Quality of universities is best viewed through the eyes of stakeholders. Yet, in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, rankings conducted by various agencies purport to provide one overall measure of university quality. This article re-examines some of the data used by university rankers. In so doing, it shows that their information can be repackaged in a way that makes it more relevant to student stakeholders when choosing where to study. Moreover, cluster analysis reveals that there is no qualitative hierarchy of British institutions. Instead, universities fall into two main groups. One is characterised by high value-added in learning. The other is defined by research. In both groups the level of student satisfaction is comparable. These divisions between groups of universities parallel social distinctions in British society. Should prospective students be provided with such information, they would better be able to judge the quality of universities in which they might enroll.