He's looking at a minuscule subset of firms. TLS greatly exaggerates 1) how unlikely it is any one biglaw associate will make partner, but more importantly 2) how little most people who actually have actual experience in biglaw want to make partner.JohannDeMann wrote:Why plan for something that has almost no chance of happening? These stats are the reason to be even more conservative and favor scholly money. The fact is most law students will not be partners at biglaw firms, and next to none will be partners at elite biglaw shops. Plan for the likely event of not being partner and take less debt to make yourself more flexible in exit options and timing.wons wrote:
Or, expressed as a percentage chance of achieving the partnership from each school, assuming 2013 enrollment numbers and a 25-year average partnership term
HLS: 2.1%
CLS: 1.8%
Penn: 0.7%
Cornell: 0.7%
Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail Forum
- IAFG
- Posts: 6641
- Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
-
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Bingo. If you summed up all the really desireable outcomes from HLS, I don't think it's an immaterial number of people.
I'm obviously biased here, as a fourth year associate who (a) unexpectedly killed it at a school I shouldn't have gotten into, and accordingly had to pay full freight at and (b) really likes his job. There is no way I would be where I am today if I had gone to Cornell for free.
Someone up top said something to the effect of "if you have the resources, why not?" Look, I paid cash for LS, but it emptied my bank account; it's not like $300k is nobigdeal even to folks with "resources". But as far as I know, EVERYONE I went to high school and college with who has a parent in the industry, even post crash, is still going to Harvard if they get in. My argument is that maybe that's the optimal choice, setting aside the undiversified risk that law school debt saddles you with. If that's true then picking a worse school for the cheaper price may not be the savvy choice folks here make it out to be, absent facts that make it so (unambitious applicant, want to work in a low paying field, etc.)
I'm obviously biased here, as a fourth year associate who (a) unexpectedly killed it at a school I shouldn't have gotten into, and accordingly had to pay full freight at and (b) really likes his job. There is no way I would be where I am today if I had gone to Cornell for free.
Someone up top said something to the effect of "if you have the resources, why not?" Look, I paid cash for LS, but it emptied my bank account; it's not like $300k is nobigdeal even to folks with "resources". But as far as I know, EVERYONE I went to high school and college with who has a parent in the industry, even post crash, is still going to Harvard if they get in. My argument is that maybe that's the optimal choice, setting aside the undiversified risk that law school debt saddles you with. If that's true then picking a worse school for the cheaper price may not be the savvy choice folks here make it out to be, absent facts that make it so (unambitious applicant, want to work in a low paying field, etc.)
IAFG wrote:He's looking at a minuscule subset of firms. TLS greatly exaggerates 1) how unlikely it is any one biglaw associate will make partner, but more importantly 2) how little most people who actually have actual experience in biglaw want to make partner.JohannDeMann wrote:Why plan for something that has almost no chance of happening? These stats are the reason to be even more conservative and favor scholly money. The fact is most law students will not be partners at biglaw firms, and next to none will be partners at elite biglaw shops. Plan for the likely event of not being partner and take less debt to make yourself more flexible in exit options and timing.wons wrote:
Or, expressed as a percentage chance of achieving the partnership from each school, assuming 2013 enrollment numbers and a 25-year average partnership term
HLS: 2.1%
CLS: 1.8%
Penn: 0.7%
Cornell: 0.7%
-
- Posts: 3436
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
why would you not be a fourth year associate if you'd gone to Cornell?wons wrote:Bingo. If you summed up all the really desireable outcomes from HLS, I don't think it's an immaterial number of people.
I'm obviously biased here, as a fourth year associate who (a) unexpectedly killed it at a school I shouldn't have gotten into, and accordingly had to pay full freight at and (b) really likes his job. There is no way I would be where I am today if I had gone to Cornell for free.
