Connect with us

Business

Does college offer a return on investment? ‘It’s front of mind for universities today in a way that it was not necessarily 15, 20 years ago’

Published

on



For a generation of young Americans, choosing where to go to college — or whether to go at all — has become a complex calculation of costs and benefits that often revolves around a single question: Is the degree worth its price?

Public confidence in higher education has plummeted in recent years amid high tuition prices, skyrocketing student loans and a dismal job market — plus ideological concerns from conservatives. Now, colleges are scrambling to prove their value to students.

Borrowed from the business world, the term “return on investment” has been plastered on college advertisements across the U.S. A battery of new rankings grade campuses on the financial benefits they deliver. States such as Colorado have started publishing yearly reports on the monetary payoff of college, and Texas now factors it into calculations for how much taxpayer money goes to community colleges.

“Students are becoming more aware of the times when college doesn’t pay off,” said Preston Cooper, who has studied college ROI at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. “It’s front of mind for universities today in a way that it was not necessarily 15, 20 years ago.”

Most bachelor’s degrees are still worth it

A wide body of research indicates a bachelor’s degree still pays off, at least on average and in the long run. Yet there’s growing recognition that not all degrees lead to a good salary, and even some that seem like a good bet are becoming riskier as graduates face one of the toughest job markets in years.

A new analysis released Thursday by the Strada Education Foundation finds 70% of recent public university graduates can expect a positive return within 10 years — meaning their earnings over a decade will exceed that of a typical high school graduate by an amount greater than the cost of their degree. Yet it varies by state, from 53% in North Dakota to 82% in Washington, D.C. States where college is more affordable have fared better, the report says.

It’s a critical issue for families who wonder how college tuition prices could ever pay off, said Emilia Mattucci, a high school counselor at East Allegheny schools, near Pittsburgh. More than two-thirds of her school’s students come from low-income families, and many aren’t willing to take on the level of debt that past generations accepted.

Instead, more are heading to technical schools or the trades and passing on four-year universities, she said.

“A lot of families are just saying they can’t afford it, or they don’t want to go into debt for years and years and years,” she said.

Education Secretary Linda McMahon has been among those questioning the need for a four-year degree. Speaking at the Reagan Institute think tank in September, McMahon praised programs that prepare students for careers right out of high school.

“I’m not saying kids shouldn’t go to college,” she said. “I’m just saying all kids don’t have to go in order to be successful.”

Lowering college tuition and improving graduate earnings

American higher education has been grappling with both sides of the ROI equation — tuition costs and graduate earnings. It’s becoming even more important as colleges compete for decreasing numbers of college-age students as a result of falling birth rates.

Tuition rates have stayed flat on many campuses in recent years to address affordability concerns, and many private colleges have lowered their sticker prices in an effort to better reflect the cost most students actually pay after factoring in financial aid.

The other part of the equation — making sure graduates land good jobs — is more complicated.

A group of college presidents recently met at Gallup’s Washington headquarters to study public polling on higher education. One of the chief reasons for flagging confidence is a perception that colleges aren’t giving graduates the skills employers need, said Kevin Guskiewicz, president of Michigan State University, one of the leaders at the meeting.

“We’re trying to get out in front of that,” he said.

The issue has been a priority for Guskiewicz since he arrived on campus last year. He gathered a council of Michigan business leaders to identify skills that graduates will need for jobs, from agriculture to banking. The goal is to mold degree programs to the job market’s needs and to get students internships and work experience that can lead to a job.

A disconnect with the job market

Bridging the gap to the job market has been a persistent struggle for U.S. colleges, said Matt Sigelman, president of the Burning Glass Institute, a think tank that studies the workforce. Last year the institute, partnering with Strada researchers, found 52% of recent college graduates were in jobs that didn’t require a degree. Even higher-demand fields, such as education and nursing, had large numbers of graduates in that situation.

“No programs are immune, and no schools are immune,” Sigelman said.

The federal government has been trying to fix the problem for decades, going back to President Barack Obama’s administration. A federal rule first established in 2011 aimed to cut federal money to college programs that leave graduates with low earnings, though it primarily targeted for-profit colleges.

