I see your point. I was thinking (though I didn't state it explicitly, apologies) of "worse" to mean "worse value". For instance, reducing the quality by, say 1

I see your point. I was thinking (though I didn't state it explicitly, apologies) of "worse" to mean "worse value". For instance, reducing the quality by, say 10%, but reducing the price by 50% would probably be a good value for many students, I agree with that. My concern is that the quality would drop "more" than the price. This concern is partially motivated by my background. I used to work for a university doing academic technology-related stuff. In my opinion, many of the technologies that were being acquired didn't contribute much to the quality of the education offered (beyond looking sexy when prospective students came in for tours). However, the tech was often extremely expensive and, in fact, required additional fees in many cases.