Someone up top said something to the effect of "if you have the resources, why not?" Look, I paid cash for LS, but it emptied my bank account; it's not like $300k is nobigdeal even to folks with "resources". But as far as I know, EVERYONE I went to high school and college with who has a parent in the industry, even post crash, is still going to Harvard if they get in. My argument is that maybe that's the optimal choice, setting aside the undiversified risk that law school debt saddles you with. If that's true then picking a worse school for the cheaper price may not be the savvy choice folks here make it out to be, absent facts that make it so (unambitious applicant, want to work in a low paying field, etc.)
IAFG wrote:He's looking at a minuscule subset of firms. TLS greatly exaggerates 1) how unlikely it is any one biglaw associate will make partner, but more importantly 2) how little most people who actually have actual experience in biglaw want to make partner.JohannDeMann wrote:Why plan for something that has almost no chance of happening? These stats are the reason to be even more conservative and favor scholly money. The fact is most law students will not be partners at biglaw firms, and next to none will be partners at elite biglaw shops. Plan for the likely event of not being partner and take less debt to make yourself more flexible in exit options and timing.wons wrote:
Or, expressed as a percentage chance of achieving the partnership from each school, assuming 2013 enrollment numbers and a 25-year average partnership term
HLS: 2.1%
CLS: 1.8%
Penn: 0.7%
Cornell: 0.7%
- PepperJack
- Posts: 643
- Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:23 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Evidence? The ones I know seem pretty happy. At 50 how many people are normally out chilling with friends?LegalReality wrote:The part forgotten in this analysis is that biglaw partners are collectively as a group some of the most miserable human beings I have ever encountered. Everything about their lives besides the money is usually completely broken.
The fact that anyone would aspire to be a partner is absolutely terrifying. Some understanding friends and family can take a few years of the crazy schedule. After 25 years of working like an associate (at my firm partners work way more hours actually), these partners usually have almost no friends besides their clients, and a family that optimistically views them as ATM in the best case, or in the more realistic case, has become a place to deposit alimony. I challenge anyone in this thread to get to know one biglaw partner before saying this is a good outcome.
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Its misleading to look at all partners. V10 firms were a lot less leveraged 25 years ago, and hired fewer entry level people. Those people came disproportionately from Harvard, etc, and had a real shot at making partner. The dynamics today are very different. The head of litigation at a V5 once told us that when he became partner, business development meant checking your messages after lunch. That dynamic is dead. Because of these structural changes, I think the proportion of partners going forward will be less skewed toward Harvard, and also a smaller overall fraction of the overall class. Both facts make it less attractive to go to Harvard at sticker versus full ride at Cornell.
The premise is that there are factors in play with the Harvard versus Cornell decision beyond the probability of getting into a V10 to begin with. And I don't think that's true. It misunderstands how partnership decisions are made at these firms, and how business development works at these firms.
There is a point in there which is that ending up top 10% at HLS offers options that ending up top 10% at Cornell does not. But those options are open to people who are say top 2-3% of folks at Cornell. Its questionable whether its work $200k for something that has a 92% chance of not mattering.
The premise is that there are factors in play with the Harvard versus Cornell decision beyond the probability of getting into a V10 to begin with. And I don't think that's true. It misunderstands how partnership decisions are made at these firms, and how business development works at these firms.
There is a point in there which is that ending up top 10% at HLS offers options that ending up top 10% at Cornell does not. But those options are open to people who are say top 2-3% of folks at Cornell. Its questionable whether its work $200k for something that has a 92% chance of not mattering.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Lol, bullshit. $250,000 isn't a personal bank account, it's a trust fund. Only a sliver of the top class of earners can throw that type of cash around without borrowing, and loans are NOT the same as "cash" - don't cast your personal privilege as good decision making in the face of adversity. What an entitled attitude. People with family in the "industry" (I assume you mean corporate attorneys) may still be eager to shell out to climb the US news survey because they happen to be supported by the generosity of wealthy benefactors and won't face $3k/month repayment for five years. Conversely, plenty of students from middle income families are seriously weighing the costs and benefits of excessive loan debt and choosing lower ranked options at a discount.wons wrote:Bingo. If you summed up all the really desireable outcomes from HLS, I don't think it's an immaterial number of people.
