Edward Fiske and Helen Ladd's review of market-based educational reforms in New Zealand are assessed in light of recent developments. We agree that predicted benefits were overstated, that there were both losers and winners, and that educational nirvana did not result. In our view, however, the main impact was to make schools' problems more transparent, creating discomforting pressures and attempts to undermine this transparency. We examine responses to changes in zoning laws, the effects of socioeconomic status on observed outcomes, signalling and value-added behavior, and school accountability. We find that educational reforms produce substantial short-term changes, largely on the demand-side.