Obviously the chances at biglaw are good from those schools. But my concern is what happens after biglaw? It is well known most associates leave starting at the 3 year mark. What are the exit options ITE for your average biglaw associate? Are they worth 250,000?

It depends. If you manage to land a biglaw job and stay in biglaw for a few years (leading to exit options), I would say that CLS/NYU are worth sticker. If you end up under/unemployed, I would say NYU/CLS aren't worth it. Therefore, the answer ultimately depends on your outcome. NYU/CLS at sticker is definitely a risky move, but it's not a rationally poor decision.

Here's a good post from rayiner:

Columbia is undoubtedly worth the investment at sticker price. I'm fairly risk adverse so that's more than I would feel comfortable paying, but the number suggest it's still a good bet. NYU is a little more uncertain. Either way, you have to be comfortable with the idea of working in Biglaw for a significant period of time, since that's more than likely the method you'll need to service your admittedly massive debt load.

Undoubtedly? Only HYS is undoubtedly worth sticker. CLS and NYU have fairly similar EIW success rates based on those who participate. If you strike out at NYU its probably a combination of poor grades/terrible interviewing skills. Going to those same interviews with CLS on the top of your resume probably wouldn't drastically change your chances the way HYS (particularly Y and S) would.

To answer OP: CCN at sticker is certainly a risk, but not a very big one if you are a reasonably normal person who puts some effort into packaging yourself to get hired in big law. The thing is though, if your highest ranked choices are CCN at sticker, you probably aren't going to have big enough scholarships at lower ranked schools to make the total risk calculation that much better. For example, $60k at Michigan will still leave you with over $100k in debt and a lower chance of getting a job to pay it back than you would at CCN. It depends on whether you would rather risk the fairly small chance of owing $200k without a job to pay for it or whether you want to take a greater risk of not getting the job in the first place and still owe a lot of debt.

That's such a meaningless statement out of context. What are you going to be making if you don't go to law school?

For your average liberal arts major looking at $30k out of undergrad, if they are lucky, the statistically-weighted net return on a T50 is undoubtedly going to improve their lifetime earning potential by more than the cost of the school.

I don't see how HYS is "undoubtedly worth sticker" while CLS and NYU are so much riskier.

If you are a big fan of LST, Columbia actually has stronger numbers than Harvard does. Is there any doubt that the top of the class at Harvard has opportunities not available to other schools? Hell yeah. Are employers lining up to hire Harvard grads with transcripts ridden with low passes?

You have to do pretty bad at any of the T6 to be completely screwed and there is a pretty good chance that if you did bad enough to be bottom 10% at CLS that you would be just as low at HYS. The choice of HYS over CCN at equal or similar cost is a no brainer because of the better opportunities at the top, but the argument that only HYS is worth sticker seems misguided.

Guys, my point was about the long term career prospects. Even if you get big law, must associates only last a few years. Some probably go into in house positions where they make 6 figures, but a lot probably also take a substantial pay cut.

My point was, from a pure financial stand point it might make sense to go to a school where you get big law(if you can go for free) than it would to pay sticker at a school where big law is guaranteed. If you are going have the opportunity to work big law just long enough to pay off your loans, you are in the same spot as the debt free grad at a lower ranked school. Of course you might have better job opportunities from your biglaw experience, but I hear even ex-associates are struggling to find work these days.

It all depends on what happens to most associates after they leave big law.

1) Your school won't help you on the lateral market nearly as much as your experiences (both pre- and post-LS)/connections/accomplishments before you're out on the lateral market.

2) From a purely financial standpoint, you don't have to last long to break even over your opportunity cost for most liberal arts grads.

3) The cheaper the school, generally, the reduced your chances at getting the springboard opportunities necessary for point 1).

So, coming back to the bolded, if you go to CLS and become an associate at Weil, or you go to Penn and become an associate at Weil, choosing one over the other is not going to be particularly helpful if you haven't made yourself an attractive candidate for lateral positions.

When I say undoubtedly worth sticker, I mean it in terms of your ability to receive a positive net return on your investment. Perhaps that's a bit strongly worded (there will always be someone who doesn't feel it's worth it to them), but in terms of pure dollars and cents, Columbia represents about as safe of an investment as you can get these days. HYS is definitely safer than C, just like C is definitely safer than N. To suggest otherwise is silly (NYU's numbers can't compete with CLS even without taking into account their proportionately large number of school funded jobs). Frankly, there's an argument to be made that Penn has better overall placement than NYU for nearly everything but PI (which many, including myself, don't give a damn about).

would you buy a used car (even a nice one) sticker?

This analogy, I don't get it.

Think harder/skip.

OP wants to pay full price for what is not the best item (albeit not the worst either) on the lot.

You are the worst troll ever. Die in a fire.

Might as well take OP's money with me then. Same Diff to him.

People who leave big law after a few years by and large do not end up in the same spot as grads who never got big law. The desirable non-big law jobs, such as non-profits, state or federal government, in-house at corporations, small/medium commercial litigation firms, are much easier to get with a few years of big law experience.

If you would pay that tuition price as an admissions fee for the job, then it's worth it. (even though not all grads from even Harvard get the jobs that they want, just much better odds at it)

If you wouldn't pay that amount just for the right to work someplace, then there is your answer too.
(plus interest of course)

What else are you going to do?

People at the bottom of the class at T14's are gunning for, and getting, the type of decent small/mid-sized firms that the large majority of the class at lower T50's are gunning for. What's the consolation prize from the lower T50?

If Columbia is a used car then UVA is?

Basically, I agree with Rayiner's analysis. But it really comes down personal goals. If you can say with 100% certainty that you want biglaw then take I'd take CCN over lower T14 with $$$. I couldn't, so I chose big $$$ (at a T18 school) over C&N at sticker. It was probably the hardest decision I've ever made.

t18? where does it end?

Unless you ultimately want to work in an area that shuns biglaw lawyers.

There really isn't a good way to answer the question in the abstract--it's a silly question. I'm sure the majority of CCN students who get a biglaw job end up making more money in their careers than if they hadn't gone to law school, even with the COA and opportunity costs factored in, but that really isn't the same as saying CCN is "worth it." We have to bake in a whole whack of assumptions--financial and otherwise--to get to that claim. To take just a few examples: How many people slog through their jobs because their debt demands it, and then are too worn out to shift gears in any meaningful way once it is financially viable? How many move from a low cost area to a high cost area because of their biglaw job and then have their costs balloon (real estate, family/education, etc.)? How many leave jobs that pay well in hourly terms but can't promise the hours and thus gross wages of biglaw?

Whether one should put oneself 300k in the hole for three years of law school is a pretty fact sensitive inquiry. Whether it is "worth it" really doesn't admit of an answer unless the person making decision is able to put a value on the things they want and the things they'd be giving up.

I'm not sure there is such a thing. Maybe certain PD jobs. Even the environmental non-profits I've encountered are chock-full of former big law litigators. Most non-profits do not have the resources to train green lawyers themselves, and are happy to take big law folks who have been trained on someone else's dime.

OP asked: "Is Columbia/NYU worth sticker ?"

My opinion is that it depends whether you're looking down on 'em or up at 'em. If accepted to Harvard, Yale or Stanford, then no; but, if not accepted to any or all of Harvard, Yale or Stanford, then yes.

This is a pretty dumb analysis. Would attending a TTT at sticker be worth it because you got shut out of the TT? Obviously NYU and Columbia aren't as good as YSH, but their value should be evaluated independent of other schools.