I'm obviously biased here, as a fourth year associate who (a) unexpectedly killed it at a school I shouldn't have gotten into, and accordingly had to pay full freight at and (b) really likes his job. There is no way I would be where I am today if I had gone to Cornell for free.
Someone up top said something to the effect of "if you have the resources, why not?" Look, I paid cash for LS, but it emptied my bank account; it's not like $300k is nobigdeal even to folks with "resources". But as far as I know, EVERYONE I went to high school and college with who has a parent in the industry, even post crash, is still going to Harvard if they get in. My argument is that maybe that's the optimal choice, setting aside the undiversified risk that law school debt saddles you with. If that's true then picking a worse school for the cheaper price may not be the savvy choice folks here make it out to be, absent facts that make it so (unambitious applicant, want to work in a low paying field, etc.)
IAFG wrote:He's looking at a minuscule subset of firms. TLS greatly exaggerates 1) how unlikely it is any one biglaw associate will make partner, but more importantly 2) how little most people who actually have actual experience in biglaw want to make partner.JohannDeMann wrote:Why plan for something that has almost no chance of happening? These stats are the reason to be even more conservative and favor scholly money. The fact is most law students will not be partners at biglaw firms, and next to none will be partners at elite biglaw shops. Plan for the likely event of not being partner and take less debt to make yourself more flexible in exit options and timing.wons wrote:
Or, expressed as a percentage chance of achieving the partnership from each school, assuming 2013 enrollment numbers and a 25-year average partnership term
HLS: 2.1%
CLS: 1.8%
Penn: 0.7%
Cornell: 0.7%
Also, seems like you work at a firm: how is that option not available from Cornell?
-
- Posts: 1650
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:42 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Good luck to you, but there are tons of people with Harvard/Yale JD who have law review, prestigious clerkships (Court of Appeals/SDNY/etc.) who get shown the door when it comes to making partner. The fact that you could pay $300,000 cash to attend law school is a great financial situation to be in, but this really does not mean that full ride at a lower T14 is not a great move. It would be useful to hear from a recently minted big law partner about how he/she made it and what happened to other similarly situated people. Of my college friends who went T14 (some of them law review + clerkships) literally none of them made big law partner. Maybe my friends are just losers, who knows.wons wrote:Bingo. If you summed up all the really desireable outcomes from HLS, I don't think it's an immaterial number of people.
I'm obviously biased here, as a fourth year associate who (a) unexpectedly killed it at a school I shouldn't have gotten into, and accordingly had to pay full freight at and (b) really likes his job. There is no way I would be where I am today if I had gone to Cornell for free.
Someone up top said something to the effect of "if you have the resources, why not?" Look, I paid cash for LS, but it emptied my bank account; it's not like $300k is nobigdeal even to folks with "resources". But as far as I know, EVERYONE I went to high school and college with who has a parent in the industry, even post crash, is still going to Harvard if they get in. My argument is that maybe that's the optimal choice, setting aside the undiversified risk that law school debt saddles you with. If that's true then picking a worse school for the cheaper price may not be the savvy choice folks here make it out to be, absent facts that make it so (unambitious applicant, want to work in a low paying field, etc.)
