date
In summary, ETS charges $160 to take the general exam, and if you need to send your scores to more than 4 institutions, you will pay $23 per institution.
  • #1
tenparsecs
42
0
The testing monopoly that is ETS charges $160 to take the general exam. On top of that, if you need to send you scores to more than 4 institutions, be prepared to pay $23 per institution. That's right... $23 to mail a slip of paper from a computer database, and there's no quantity discount.

I'm curious why this monopoly is allowed to charge what it charges, with no competition.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
tenparsecs said:
I'm curious why this monopoly is allowed to charge what it charges, with no competition.

I think you just answered your own question.
 
  • #3
Pengwuino said:
I think you just answered your own question.

Monopolies are suppose to be regulated or competition is suppose to be introduced. So no, I did not answer my own question.
 
  • #4
That's a naive assumption.

Often a monopoly is the most efficient configuration of firms. This can occur when either the entry cost is high, the profits low, or especially in economies of scale, where returns increase much faster than costs of expanding.

Regulation is hard to do correctly. The most obvious types of regulation (taxing expansion, breaking up firms, etc) often lead to the monopoly acting even more greedily, and worse, refusing to improve its products because it would only benefit the consumer.

But anyway, yeah, **** ETS.
 
  • #5
ETS is ETS.org?
 
  • #6
Are these the same guys as the CollegeBoard? SAT / AP etc? If so, I'd say that's definitely a monopoly. And yes, it is quite obscene to charge that much. As I remember, even the AP graders are volunteers, so it shouldn't cost that much per test as it does. And who does the GRE? Isn't that ETS too? There's no escape...
 
  • #7
First and foremost, ETS does have competition, most notably ACT Inc. ACT successfully competes against ETS in the much larger college entrance exam market. If they wanted to compete in the grad market, they certainly have the ability and resources. I suspect that they have concluded they will lose too much money at it: in the last decade or so ETS has reduced the number of subject tests from 17 to 8.

Second, ETS is a non-profit, which means that every dime that goes in and goes out is accounted for - IRS Form 990 lists it all. In 2008, they took in $835M in "program services revenue" - i.e. fees for tests, reports, etc. In that same time, they spent $889M on "functional expenses" - i.e. producing tests, reports etc. One might argue that the fee structure doesn't match the expense structure - i.e. maybe they could charge $5 per report, but then charge $250 per test.
 
  • #8
Yes, I would agree.

But, it remains that these costs are still substantial amounts to the student population, profit or non profit.

I think, instead (maybe this is too naive) that any college requiring SATs or SAT IIs, GREs, or any other ETS product should pay ETS a certain amount to fund these tests. But then, that's silly because the schools will just pass off that amount in tuition hikes and what not.

EDIT: I also think there may be inefficiencies in ETS driving these prices?
 
  • #9
I think you should just suck it up.. there are just certain things in life you have to live with. For example, $50-$100 just to apply to a university?? It's not even a test or service!

Then you can look outside of acedemia... wedding dresses cost how much? Why do I have to pay so many people commissions if I buy a house? There are products/services in life that have such a small market or are used so infrequently that they practically are forced to charge 'obscene' amounts or they couldn't exist.
 
  • #10
Vanadium 50 said:
One might argue that the fee structure doesn't match the expense structure - i.e. maybe they could charge $5 per report, but then charge $250 per test.

And to immediately shoot down this argument if one were to make it... imagine if you wanted to retake the test! I would imagine the number of people who take the test more then once far outnumbers the number of people who send their scores to over 4 institutions. Even though an equivalent increase in the test cost would probably be minor, I think you annoy fewer people with just a high extra report cost.
 
  • #11
Pengwuino said:
there are just certain things in life you have to live with. For example, $50-$100 just to apply to a university??

Yeah, its well within anyone's God-given capitalist right to charge whatever they want for their products. But just because you can charge exorbitant amounts, should you?

To do so, is obscene. At least that's my interpretation of the OP's mind.

Yeah, it costs a lot to apply to schools, and for ETS testing, but should it unnecessarily be so?
 
  • #12
Pengwuino said:
I think you should just suck it up.. there are just certain things in life you have to live with. For example, $50-$100 just to apply to a university?? It's not even a test or service!

Admissions needs their salaries too :)

From the perspective of a consumer of these tests, I quite agree it's overly expensive. I've been looking into those actuary tests -- about $200 for each! However, I neither know the details of the industry nor have the power to change anything, so the only choice I have is to suck it up and hope later profits make up for the initial investment.
 
  • #13
Evil Testing Serpent :)
 
  • #14
Pengwuino said:
I think you should just suck it up.. there are just certain things in life you have to live with.

