|
|
FOR-PROFIT EDUCATION INDUSTRY US 1987 SIC: 8221 - Colleges
and Universities US 1987 SIC: 8229 - Schools and
Educational Services Industry: Schools
Featured
Companies: Apollo Group, Inc. Career Education
Corporation Corinthian Colleges, Inc. Strayer Education,
Inc. Sylvan Learning Systems, Inc.
Channon Arteman Meg
Burger Carissa Holler Eric
Sizemore | ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
INDUSTRY OVERVIEW
The For-Profit Education industry ("For-Profit") is
one of the most rapidly growing industries. It is an industry that, as a
whole, has seen significant, and in individual cases astronomical profit
margins in the past three years and whose future holds financial promise.
Schools types include vocational, technical and traditional degree
programs. Apollo Group, Inc. ("Apollo"), Career Education Corporation
("Career Education"), Corinthian Colleges, Inc. ("Corinthian"), Strayer
Education, Inc. ("Strayer") and Sylvan Learning Systems, Inc. ("Sylvan")
are among the industries top participants. Their business structures vary
greatly from a combination of online and brick-and-mortar schools to
purely one or the other. Likewise, their curricula vary greatly, offering
undergraduate, graduate and doctoral programs in the health sciences,
business Administration, Technical Professions and traditional
disciplines. "[P]ostsecondary education is an approximately $31.5 billion
industry in the U.S., with approximately 15.6 million students obtaining
some form of postsecondary education." According to the Department of
Education, "the number of students within the postsecondary education
industry is expected to grow by 15%-23% to approximately 17.7-18.8 million
students by 2013" [NCES]. While the for-profit education industry only
comprises less than 2% of this burgeoning market, the potential for growth
is phenomenal. Market analysts project that once all of the 2003 earnings
reports are filed, the average profit margin for the for-profit sector
will be 20%. Most analysts are basing this on U.S. market alone; the
international market and opportunities are even greater. This market has
flourished not necessarily in spite of, but in some ways because of the
sluggish economy and unemployment. Many workers who lost their jobs in the
1990's needed to retrain to market themselves. At the same time older Baby
Boomers are entering retirement and creating professional job openings
faster than the traditional institutions can graduate a backfill. The
younger Baby Boomers' "echo-boom" children are also reaching college age.
Minorities and first-generation Americans are realizing that
post-secondary education is fundamental to financial security. The
for-profit market has specifically focused on these needs. Most
institutions provide training and education that is specifically aligned
with the skills and education needed in the current business environment.
FEATURED
COMPANIES
Apollo Group, Inc. (NASD: APOL) 4615 East Elwood
Street Phoenix, AZ 85040 800-990-APOL | 480-966-5394 480-379-3503
Fax
Apollo Group is the
largest for-profit education company in the industry. It enrolls
approximately 200,100 students and owns 191 physical campuses in addition
to its online "campus." It conducts its education business through four
subsidiaries: University of Phoenix (including University of Phoenix
Online), Institute for Professional Development, College for Financial
Planning, and Western International University. In addition, Western
International University is preparing to launch Axia College, a college
designed to target the 18-24 year old market. Apollo was founded in 1973
and University of Phoenix in 1976. University of Phoenix was created in
response to a growing need for alternative education for working adults.
Apollo, in addition to most recently being named #48 in BusinessWeek's Top
50 companies of the S&P 500, lays claim to a score of other
accomplishments.
www.apollogrp.com
Career Education
Corporation (NASD: CECO) 2895 Greenspoint Parkway Suite
600 Hoffman Estates, IL 60195 847-781-3600 847-781-3610
FAX
Career Education was founded in 1994 and operates 78
campuses in the United States, Canada, France, the UK, and the United Arab
Emirates. Among degrees offered are doctoral, masters, bachelors,
associates, and diploma degrees. Career Education operates under two
different structures: Universities Group and Online Education Group. Their
curricula are diverse in nature, offering students degrees in business
studies, culinary arts, information technology, and visual communications
and design technologies. Its student population tops 83,000 and its
revenue has grown an average of over 30% a year since its inception.
www.careered.com
Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (NASD: COCO) 6 Hutton
Centre Drive Suite 400 Santa Ana, CA 92702 (717)
427-3000 (717) 427-5111 FAX
Corinthian Colleges, Inc. was founded in 1995 and
went public in 1999. It operates its training centers and universities in
21 states and 7 Canadian provinces serving over 52,000 students. Its
degree programs stretch from masters to diploma programs in a wide variety
of fields such as healthcare, business, and information technology. In
addition to its 133 campuses and 17 training centers, Corinthian provides
the opportunity to receive any of their degrees via their online campus.
Corinthian has been actively expanding their physical presence, adding an
average of 8 new campuses per year.
www.cci.edu
Strayer Education (NASD: STRA) 1100 Wilson
Boulevard Suite 2500 Arlington, VA
22209 703-247-2500
Strayer,
while smaller in size to many of the other featured companies, has a large
foothold in the east coast. It owns 27 campuses in Maryland, North
Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and
Washington, D.C. in addition to its courses online. Students are able to
receive their undergraduate or graduate degree in all of the traditional
disciplines or gain specialized knowledge in a 6- to 12-course certificate
or diploma program. Strayer's history dates back to 1892 with the
inception of Strayer Business College of Baltimore City. Since 1973 it has
been accredited by numerous accrediting agencies and states and offered
its first online course in 1996. It enrolls over 20,000 students
throughout its 27 campuses and online learning centers, of which 91% claim
full time employment immediately after graduation.
www.strayer.edu
Sylvan Learning Systems (NASD: SLVN) 1001
Fleet Street Baltimore, MD 21202 Baltimore City
County 410-843-8000 410-843-8717 FAX
Sylvan offers education programs through two
separate business segments: Campus-Based and Online Higher Education.