IAFG wrote:He's looking at a minuscule subset of firms. TLS greatly exaggerates 1) how unlikely it is any one biglaw associate will make partner, but more importantly 2) how little most people who actually have actual experience in biglaw want to make partner.JohannDeMann wrote:Why plan for something that has almost no chance of happening? These stats are the reason to be even more conservative and favor scholly money. The fact is most law students will not be partners at biglaw firms, and next to none will be partners at elite biglaw shops. Plan for the likely event of not being partner and take less debt to make yourself more flexible in exit options and timing.wons wrote:
Or, expressed as a percentage chance of achieving the partnership from each school, assuming 2013 enrollment numbers and a 25-year average partnership term
HLS: 2.1%
CLS: 1.8%
Penn: 0.7%
Cornell: 0.7%
- A. Nony Mouse
- Posts: 29293
- Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Are you suggesting that people who are 50 don't have friends or spend time with friends? Do you know many people who are 50?PepperJack wrote:Evidence? The ones I know seem pretty happy. At 50 how many people are normally out chilling with friends?LegalReality wrote:The part forgotten in this analysis is that biglaw partners are collectively as a group some of the most miserable human beings I have ever encountered. Everything about their lives besides the money is usually completely broken.
The fact that anyone would aspire to be a partner is absolutely terrifying. Some understanding friends and family can take a few years of the crazy schedule. After 25 years of working like an associate (at my firm partners work way more hours actually), these partners usually have almost no friends besides their clients, and a family that optimistically views them as ATM in the best case, or in the more realistic case, has become a place to deposit alimony. I challenge anyone in this thread to get to know one biglaw partner before saying this is a good outcome.
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Law review and clerkships have fuck all to do with making partner. At a V10, making partner is about grinding, making existing clients happy, and being lucky enough to be in a group that needs a new partner the year you're up for it.
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Most partners I've met seem pretty similar to my parents. Not hanging out with friends every week, but working and them going home to family. I've got a chill 8:30-5:30 government gig, but I hang out with people (besides my wife) maybe twice a month. That's just life with kids.
-
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 2:32 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
The most ridiculous thing about this argument is the assumption that the school from which one earns one's JD = obviously the only reason that some people made partner and others didn't. High school statistics students could tell you that that's crap. Intelligence, social skills and (probably especially) work ethic are also very important, and are also likely to be positively correlated with school rank.
It's not surprising that a bunch of HLS strivers made partner, but it's worth remembering that many of them would have made partner anyway had they landed a firm job out of Cornell or Michigan and not from HYS.
It's not surprising that a bunch of HLS strivers made partner, but it's worth remembering that many of them would have made partner anyway had they landed a firm job out of Cornell or Michigan and not from HYS.
-
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 2:36 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
What is this? 0Ls (and a midlevel?) talking about making partner in biglaw? hahahahahahaha
You're not going to make partner. And if you have the time to run these numbers while working in biglaw, you're probably not the star associate who has a shot.
The only people I know who are in serious contention of making partner bill 60+ hours a week on average and don't waste time on forums. A lot of factors go into making partner - your grades and school are low on the totem pole. It's mainly your work product, how hard you work (billables) and your personality (also which partners like you and back you).
You're not going to make partner. And if you have the time to run these numbers while working in biglaw, you're probably not the star associate who has a shot.
The only people I know who are in serious contention of making partner bill 60+ hours a week on average and don't waste time on forums. A lot of factors go into making partner - your grades and school are low on the totem pole. It's mainly your work product, how hard you work (billables) and your personality (also which partners like you and back you).
- IAFG
- Posts: 6641
- Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
The people I know who are about to make partner or already did have the manic sort of energy that enables billing and posting and side projects and a healthy drinking habit, etc.lecsa wrote:What is this? 0Ls (and a midlevel?) talking about making partner in biglaw? hahahahahahaha
You're not going to make partner. And if you have the time to run these numbers while working in biglaw, you're probably not the star associate who has a shot.
The only people I know who are in serious contention of making partner bill 60+ hours a week on average and don't waste time on forums. A lot of factors go into making partner - your grades and school are low on the totem pole. It's mainly your work product, how hard you work (billables) and your personality (also which partners like you and back you).
