See my other thread here about how by not being a progressively structured ISA, you can cause the most harm to students who get the least out of your 'school.' Not to mention your securitizing of ISAs removes the argument for your model that you align your business with the success of your students.
But frankly, if the only thing you took out of this post is that the ISA structure is poor, without considering how you have all the power to set and enforce terms in your contract, I don't think I have much else I can say to try and help you. I think there are a lot of ways you can improve Lambda School to make it better for the people attending. And they don't involve deleting Reddit threads of criticism.
>In the event we finance an ISA of a student who has not graduated we have to refund what we received if a student doesn't graduate.
Interesting, I didn't know this. I thought you just sold the ISA outright, which would retain some of the incentive but weaken it quite a bit. It's great to hear that that's not happening.
Right now it's technically structured as a sale to an SPV that is owned by Lambda, Lambda gets a small advance (<$5k/student) that we have to pay back before we get any additional cashflows.
It's still completely aligned, we just fast-forward some of the cash so we don't have to raise endless amounts of VC.
" Lastly, this arrangement will not affect the student experience during or after Lambda School."
As a student, I can confirm this is a lie. And you know it is because we have told you in Slack, we've told you on Twitter, we've told you on Reddit, and now you have to read about it on Hacker News.