Founded in 1979 in Portland, OR, it now lays claim to locations throughout
the United States, Europe, South America and Central America. Its 115,000
students have the opportunity to earn bachelors, masters, and doctoral
degrees in business, law, education, engineering, information technology,
healthcare, hospitality and a plethora of other traditional programs.
Offering education services through on-campus options and its innovative
online portals, its annual compounded growth rate over the past three
years has exceeded 60%.
www.sylvan.net

THREAT OF NEW ENTRANTS Overall Assessment: A medium force. The growth
rate over the past 3 years has been phenomenal and offsets any debt
incurred in start-up costs.
Government Regulation Each school must be accredited by the United States
Department of Education; additional state-level accreditation is necessary
but few barriers have existed in gaining such accreditation. The
for-profit industry strongly supports H.R. 3311 Affordability in Higher
Education Act of 2003, Title III-Transfer of Credit. This legislation will
ensure that any higher education institute accredited by the U.S.
Department of Education will allow transfer of student credits received to
other accredited universities. (www.congress.com). Due to less than
favorable opinions of many for-profit institutes held by non-profit
universities, H.R. 3311 is paramount for for-profit reputation, which
directly influences enrollment and thus profits.
Online Education Online degree programs have grown rapidly, in some
cases, as with Strayer, online students increased from 2003 to 2004 by
29.2% while the company saw a decrease of over 7% in their on-campus
student enrollment [Bisbee-Lehman, 2004]. Such programs are low in cost
and high in revenue return thus allowing new competitors a low risk, low
capital investment in exchange for high returns. The number of students
choosing online degree programs is directly proportional to longer, more
intense, high demand work weeks and schedules that U.S. companies are
placing on their employees. "The Department of Education (DOE) estimates
that the number of degree-seeking students taking online courses will grow
at a compound rate of 33% per year during the next several years."
According to a recent DOE study of online education, during the 2000-2001
academic year, enrollment in college-level, credit-granting, distance
education courses totaled 2.9 million. Due to high returns in this segment
of the industry, companies are pouring large amounts of capital into
improvements of these systems in order to sustain and grow their
enrollment rates. For example, Sylvan's "Online Higher Education" (OHE)
"has spent considerable time automating and streamlining much of the
infrastructure and systems that underlie [its] programs, but especially
those at Walden and NTU. This should provide opportunities for better
enrollment marketing and management, better (and cheaper) course delivery,
tighter controls and satisfied students (better retention)" [Credit Suisse
First Boston].
The National Economy Poor nationwide economic conditions are favorable for
existing companies and provide open doors for new entrants. "Over the past
three decades enrollment growth in post-secondary institutions in the US
has been directly related to changes in unemployment rate" [Merwitz-MSDW,
2003].
|
|
Students
are going back to school in droves due to lack of jobs and the
pressure for more technical and educational expertise required by
their current jobs. They are willing to pay the increased tuition
rates being dictated by for-profit universities. Strayer, for
example, has increased their full-time undergraduate tuition by $22
per credit hour (one class being equal to 4.5 credit hours) and
nearly $29 for graduate courses from 2001 to 2003 [Cowan-Jeffereies,
2004]. |
International Market The international market is by far one of the widest
doors open. While schools like Sylvan and Career Education have begun to
permeate this market by concentrating their acquisition focus in Europe
and Central America in what was once termed "a fuzzy strategy" by analysts
at Think Equity, the focus those companies have taken has proven more than
fruitful. In fact "Sylvan generates approximately 50% of its revenue from
its campuses in Chile and Mexico, and as the company integrates its recent
acquisition of UNAB (a Chilean university), we expect that total to rise
to closer to 60% [MSDW, 11/6/03]. Morgan Stanley analysts go further to
outline the international conditions and demographics that will fuel this
exciting market growth opportunity. "We expect the schools in these
regions to benefit from the growing size of the college aged population
cohort...both Chile and Mexico teenage populations are much larger than
their populations aged 20-24" [MSDW, 11/6/03].

Government
Financing While government
accreditation and regulation provides a large amount of money to
for-profit education corporations through financial aid programs such as
FEFEL (the Federal Family Education Loan), FDL (the William D. Ford
Federal Direct Loan program), PELL (the Federal Pell Grant program), FSEOG
(the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant program), PERKINS
(the Federal Perkins Loan), and FWS (the Federal Work-Study program), the
regulation process to ensure the opportunity for their students to receive
such aid is complicated.
"To participate in the Title IV Programs (programs
listed above), an institution must be authorized to offer its programs of
instruction by the relevant agencies of the state in which it is located,
accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the DOE (Department of
Education) and certified as eligible by the DOE. The DOE will certify an
institution to participate in the Title IV Programs only after the
institution has demonstrated compliance with the provisions of the Higher
Education Act and the DOE's extensive regulations regarding institutional
eligibility. An institution must also demonstrate its compliance with
these requirements to the DOE on an ongoing basis...The substantial amount
of federal funds disbursed through the Title IV Programs, the large
numbers of students and institutions participating in those programs, and
instances of fraud, waste, and abuse by some schools and students in the
past have caused the U.S. Congress to require the DOE to increase its
level of regulatory oversight" [Career Education 10K].
In addition, the U.S. Congress must review and
reauthorize the Higher Education Act every six years, a process that
ultimately changes the face of the legislation, often reducing or
increasing regulation that can be either positive or negative for the
growth strategy and overall revenues of for-profit companies. As a result,
new entering companies must assess the risk that relying on funds from the
U.S. government, via their students, entails. "Regulations adopted in
recent years have tightened standards for educational content, established
strict standards for student loan default rates, required intensified
scrutiny by state education agencies and accrediting agencies, and created
more stringent standards for the evaluation of an institution's financial
responsibility and administrative capability. As a result, some
career-oriented schools have been forced to close because they lacked
sufficient quality or financial resources or could not manage the
increased regulatory burden" [Career Education 10K].
Non-Profit Higher
Education For-profits are competing
with the community colleges and not-for-profit schools for the 2.8 million
new prospective postsecondary students who are emerging out of U.S. high
schools [Career Education 10K]. Such competition can be looked at in two
ways. First, competition within the marketplace is good. Competition
supports and encourages new growth strategy and balances a multitude of
financial forces within in the industry that keep profits stable and
increasing at a comfortable rate. Second, while this competition does
exist, the for-profit industry has a unique curriculum and structure
position to target and market to the demographic groups unable to
participate in the traditional classroom.
In addition, many of these companies offer curricula
in the highest growing market professions such as healthcare, business
administration, and technical programs. Corinthian Colleges, for example,
has positioned itself as a leading healthcare program institution. Two out
of Corinthian's five school divisions are primarily focused on the
healthcare professions. Corinthian offers diploma programs in allied
health through Corinthian Schools, Inc. Likewise, Rhodes Colleges, Inc.
(another division of Corinthian) specializes in "business, allied health,
information technology and criminal justice" [www.cci.edu]. Career
Education Corporation offers "doctoral degree, master's degree, bachelor's
degree, associate degree and diploma programs in the career-oriented
disciplines of visual communication and design technologies, information
technology, business studies, culinary arts and health education"
[www.careered.com], disciplines traditional universities and even
traditional community colleges either offer little in the way of or do not
offer at all.
A study done by the Hudson Institute and published
in its comprehensive report, "Workforce 2020," found that "[c]olleges are
largely inflexible in responding to labor market demands because of
funding mechanisms and tenure systems. This lack of responsiveness to
market conditions could account for the growth in enrollment in
proprietary post-secondary schools such as ITT and DeVry...A growing
proprietary sector and programs and degrees from a small group of colleges
offered through the Internet show promise of expanding education options"
[Hudson Institute, p. 139].
Future Outlook While many of the outlined conditions demonstrate a
market wide open to prospective entrants and investors, it is also likely,
given the overall outlandish growth rate in the industry, that this market
could go dry in the next 5-10 years. With new entrants, particularly in
the online segment of the market, growing rapidly, the market may become
flooded. The industry has positioned itself such that any emerging company
only needs to establish themselves as "specialists" in a particular area
of education in order to become relatively successful. But the education
market is expansive, ever growing and always in need, and with for-profits
only comprising a total of 2% of the market thus far, the next 5-10 years
will be interesting and lucrative.
BARGAINING POWER OF SUPPLIERS Overall assessment: A medium force. For-profit
schools have thus far been able to control their supplies of teaching
labor, materials, and technology. However low barriers to entry in this
industry mean that today's suppliers may become tomorrow's
competitors.
Labor The
for-profit education sector has applied cost savings learned from the
business sector to reduce expenses related to education labor. Most
instructors are not paid to program their own classes. At Apollo Group's
University of Phoenix (UOP) a small group of faculty members standardize
the school's curriculum, then distribute the online courseware throughout
the University [Yung, 2004]. Apollo Group's faculty members usually teach
20 to 24 hours per course instead of the typical 40 because UOP students
spend many hours on group projects without faculty supervision [Yung,
2004]. These two practices taken together result in less work required
from most instructors and much lower labor costs, which results in much
higher profits for the company. According to University of Virginia
researcher David Breneman "If the typical class enrolls 20 students at
$800 tuition each, revenue equals $16,000. If the faculty member is paid
$1,600 to $2,000, that leaves at least $14,000 to cover all other costs
plus profit. So long as demand remains strong, UOP is a veritable money
machine" [Yung, 2004]. This supply of instructors, uninterested in
publishing, and willing to accept lower pay for teaching, results in a low
threat from labor suppliers with no foreseeable change in the near
future.
So far there have been no successful large-scale
labor actions, lawsuits or attempts at unionizing the for-profit
post-secondary education industry. Among occupational groups, education,
training, and library occupations had the highest unionization rates in
2003 (37.7%). Nearly two-fifths of workers in education, training, and
library occupations and in protective service occupations were union
members in 2003. Compare this overall group assessment to a less-than-6%
unionization rate for employees in private education according to the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS, 2004]. For-profit post-secondary
educators have shown few signs of forming collective bargaining units or
joining existing educators unions such as the Service Employees
International Union (SEIU) or American Federation of Teachers (AFT), as
their public sector counterparts have.
Textbooks The
for-profit post-secondary education industry is attempting to reduce its
reliance on textbook publishers, and is finding alternative learning
materials with better production efficiencies. "We contract authors and
experts to create course materials exactly to our specs. That lets us
bypass textbook publishers," according to a spokesman for Apollo Group's
University of Phoenix [Breen, 2003]. Apollo Group's brand of materials,
"rEsource," is "superior to textbooks because they include simulations,
training courses and other study aids [Yung, 2004]. "It's a beautiful,
beautiful thing," says Mark DeFusco, CEO of Vatterott College in St. Louis
and a former Apollo vice president. "rEsource is pure bottom line.
Publishers should be scared" [Yung, 2004].
In response, textbook companies are pursuing
development of online courseware. This potential threat is serious, but
without state accreditation (which would require substantial changes in
current law), this is not an immediate threat to the for-profit
post-secondary industry. Unfortunately, as noted in the Threat of New
Entrants discussion above, the economics exemplified by the for-profit
education model present very low barriers to entry into this market.
Education services stripped bare of physical campuses, libraries and
textbooks could be easily replicated by a company with core competencies
in software or content delivery. One corporation's accredited online
course may soon be an easy substitute for another. The future
commoditization of education, as in other commodities markets, may make
brand names the chief differentiator (see Rivalry Among Existing
Competitors discussion below).
Education Software Software manufacturers subcontracted to provide online
classes may have the core competencies to distribute teaching. "A big part
of why for-profit education can be successful is economies of scale," says
Sean Gallagher, an analyst at Eduventures Inc. in Boston [Heresniak,
2002]. Online programs are a low-cost way to generate more cash because
courses, while requiring more upfront cash outlays, provide lower ongoing
costs than classroom instruction, explained UmassOnline CEO David Gray
[Qualters, 2003]. As noted above, Apollo produces its own online
curriculum materials in a product called rEsource, which standardizes
curriculum between different faculty and adds a great deal of revenue
compared with using traditional text books [Heresniak, 2002]. "Once it's
converted, you're dealing largely with updates," Gray said. "It's a very
productive medium for us to make use of in terms of revenue" [Qualters,
2003].
Course-Management Systems About 80% of all universities have a course-management
system in place, according to a 2003 survey by the California based Campus
Computing Project. Licensing fee revenues have quadrupled revenue since
2000, to $141.1 million in 2003. Sales are projected to increase another
30% this year [Davis, 2004]. The online courseware industry, according to
Eduventures' 2003 market report [Davis 2004] is dominated by: Blackboard,
WebCT, and eCollege. These three suppliers may be the source of future
competition for the for-profit post-secondary industry, since they have
built up considerable experience distributing online courseware and
managing online classrooms. Another unique advantage that these companies
have is an easy path to content creation. Blackboard actually retains the
copyrights to all materials developed and implemented using their services
[Blackboard, Terms of Agreement]. This represents an enormous pool of
classroom materials that could be used to develop educational content in
the future. As noted earlier, these courses can constitute an enormous
profit center for the companies, especially if they can enter into joint
ventures where they can further share in the profits of distribution. With
so much profit to be made, and such low barriers to entry in this market,
the threat to the for-profit industry is palpable in the medium- to
long-term.
Other Potential Education
Suppliers As stated earlier, the
for-profit education model exemplified by Apollo Group's bare bones
services present low barriers to entry in this market. The standard
economic model of production predicts that the strongest producers will
displace local or subsistence production to exclusively produce goods for
trade. There is no guarantee that the strongest education producers today
will be able to differentiate their services from up-and-comers in the
future. This "blind spot analysis" in online education content industry
shows that it is entirely possible that strong software producers such as
Microsoft could team up with high value brand name content providers, such
as Harvard or MIT (see Competitor List, Appendix), to release online
products like Anthropology 300 or "Arthur Miller on disc" [O'Meara, 2001].
To carry this scenario out even further, companies could lobby for state
legislation to ease accreditation, allowing degrees to be granted online
through even further centralized and automated networks. This scenario is
by no means imminent but this, or some similar venture, is possible in the
longer-term.
BARGAINING POWER OF BUYERS Overall assessment: A weak force. The large pool
of current and potential "buyers" (students) limits the power that any one
of them could wield against the for-profit industry.
Differentiation For-profit schools attempt to differentiate themselves
from not-for-profit schools in at least three key ways: in the types of
students that they target, in the courses they offer, and in the
convenience and accommodations they extend to their students.
Target students - As noted in the Apollo Group 10K,
"Traditional universities and colleges were designed to fulfill the
educational needs of conventional, full-time students ages 18 to 24, who
remain the primary focus of these universities and colleges." In contrast,
for-profit schools focus largely on "working adults" in age ranges beyond
that. Strayer reported that the majority of its students are "working
adults pursuing their first college degree to improve their job skills and
advance their careers," with approximately 59% of them being age 31 or
older [Strayer 10K]. Apollo reported that the age distribution of its
University of Phoenix students in the first half of 2003 was as follows:
"25 and under (16.6%); 26 to 33 (37.8%); 34 to 45 (33.5%); 46 and over
(12.1%)" [Apollo 10K], which shows a definite high proportion of students
over age 26. For its Online Higher Education business, Sylvan explicitly
targets "adult working professionals who are over 25 years old" [Sylvan
10K]. Overall among people who earned a bachelors degree in 1999-2000,
private for-profit schools were the degree-granting institutions for the
largest percentage of those who received the degree at age 25-29 (19.8%),
age 30-39 (26.4%), or age 40 or older (32.0%) [A Descriptive
Summary…].