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 2:36 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Posting? The star associates I know work crazy hours every week and don't have much of a social life (although they drink a lot). Generally seems like the partner type are workaholics who don't want to do anything outside of work.IAFG wrote:The people I know who are about to make partner or already did have the manic sort of energy that enables billing and posting and side projects and a healthy drinking habit, etc.lecsa wrote:What is this? 0Ls (and a midlevel?) talking about making partner in biglaw? hahahahahahaha
You're not going to make partner. And if you have the time to run these numbers while working in biglaw, you're probably not the star associate who has a shot.
The only people I know who are in serious contention of making partner bill 60+ hours a week on average and don't waste time on forums. A lot of factors go into making partner - your grades and school are low on the totem pole. It's mainly your work product, how hard you work (billables) and your personality (also which partners like you and back you).
- IAFG
- Posts: 6641
- Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
We probably work at very different firms. Which probably explains the disconnect ITT. One partner is made at my firm for every four first years, and promotion is exclusively from within. And people who are going to make partner could totally get away with being raging Internet posters.lecsa wrote:Posting? The star associates I know work crazy hours every week and don't have much of a social life (although they drink a lot). Generally seems like the partner type are workaholics who don't want to do anything outside of work.IAFG wrote:The people I know who are about to make partner or already did have the manic sort of energy that enables billing and posting and side projects and a healthy drinking habit, etc.lecsa wrote:What is this? 0Ls (and a midlevel?) talking about making partner in biglaw? hahahahahahaha
You're not going to make partner. And if you have the time to run these numbers while working in biglaw, you're probably not the star associate who has a shot.
The only people I know who are in serious contention of making partner bill 60+ hours a week on average and don't waste time on forums. A lot of factors go into making partner - your grades and school are low on the totem pole. It's mainly your work product, how hard you work (billables) and your personality (also which partners like you and back you).
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
This has gotten a little meta, people. The ability to make partner has totally insignificant correlation to how much one posts on TLS. If you can build a book of business and demonstrate an ability to bring in and/or retain clients (which could have more to do with specialization or professional background) or you're coming from another role like DOJ with a particular skill set, how many hours you bill probably won't be so relevant.
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
The "book of business" is a flame, at least as applied to V10-type firms. An associate isn't going to bring in the type of client such a firm will care about. At the same time, partnership isn't a reward for billing a ton of hours.jbagelboy wrote:This has gotten a little meta, people. The ability to make partner has totally insignificant correlation to how much one posts on TLS. If you can build a book of business and demonstrate an ability to bring in and/or retain clients (which could have more to do with specialization or professional background) or you're coming from another role like DOJ with a particular skill set, how many hours you bill probably won't be so relevant.
Big corporations have a list of preferred providers for various kinds of matters. If a new matter is small, it'll be given to a preferred provider based on discretion. For a larger matter, there will be a beauty contest, where firms will come in and pitch. The firm will be selected based on the strength of their pitch.
So who makes partners? If you're a senior that develops a good relationship with a client that is important, and your department needs a new partner when you're up, you might get the nod. This is correlated with both hours and business development ability, as well as politics. Associates who are perceived to be better will be given choice assignments. People who can play the politics will also get choice assignments. People with a good business sense might endear themselves to an important client. But these clients aren't your "book."
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Sorry - I meant to employ the generic expression more in the sense of "endear themselves to an important client" and "develops a good relationship".rayiner wrote:The "book of business" is a flame, at least as applied to V10-type firms. An associate isn't going to bring in the type of client such a firm will care about. At the same time, partnership isn't a reward for billing a ton of hours.jbagelboy wrote:This has gotten a little meta, people. The ability to make partner has totally insignificant correlation to how much one posts on TLS. If you can build a book of business and demonstrate an ability to bring in and/or retain clients (which could have more to do with specialization or professional background) or you're coming from another role like DOJ with a particular skill set, how many hours you bill probably won't be so relevant.
Big corporations have a list of preferred providers for various kinds of matters. If a new matter is small, it'll be given to a preferred provider based on discretion. For a larger matter, there will be a beauty contest, where firms will come in and pitch. The firm will be selected based on the strength of their pitch.