Ha, I think the complete opposite. Its the consumers responsibility to advocate for themselves. You shouldn't just bend over and take it - you should be mad, you should voice your discontent, you should do everything you can to spite and deny the corporation your money. The best regulation for a free market is a vigilant consumer, something we very much lack unfortunately. I would suggest losing the 'just deal with it' attitude and stand up for yourself, even if it is in a small way.
 
  • #15
Academic said:
Ha, I think the complete opposite. Its the consumers responsibility to advocate for themselves. You shouldn't just bend over and take it - you should be mad, you should voice your discontent, you should do everything you can to spite and deny the corporation your money. The best regulation for a free market is a vigilant consumer, something we very much lack unfortunately. I would suggest losing the 'just deal with it' attitude and stand up for yourself, even if it is in a small way.

While I love your sense of consumerism... it's still a non-profit, akin to making demands at your local soup kitchen.
 
  • #16
I wouldn't think non-profit status alone makes it ok, or equivalent to a soup kitchen. Though in this case I don't know.
 
  • #17
Academic, you are free to include with your application that you object to paying this much money on principle and refuse to take the test. The university is free to react to this statement any way it wants to - positively or negatively.
 
  • #18
Haha. That'd be risky business.
 
  • #19
Freedom is a beautiful thing.
 
  • #20
I really don't think non-profit exists, except on paper.

As far commenting to an admissions committee about the unfairness of the GRE testing fee, I'd recommend against that. Structured education is not a brave enterprise. It exists for those that like lines, and for those that enjoy staying between said lines.

If you're someone that likes to stir the pot, fight injustice, and tear down illusions, then put away any ideas about being accepted by the masses.
 
  • #21
Vanadium 50 said:
Academic, you are free to include with your application that you object to paying this much money on principle and refuse to take the test. The university is free to react to this statement any way it wants to - positively or negatively.

Certainly there are better ways to go about it than that. How about suggesting to committee at our own schools that they only require official scores after being accepted? Until then a photo copy works. Some schools do that, the school I choose does. (along with unofficial transcripts until accepted)
 
  • #22
That doesn't solve the problem of the cost of the test. And, as has been pointed out before, shifting revenues away from the reports may shift them towards the test itself.

The fundamental problem is something that nobody here wants to accept - according to their tax statements, it costs ETS slightly more to operate their test-taking business than they collect in test fees.
 
  • #23
Academic said:
Certainly there are better ways to go about it than that. How about suggesting to committee at our own schools that they only require official scores after being accepted? Until then a photo copy works. Some schools do that, the school I choose does. (along with unofficial transcripts until accepted)

Then they would just have to charge more per report because you'd be sending fewer of them. What part of non-profit are you not understanding? They have no room to charge less.

If you're balking at the fees for admission tests, wait until you see the cost of books in college. You pay all these fees now with the expectation that once you have a degree you can get a better job and earn more to make up for it than if you never attended college.

The real cost is in writing and validating the test. They probably also pay a lot to rent the facilities where the tests are administered. Then they need to maintain the secure databases, servers, and computers for administering the tests. This requires hardware and staff.
 
  • #24
Tedjn said:
I've been looking into those actuary tests -- about $200 for each!

Super cheap compared to the later ones. . .

Thankfully when you're employed your employer will cover it.
 
  • #25
Moonbear said:
Then they would just have to charge more per report because you'd be sending fewer of them. What part of non-profit are you not understanding? They have no room to charge less.

This is not at all what non-profit means. Non-profit organizations can have tons of excess cash available to them
 
  • #26
Office_Shredder said:
This is not at all what non-profit means. Non-profit organizations can have tons of excess cash available to them

Sometimes they can, sometimes they can't. In any case, if they have excess cash, they've typically chosen to do so, so they'll act as Moonbear suggested, increasing price to adjust for lower volume.
 

1. Why do some people think ETS is obscene?

Some people think ETS (Environmental Tobacco Smoke) is obscene because it contains harmful chemicals and toxins that can negatively impact the health of those who are exposed to it.

2. Is there any scientific evidence to support the claim that ETS is obscene?

Yes, there is a significant amount of scientific evidence that shows the harmful effects of ETS on both smokers and non-smokers. This includes increased risks of respiratory illnesses, cardiovascular disease, and cancer.

3. Is ETS more harmful than smoking itself?

No, smoking is still considered more harmful than ETS. However, ETS exposure can still have serious health consequences, especially for those with pre-existing conditions or those who are exposed to it for long periods of time.

4. How does ETS affect non-smokers?

Non-smokers who are exposed to ETS can experience similar health risks as smokers, including respiratory issues, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. They may also experience irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, as well as headaches and dizziness.

5. What can be done to reduce the harm of ETS?

The most effective way to reduce the harm of ETS is to eliminate smoking in public places and to create smoke-free environments. Additionally, quitting smoking is the best way to protect oneself and others from the harmful effects of ETS.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
25
Views
7K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Back
Top