Curriculum - In contrast to traditional
not-for-profit institutions, for-profit institutions focus largely on
providing education opportunities to improve the employability of their
student-customers. Corinthian [10K], Sylvan [10K], and Career Education
[10K] maintain relationships with members of the business community,
sometimes as formal advisory boards, to ensure that their course offerings
change to reflect the current expectations of potential employers. Apollo
even utilizes input from current employers of its students, and
incorporates employer issues in class projects [Apollo 10K].
Convenience - In contrast to traditional
not-for-profit institutions, for-profits generally maintain several
campuses, and offer courses in the evenings, on weekends, and online both
synchronously or asynchronously (on-demand), to accommodate their "working
adult" target markets. Strayer operated 27 campuses as of December 31,
2003, and noted in its 10K that approximately 90% of the courses available
through the school were offered on nights and weekends [Strayer 10K]. At
its June 30, 2003 fiscal end, Corinthian operated 125 campuses and 17
training centers year-round, with courses available throughout the day,
including nights and weekends [Corinthian 10K]. Apollo and Career
Education also maintain a substantial number of physical campuses (71
campuses and 121 learning centers at August 31, 2003 and 78 campuses at
December 31, 2003, respectively) [Apollo 10K] [Career Education 10K]. With
regard to online offerings, Strayer reported that 53% of its students
enrolled in Fall 2003 had taken at least one course online through the
school [Strayer 10K]. Corinthian offers online "all of the courses
necessary to complete an associate's and bachelor's degrees in business,
accounting, and criminal justice" [Corinthian 10K].
Concentration and Importance of
"Buyers" There are many "buyers"
(students) in the market for post-secondary education, so no one buyer
represents a substantial portion of "sales" made by for-profit education
institutions. Strayer [10K], Corinthian [10K], Apollo [10K], and Career
Education [10K] have all seen steady increases in enrollment every year
from 1999 through 2003, with total enrollments now ranging from a low of
approximately 20,000 for Strayer to over 200,000 for Apollo. Looking
ahead, the U.S. Department of Education projects that the total number of
high school graduates will increase 11% between the 2000-01 and 2012-13
academic years, and that total enrollment in degree-granting institutions
will increase between 2000 and 2013, by anywhere from 15% to 23%, to
totals ranging from 17.7 million to 18.8 million people [NCES]. This
indicates that there will continue to be a large pool of potential buyers
in the future, and no threat that significant influence may be
concentrated in the hands of only a few.
Tuition and Price Sensitivity For-profit institutions do not represent the "low-cost"
education option, and therefore will likely not gain students based on
tuition alone. In 2003, full-time attendance in pursuit of a bachelors
degree at Strayer would cost approximately $11,000 per year [Strayer 10K].
At Corinthian, the same degree would average $7,800 per year, while a
masters degree would cost on average $9,500 per year [Corinthian 10K]. At
Career Education, total cost for a completed degree could range from
$12,600 for the lowest-cost associate degree to $98,100 for the
highest-cost bachelors degree [Career Education 10K]. "Online group study"
through Apollo's University of Phoenix Online costs $440 per undergraduate
credit hour, $545 per graduate credit hour, and $620 per doctoral credit
hour [UOPX-tuition]. Finally, tuition for Sylvan schools is very complex
and varies from subsidiary to subsidiary and from country to country, but
generally ranges from an annual "low" of $1,400 for attendance at an
international "full-service" institution to a high of $65,000 for
completion of certain degrees through Sylvan's Walden subsidiary [Sylvan
10K].
Overall, for the period 2002-03, private for-profit
institutions offering less than a 4-year degree had average annual tuition
costs of $10,321, higher than either public or private not-for-profit
institutions with similar offerings. During the same period, private
for-profit institutions offering at least a 4-year degree had average
annual tuition costs of $11,439, second only to private not-for-profits.
Private for-profits had the highest tuition increases between the periods
1997-98 and 2002-03: 40.6% for those offering less than a 4-year degree
and 35.3% for those offering at least a 4-year degree [Postsecondary
Institutions in the United States…]. These examples demonstrate that
for-profit institutions cannot compete with not-for-profits on the basis
of "low-cost," and therefore must compete on program offerings and
convenience.
Perceptions of Quality To compensate for higher tuition costs, for-profit
institutions must demonstrate the quality of education provided, which
generally translates into placement in new or "better" (higher salary)
employment. There seems to be strong statistical evidence to support this
"quality" argument: people who earned a bachelors degree in 1999-2000 from
a private for-profit institution went on to earn higher salaries than
people who received their bachelors degree from any public or private
not-for-profit institution (on average, $45,668 per year for the
for-profit attendees). Further, 29.9% of the for-profit attendees were
earning $60,000 or more in the year after graduation; in contrast, only
8.1% of those who received their bachelors degree from a
doctorate-granting private not-for-profit were earning that amount; all
other types of institutions produced even smaller percentages of graduates
earning that amount [A Descriptive Summary…].
Beyond salary issues, there also seems to be some
evidence that those who attend for-profit institutions end up working in
their chosen fields, which may be a measure of job satisfaction.