So who makes partners? If you're a senior that develops a good relationship with a client that is important, and your department needs a new partner when you're up, you might get the nod. This is correlated with both hours and business development ability, as well as politics. Associates who are perceived to be better will be given choice assignments. People who can play the politics will also get choice assignments. People with a good business sense might endear themselves to an important client. But these clients aren't your "book."
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
You're more likely to be this guy (http://www.rosestreet.net/?p=28), than to make partner at V10. Many times more likely, in fact. Quantity that.
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Pretty much only at those types of firms. Most firms don't have large institutional clients and therefore don't need partners who are just account managers. They need people who are going to bring in business. People who don't have that ability make of counsel. Some firms have non-equity partners which are just of counsel with another name.rayiner wrote:The "book of business" is a flame, at least as applied to V10-type firms. An associate isn't going to bring in the type of client such a firm will care about. At the same time, partnership isn't a reward for billing a ton of hours.jbagelboy wrote:This has gotten a little meta, people. The ability to make partner has totally insignificant correlation to how much one posts on TLS. If you can build a book of business and demonstrate an ability to bring in and/or retain clients (which could have more to do with specialization or professional background) or you're coming from another role like DOJ with a particular skill set, how many hours you bill probably won't be so relevant.
Big corporations have a list of preferred providers for various kinds of matters. If a new matter is small, it'll be given to a preferred provider based on discretion. For a larger matter, there will be a beauty contest, where firms will come in and pitch. The firm will be selected based on the strength of their pitch.
So who makes partners? If you're a senior that develops a good relationship with a client that is important, and your department needs a new partner when you're up, you might get the nod. This is correlated with both hours and business development ability, as well as politics. Associates who are perceived to be better will be given choice assignments. People who can play the politics will also get choice assignments. People with a good business sense might endear themselves to an important client. But these clients aren't your "book."
It's crazy to give to people equity unless they bring business in. Which is why most don't.
- Hipster but Athletic
- Posts: 1993
- Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:15 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Do Monte Carlo w/ gamma fit bro on deciding between free cornell and 300k Harvard.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- cron1834
- Posts: 2299
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Yup. I would put a lot of money on which expected value is better if you ran sims.Hipster but Athletic wrote:Do Monte Carlo w/ gamma fit bro on deciding between free cornell and 300k Harvard.
- Kikero
- Posts: 1233
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:28 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
Really? I can, especially if it's a truly no debt scenario such as you live in the area or have savings or a spouse with regular income. Some people aren't interested in ultra prestigious jobs, and for them having $300,000 more (or rather not having $300,000 less) now is a pretty big incentive.manu6926 wrote:But I don't think school choice can be simplified to choosing the cheapest school.nouseforaname123 wrote:Even assuming your analysis is correct, for the majority of applicants, there is nothing overconservative about significantly reducing upfront costs and forgoing slightly better employment prospects coming out of law school.
Sounds like your family has the resources to pay for law school. If cost isn't an issue for you, sure, take the more prestigious and expensive school. For many applicants, cost absolutely has to be a part of the equation.
Assuming A and B are in the same tier or A is considered a tier below B, it's reasonable to choose A school over B school if A is cheaper or gives you $$$.
For instance, I can't imagine anyone choosing Cornell free ride over Yale.
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
An imperfect, but relevant study re: partnership odds: http://www.adamsmithesq.com/2012/03/thebestandbrightest. Long story short, Cornell grades who get into big law to begin with are more likely to make partner than Harvard grads.
- aboutmydaylight
- Posts: 580
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:50 pm
Re: Are folks overconservative? Quantifying the long tail
I'm guessing a lot of those schools are really benefiting from a bullish market and fortunate geography. For example, I think its safe to say Hastings is no longer getting 1/3 of its big law associates to partner level. