>You seem to be saying that unless a significant fraction of their students end up at FAANG companies then recruiters will not care whether "Lambda School" is o

>You seem to be saying that unless a significant fraction of their students end up at FAANG companies then recruiters will not care whether "Lambda School" is on a resume. To be a top tier bootcamp, a significant amount of your students would need to end up at FAANG companies because that's what top tier means, but you could run an effective bootcamp that wasn't top tier. However bootcamps have a bad reputation because there are too many terrible bootcamps. Therefore to cut through that noise, as of right now, your bootcamp needs to be top tier. >Is there anything Lambda could do to change your mind on this point? For example, suppose they submitted their graduates' CVs to 100 job ads, but for 50 randomly chosen ads removed any reference to Lambda from the CV, then reported a significant difference in response rate...? Sure, assuming an outside independent group did the test, and you replaced 9 months at Lambda School with 9 months of equivalent experience, but that's not going to happen anytime soon. Reputation is just people's perception, and right now outside of a few elite bootcamps, the perception is that bootcamps in general are mostly a neutral to negative signal. >Similarly, might an A/B test persuade you on this point? Suppose Lambda identified 100 applicants who met their admission criteria, but 50 were rejected at random, then Lambda reported a significant difference in the median income of each group over the next two years...? Sure again assuming an independent group conducted this test, so I wasn't just taking Lambda's word that the recruits were rejected at random. But what's the point of this? No test like that is ever going to happen.