A Republican reconciliation bill passed this year takes a wider view, requiring most colleges to hit earnings standards to be eligible for federal funding. The goal is to make sure college graduates end up earning more than those without a degree.

Others see transparency as a key solution.

For decades, students had little way to know whether graduates of specific degree programs were landing good jobs after college. That started to change with the College Scorecard in 2015, a federal website that shares broad earnings outcomes for college programs. More recently, bipartisan legislation in Congress has sought to give the public even more detailed data.

Lawmakers in North Carolina ordered a 2023 study on the financial return for degrees across the state’s public universities. It found that 93% produced a positive return, meaning graduates were expected to earn more over their lives than someone without a similar degree.

The data is available to the public, showing, for example, that undergraduate degrees in applied math and business tend to have high returns at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, while graduate degrees in psychology and foreign languages often don’t.

Colleges are belatedly realizing how important that kind of data is to students and their families, said Lee Roberts, chancellor of UNC-Chapel Hill, in an interview.

“In uncertain times, students are even more focused — I would say rightly so — on what their job prospects are going to be,” he added. “So I think colleges and universities really owe students and their families this data.”

___

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Borrowing by AI companies represents a ‘mounting potential threat to the financial system’: Zandi

Published

on



Tech companies are issuing more debt now than before the dot-com crash as a rapid infrastructure buildout unfolds in the AI boom, Moody’s Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi said in a LinkedInpost on Sunday.

Even after adjusting for inflation, big tech companies are issuing more bonds than during the late 1990s. And the companies aren’t just refinancing existing debt—they’re taking on additional debt.

“While the increasingly aggressive (and creative) borrowing by AI companies won’t be their downfall, if they do fall short of investors’ expectations and their stock prices suffer, their debts could quickly become a problem,” Zandi wrote. 

“Borrowing by AI companies should be on the radar screen as a mounting potential threat to the financial system and broader economy.”

The 10 largest AI companies, including Meta, Amazon, Nvidia and Alphabet, will issue more than $120 billion this year, Zandi said in a LinkedIn analysis last week.

And this time is different from dot-com era debt issuance, as internet companies back then didn’t have a lot of debt, he pointed out. Instead, they were funded by stocks and venture capital.

“That’s not the case with the AI boom,” Zandi added.

Even though hyperscalers like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft could pay for the AI buildout with their profits, bond issuance is the “cheapest and cleanest” way to finance an infrastructure buildout of this scale, which will likely last more than a decade and be worth trillions of dollars, Shay Boloor, chief market strategist at Futurum Equities, told Fortune.

“These companies are a lot more comfortable issuing 10- to 40-year papers, for example, at very low spreads, because the market now views them as quasi-utility names—because they’re building all this infrastructure—not just a pure tech company anymore,” Boloor said.

He added that in the previous six months, tech companies have shown “proof in the pudding” that future demand for AI is booming.

Despite AI bubble concerns, Nvidia delivered a strong earnings report for its third quarter last month, saying its AI data center revenue increased by 66% from last year. 

Still, critics warn that the buildout may not keep up with how rapidly AI is developing.

Computer hardware, which makes up most AI data centers’ cost, may be more susceptible to becoming obsolete and replaced by more advanced technology during the AI boom as opposed to wireless and internet buildouts, much of which still runs today, George Calhoun, professor and director of the Hanlon Financial Systems Center at Stevens Institute of Technology, told Fortune.

“The cycle of innovation in the chip industry is much faster than for wireless technology or fiber optics,” he said explained. “There is a real risk that much of that hardware may become competitively disadvantaged by newer technologies in a much shorter timeframe,” before being fully paid off.

At the same time, big players in the AI boom—namely OpenAI—do not have the profits currently to cushion their massive investments at the moment, increasing their risk, Calhoun said.

“If OpenAI fails, the snowball effect of that is gonna be substantial,” Futuruum Equities’ Boloor said. Though larger tech companies won’t likely be impacted much by a potential OpenAI bust, companies that largely rely on its business like Oracle could, he added.

Still, Boloor is optimistic about the AI buildout, saying the main bottleneck for its success is U.S. energy capacity.

“I think that the risk is that trillions of dollars of AI capacity gets built faster than the North American grid can support it, which could slow realization,” he warned. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

International deals race forward to end China’s hold on critical minerals since US can’t do it alone

Published

on



Pini Althaus saw the signs. In 2023, he left the company he founded, USA Rare Earth, to develop critical minerals mining and processing projects in central Asia, after realizing that the U.S. will need all the international help it can get to end China’s supply chain dominance.

“I realized we only have a handful of large critical minerals projects that were going into production between now and 2030,” Althaus, chairman and CEO of Cove Capital, told Fortune. “I understood that we’re going to have to supplement the United States critical minerals supply chain with materials coming in from our allied and friendly countries.”

Over a series of decades, China built up its stranglehold on much of the world’s critical minerals supply chains, including the 17 rare earths, used to make virtually all kinds of high-performance magnets and parts for vehicles, computers, power generation, military defense, and more. The rest of the world deferred to Beijing in exchange for cheap prices.

Amid an ongoing tariff war with the U.S.—and a temporary truce—the Trump administration is racing to build up domestic mining and processing capabilities, while also developing the global partnerships necessary to eventually undermine China, which controls 90% of the world’s rare earths refining.

In October, Trump inked a deal with Australia for both countries to invest $3 billion in critical minerals projects by mid-2026. Australia is home to the largest publicly traded critical minerals miner in the world, Lynas Rare Earths. Trump then signed a series of bilateral critical minerals deals in eastern and southeastern Asia, including Japan, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Cambodia. The U.S. also has new deals with Ukraine, Argentina, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Kazakhstan, and more.

Althaus is specifically developing mining and processing facilities for tungsten—a heat-resistant metal used in electronics and military equipment—and rare earths in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. He sees the most potential in former Soviet Union nations in central Asia.

“The Soviets spent many decades exploring and developing mines. Many of their databases have been left and are quite meticulous,” Althaus said. “This gives companies looking to develop projects in central Asia a jumpstart compared to what would be here in the United States, where most of the opportunities are greenfield—very early stages, very high risk, and very little appetite for investment.”

In November, the Ex-Im Bank offered Cove Capital a $900 million financing letter of interest for the $1.1 billion Kazakh tungsten projects. A separate letter of interest was received from the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation.

Jeff Dickerson, principal advisor for Rystad Energy research firm, said only a long-term, coordinated effort—essentially a “wartime” approach—both domestically and with international partnerships can lead to success. But it cannot be done without new projects with foreign allies. “The challenge is that the U.S. doesn’t have a strong pipeline of mature mineral projects that are shovel ready,” he said. 

“The cycle of China extracting concessions on the back of mineral geopolitics and weakening the U.S. strategic negotiating position will likely continue without a coordinated, long-term response during the current moment of heightened attention to critical minerals,” Dickerson said, questioning whether the U.S. will maintain a concerted focus for years to come.

New emphasis

The Trump administration is increasingly making financial partnerships with critical minerals developers—even becoming a majority shareholder of U.S. rare earths miner MP Materials—and offering deals for floor-pricing mechanisms to offset China’s recurring dumping practices that aim to eliminate competition.

A native Australian turned New Yorker, Althaus is, naturally, a big fan of this approach. Chinese price dumping has crippled global competition and scared away potential investors, he said.

“By providing a price floor, it removes the question marks; it removes the instability; it removes the most significant risk in funding a project that’s about to go into production,” Althaus said. “It creates a predictability where you can take geology all the way through to profitability. I think there should be a global effort to create transparent markets and prices for the key critical minerals.”

Critical minerals are increasingly included in U.S. negotiations for all foreign deals. In the tariff agreement with Indonesia, for instance, the Asian nation agreed to lift export bans on nickel. The White House leveraged its military support for Ukraine by demanding the rights to its critical minerals in return. And the recent U.S. bailout of Argentina included a partnership on critical minerals mining.

In addition to its strategic defense location, rare earths are even a reason Trump continues to show interest in annexing Greenland from Denmark.

Veteran geologist Greg Barnes, who founded the massive Tanbreez mining project, which remains in development, briefed Trump at the White House during his first presidential term. This year, Critical Metals acquired 92.5% ownership of the Tanbreez project.

Critical Metals CEO Tony Sage is keen to supply the U.S. with desired rare earths, and the company recently received a letter of intent for a $120 million Ex-Im Bank loan. The goal is to start construction by the end of 2026.

“There’s an absolute need to make sure that more than 50% of the supply of these heavy rare earths come from outside of China—mined and processed outside of China,” Sage told Fortune.

Regardless of any long-shot annexation bids, Sage said Greenland can and should be a key ally to the U.S. for critical minerals. “They definitely don’t want to be part of the U.S., but I think they’ll be pro-U.S.,” he said.

For his part, Althaus said he sees all the international deals as progress, and not as competition for his Cove Capital.

“I think it’s a positive, and I think we’ll start to see a lot more happen in the coming months in terms of the U.S. and collaboration with other countries.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Amazon’s new Alexa aims to detangle chaos in the household, like whether someone fed the dog

Published

on



It’s 10 p.m. after a long day when you walk in the door and wonder aloud: “Did anyone feed the dog? Who fed the dog,” Panos Panay says he calls out to his family of six.

Turns out, nobody fed the dog and so all the kids “scatter to their corners,” he told Fortune’s Brainstorm AI audience in San Francisco on Monday. 

The senior vice president of devices and services at Amazon says the new generative AI-powered Alexa+, which runs on Echo hardware and can integrate with other devices like Amazon’s Ring security cameras, aims to ease the constant mental load in a household: remembering whether the pets ate, restaurants each family member pitched and saw vetoed, and regular grocery orders. The idea is to have “ambient” artificial intelligence around your house so that devices can assist in tasks, chores, and other household command center issues, said Panay.

The new Alexa+ is much more conversational, Panay said, and you no longer have to pronounce everything perfectly and discretely in order for it (or her, as Panay refers to the virtual assistant) to understand you.

“She’s the best DJ on the planet, in my opinion,” said Panay. “You have a personal shopper, you have a butler, you have a personal assistant, you have your home manager. Different people use Alexa for different things, and now she’s pretty much supercharged,” Panay said.

In addition to confirming that the dogs have not been fed, Panay said he used Alexa+ on Sunday night to head off another age-old debate: where the family should go for dinner. Both dinner decisions and pet chores are “classic fight[s] in my house,” Panay told the Brainstorm AI audience.

His youngest had previously suggested a few restaurants she wanted to visit for a quick bite and hadn’t yet been to, and Panay asked Alexa to remind them which ones his daughter suggested specifically. It was a sushi joint and she enjoyed it, Panay said. That type of ambient listening and assistance with debate is the point, he said, and stops people needing to pull out their phones and start typing and scrolling for information.   

From there, Panay said Alexa can also take more concrete actions like making a reservation on dining platform OpenTable, ordering delivery on nights in, getting an Uber, and handling home issues such as telling you how many packages were delivered or the number of guests who stopped by. Panay said Amazon has more than 150 partners to aid in these integrations, although there is work ahead to get more partners on board, he added.  

Thus far, Alexa+ has been rolled out to early-access users and this week the product is available to those on a lengthy waitlist, said Panay, and it’s been boosted by Amazon’s advertising. This week, the product is being released to anyone with an Echo device. The business monetization model involves “flywheels” from Amazon’s $2.4 trillion retail ecosystem, particularly around shopping for clothes, groceries, and other consumer items. “If you’re shopping on the grocery list and order groceries often enough, Alexa knows what you’re doing, and ultimately, can just order ahead of time for you moving forward,” he said.

Ultimately, Panay envisions users wanting “your assistant everywhere you go” because “the more it understands about you, the more informed it is, the better it can serve your needs.” And while Panay said there will be continued innovation from Amazon in this space, he refused to reveal any specific products. He said Amazon has a “lab full of ideas,” but most won’t make it out of that lab. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.