Eighty-four percent of people who earned a bachelors degree in 1999-2000
from a private for-profit institution went on to work in jobs that were
"somewhat related" or "closely related" to their degree; this is a higher
percent than for any type of not-for-profit institution. In addition,
29.6% reported that they were continuing in their existing career with
their new bachelors degree; no not-for-profit institution type had similar
high marks in this area. Finally, graduates from all not-for-profit
institution types more frequently reported that the job they obtained
after graduation was just to "pay the bills"; only 23.4% (the lowest
percent) of graduates from for-profit institutions reported this result [A
Descriptive Summary…].
For-profit institutions manifest this aspect of
quality by focusing on placement, thereby providing a return on their
students' investments and creating a competitive advantage over
not-for-profit institutions. Corinthian provided a specific example of
placement success by reporting that "approximately 82% of [its] graduates
in calendar year 2002 who were 'available for placement'…were placed in a
job for which they were trained within six months after graduation"
[Corinthian 10K]. Career Education was seemingly even more successful; it
reported that "as of December 31, 2003, approximately 93% of [its]
Colleges, Schools and Universities segment graduates and 97% of [its]
Online Education Group segment graduates who were available for employment
for the academic year beginning July 1, 2002 and ended June 30, 2003, had
found employment in their fields of study, or related fields of study"
[Career Education 10K].
Marketing and Advertising As noted in the Apollo Group 10K, "Traditional
universities and colleges are also limited in their ability to market to
or provide the necessary customer service for working adult students
because it requires the development of additional administrative and
enrollment infrastructure" [Apollo 10K]. In contrast, for-profit
institutions invest substantial resources in marketing and advertising,
which serves to bias the amount of information available about
post-secondary education options in favor of for-profit institutions
versus their not-for-profit competitors. Corinthian reported that "for the
year ended June 30, 2003, approximately 41% of [its] new student
enrollments were generated through television, newspaper and yellow pages
advertising, 30% were generated through referrals, 6% were generated
through direct mail, 10% were generated from the Internet, and 13% were
generated through a variety of other methods" [Corinthian 10K]. Career
Education has divided its recruiting efforts into five areas "Local
market; High school; Out-of-area; International; and Internet"; as an
example, efforts in the "high school" recruiting area include
presentations by Career Education representatives in local secondary
schools and formation of direct relationships with high school counselors
and faculty [Career Education 10K]. Sylvan approaches advertising uniquely
for each of its subsidiaries; for example, the company "markets its Canter
division primarily through cooperative programs with participating
institutions and advertising aimed towards teachers" [Sylvan 10K].
Overall, not-for-profit institutions do not have the financial support or
personnel to execute sophisticated marketing plans on the scale that the
for-profit institutions have achieved.
THREAT OF SUBSTITUTE PRODUCTS OR
SERVICES Overall assessment: A medium
force. For-profits have demonstrated significant strengths, but have not
usurped not-for-profit institutions in all areas.
Cost Versus Benefit As noted in the "Bargaining Power of Buyers"
discussion, for-profit institutions do not have a competitive advantage
over not-for-profit institutions on the basis of "price" (tuition cost)
alone. To counter any negative perception of high cost, for-profits have
been forced to demonstrate the uniqueness and quality of their offerings
relative to those of not-for-profit institutions. First, by targeting
"working adults," for-profits have been able to craft curricula and
services around the needs of that demographic, securing a niche for
themselves that has not been addressed by traditional not-for-profits.
Prospective students are therefore presented with a trade-off between the
generally higher tuition costs charged by the for-profits and the
convenience available in their service offerings. Also as demonstrated
through available statistical evidence, attending a for-profit institution
generally results in a higher salary and higher overall correspondence
between the degree received and subsequent employment obtained than does
attendance at any type of not-for-profit institution. This too is another
area for consideration when prospective students weigh the merits of
education at a for-profit institution against the cost of attendance.
There is also the possibility that a person would
choose to forego post-secondary education and enter into the work force
directly from high school; however, that option is becoming increasingly
less attractive as data about the long-range success of such people
becomes known. As Career Education reported in its 10K, data from the U.S.
Department of Commerce indicates that by obtaining an associate degree, a
high school graduate can increase his or her earnings by 25%; by obtaining
a bachelors degree, earnings increase by 65% [Career Education 10K].
Student Retention For any post-secondary institution, there is a threat
that a student will leave to continue his or her education elsewhere.
According to the Chronicle for Higher Education, "about 60 percent of
college students attend more than one institution before they graduate."
The switching cost for students is primarily the loss of credits that do
not transfer to the new institution. Currently, the difficulty in
transferring credits among the for-profits and the not-for-profits acts
against the for-profits. As previously mentioned, legislation is currently
being proposed in accordance with the Higher Education Act to make higher
education credits more uniform and transferable among all accredited
institutions. Another potential barrier to switching is any inconvenience
associated with location or schedule with a different institution, which
could also act as an incentive, particularly as online and asynchronous
courses become more available.
Similar to their marketing efforts, for-profit
institutions have invested considerable financial and personnel resources
in retaining their students. Corinthian has implemented orientation,
tutoring, advising, ride-sharing and referral programs in an effort to
improve student retention [Corinthian 10K]. As noted in the Career
Education 10K "We recognize that our ability to retain students until
graduation is an important indicator of our success and that modest
improvements in retention rates can result in meaningful increases in
school revenue and profitability" [Career Education 10K].
No Financial Threat Not-for-profit
institutions are no competition for for-profit institutions in terms of
income generated per student. Based on information found in the latest
10Ks, in the years 2001-2003, Strayer, Career Education, Corinthian,
Apollo, and Sylvan each showed positive operating income per student; with
the exception of Strayer, each company saw increases year-over-year. In
contrast, not-for-profit institutions must rely on appropriations and
fund-raising to supplement their tuition revenues; considering only
tuition revenues, not-for-profit institutions show negative operating
income per student (based on 2001 data, the only year available)
[Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions…].
RIVALRY AMONG EXISTING
COMPETITORS Overall assessment: A
medium force. High market growth currently offsets competition within the
industry, but sensitivity to changes in the job market may affect this
balance.
Market growth Overall the market growth is so significant that the
for-profits currently compete for the new market share more than they
compete for each other's share. Since increased revenue for one company
does not displace the growth of competitors, the intensity of the rivalry
is reduced. However, in some markets, such as Los Angeles where nine of
the largest ten for-profits exist, education industry analyst Jeffrey M.
Silber indicates that there is a slowdown in growth, and thus the
competition for market share is more intense.
The strategies that the for-profits are using
to gain incremental market share will set the stage for when that growth
declines and internal rivalry intensifies. In terms of the investors and
industry analysts, the for-profit education industry is hot; five
for-profit education institutions (including Apollo, Career Ed.,
Corinthian, and Strayer) were listed as BusinessWeek's Top 25 Hot Growth
Companies in 2003. These institutions strive to produce bottom line
numbers that appeal to stockholders:
Diversity and Differentiation Many of the larger for-profits have acquired the
attractive smaller companies in the past few years and expanded their
campus locations and programs offered, leaving fewer smaller companies and
nine or ten larger companies that share 45% of the for-profit market. The
five that we analyzed differentiate themselves by curricula, degree-levels
offered, geographic locations of campuses and online presence. Online
presence is beginning to minimize the importance of geographic campus
presence.
Apollo Group - Differentiators: Size,
online curriculum, Canadian presence Apollo is the largest of all of the for-profits, with a
2003 enrollment of 200,000 students, and according to the analysts, has a
strong brand presence. It has 191 campuses in the 28 U.S. states, Canada,
and Puerto Rico, and is growing at a rate of 7-9 campuses per year through
acquisitions and expansion. Apollo established a partnership in 2003 with
the Canadian Institute of Business and Technology to provide educational
opportunities in China. U.S. campuses are in metropolitan areas, with no
presence in the northern or northeastern states. Apollo schools, most
notably the University of Phoenix (UOP) and UOP-Online, offer bachelors,
masters and doctoral degrees in business, education, healthcare, and
information technology through both its campus and online programs.
Sylvan Learning Systems -
Differentiators: International presence, advanced engineering training,
English language training Sylvan
divested its K-12 segment in June 2003 in order to focus almost
exclusively on the international postsecondary education market. Nearly
90% of its current enrollment is outside of the U.S., in Mexico, Panama,
Chile, France, Switzerland and Spain. Sylvan cites international
enrollment in post-secondary education as growing at a rate three times
that of U.S. enrollment. Analysts see a pronounced need in Asia for higher
education in the next 20 years, and they see Sylvan as well-positioned to
meet these needs with physical campuses and online programs. Sylvan's U.S.
campuses offer bachelors, masters, and doctoral degrees as well as
professional development courses in education, health services,
psychology, engineering and technology, business and management. Wall
Street Institute offers online English language training targeted at
international students. National Technical University (NTU) offers
professional training for engineers, partnering with both engineering
schools and corporate customers that employ engineers.
Corinthian Colleges - Differentiators:
Technology trades, allied health, metro locations serving minorities,
consolidation Corinthian offers
diplomas, associates, bachelors and masters degrees, as well as continuing
professional education, focusing on healthcare, business, automotive
repair, criminal justice and information technology. Corinthian's campus
locations in 21 U.S. states focus on fast-growing metro areas (in states
such as California and Texas) that position it to serve minorities and the
lower-middle class. Fifty-five percent of Corinthian's 2002 enrollment
belonged to a racial minority (22% Hispanic and 29% Black), with an even
higher percentage represented in the allied health fields [ThinkEquity].
Its 2003 acquisitions of CDI in Canada and Career Choices in the Pacific
Northwest (U.S.) demonstrate and reinforce its ability to acquire and
improve existing institutions. Corinthian's online/distance learning is
limited at this time through the FMU (Florida Metropolitan University) and
LTU (Learning Tree University) branches, which are expected to have
significant growth potential for Corinthian.
Strayer Education - Differentiators:
Online flexibility, corporate alliances Strayer offers associates and bachelors degrees in
business and information technology fields, and masters degrees in
education, business, health services, public administration and
information technology fields. Strayer offers synchronous and asynchronous
online classes for its entire curriculum, maximizing scheduling
flexibility for its students. Strayer's campus growth, online growth and
corporate alliance program growth have all been strong and analysts expect
this growth to continue [Credit Suisse].
Career Education - Differentiators:
International presence, culinary arts, graphic arts, graduate
placement Career Education offers
diploma, certificate, associates, bachelors and masters level degrees in
visual communication and design technologies, information technology,
business studies, culinary arts and healthcare. There are 78 campus
locations in the U.S., Canada, U.K., France and United Arab Emirates.
Career Education offers online programs in information technology,
business administration, visual communication, and education through its
AIU (American Intercontinental University) and CTU (Colorado Technical
University) branches. Career Education prides itself on its job placement
and programs that help students focus on career goals and placement from
the time that they enroll. In 2003, 93% of their graduates found
employment in their field within six months of graduation.
(www.careered.com)
Cost structure Online education has very low fixed costs and offsets
the high fixed costs of bricks-and-mortar. Thus, the institutions with a
higher ratio of online classes to on-campus classes (assuming equal class
size) will have lower fixed costs. In terms of profits, the five companies
we assessed ranged from 10-23% profit margins in 2003, based on income
that is almost exclusively on tuition. For-profits increase tuition an
average of 5-6% annually, not based on increased costs, but based on what
the market allows. This revenue is used for expansion, acquisitions or as
dividends to the shareholders. Tuition is also an area in which
institutions have room to be more cost competitive if the market changes.
On the flip side, many of these institutions' students, and thus the
institutions themselves, are dependent on financial aid. The institutions
are limited to a maximum percentage of tuition they can receive as
financial aid, as well as a maximum student loan default rate. Many
institutions, notably UOP, make extensive efforts to help their students
graduate, get employed and pay their loans in order to meet this
requirement.
Intellectual Property Higher education is not active in developing
intellectual capital, with the exception of Sylvan Learning Systems. While
traditional institutions have patents primarily on their research,
Sylvan's patents relate to education technology, online learning systems,
and security systems that protect the integrity of online examinations.
Sylvan has nine patents filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,
with additional international filings on these same inventions. Four of
the nine are granted patents and five are pending. There are two main
patent families within this group, and each of these two foundation
patents has been cited several times (11 and 14 citations) by patents from
companies such as Sony, GTE, and IBM (mostly for interface-related
innovations) and competitors such as eCollege.com and Alverno College
[www.uspto.gov]. A market with high internal rivalry would likely evidence
this through heavily patented products and processes, established patent
estates, and cross-citations.
Emerging Institutions and Niches - Concord Law
School/Kaplan In 1998, Concord Law
School enrolled the first class of 33 students in a completely online law
school. Four years later, it graduated its first class of ten with juris
doctor degrees and the following year, 2003, it graduated twenty-six.
Currently, Concord, a division of Kaplan, which is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Washington Post Co., has over 1500 students enrolled in its
Juris Doctor and Executive JDSM programs. Concord faces many of the same
issues as other online schools in terms of accreditation and their
perceived ability to provide a "complete" education compared to
traditional institutions. While neither the American Bar Association nor
the California Committee of Bar Examiners (CCBE) will accredit Concord,
the CCBE allows Concord to register as a correspondence school, which in
turn permits Concord graduates to sit for the California Bar Exam. Some
states' reciprocity agreements allow students who pass the California Bar
Exam to sit for their bar exam, and after passing, to be admitted to that
state's bar association. It is an indirect route, but a path to
"legitimacy" for Concord graduates wishing to practice outside of
California.
Kaplan has been well known for its testing
preparation materials and services for over 65 years. Prior to Concord, it
had ventured into "lifelong learning" with its SCORE! tutoring program,
professional development programs and National Institute for Paralegal
Arts and Sciences (NIPAS), providing degrees and certificates in paralegal
studies and legal nurse consulting. Building on this legal training
foundation and LSAT (law school entrance examination) preparatory
materials and classes, it launched Concord Law School in 1998. In 2000, it
continued its expansion into the higher education market with the
acquisition of Quest, now Kaplan College, and provides diploma- through
bachelor degree-level education on 56 campuses and in online programs such
as healthcare, business, information technology, fashion and design,
financial planning and criminal justice. Kaplan's educational experience,
breadth of curricula, and willingness to venture into uncharted territory
(online law school), combined with the resources of Washington Post Co.,
make Kaplan's six years in post-secondary education an emerging threat to
the key players of for-profit higher education.
Overall For-Profit Education Outlook Market growth will continue to be the most significant
factor in this sector through the 2013 forecast. Higher education is
forecasted to grow by 15%-23% to approximately 17.7-18.8 million students
by 2013. The U.S. Department of Labor identifies the fields of business,
criminal justice, technology, education and health as having high job
growth. The following areas will contribute to this
growth: -Penetration of the U.S. market through acquisitions and
expansion of both campus and online programs, with careful consideration
of the costs and risks of acquisition vs. expansion.
-International growth that will continue to be
significant, primarily in Asia.
-Maximizing profit margins by
leading students to four-year degrees (e.g. nursing) from or instead of
two-year degrees and diplomas, by offering more classes and programs
online and reducing the fixed-cost percentage, and by increasing the
average class size.
-Identifying and developing new student markets
as part of the market growth, including corporate alliances, military
education and high school recruiting.
-Expanding health care
training. The Department of Labor forecasts that nearly "one in six newly
created jobs between 2002 and 2012 will be in health care and more than
half of those jobs require less than a two-year degree" [Bank of America
Securities].
-Increasing brand equity. Analysts are already
identifying brand strength in the Apollo/University of Phoenix and
Corinthian brand names. As the transferability of credits becomes more
equitable with traditional institutions and more graduates of for-profit
schools integrate into the marketplace, the value of the for-profit sector
education will increase. This will be a threat not only to new entrants in
the field, but also an increasing threat to traditional institutions as
competition for the same students increases.
|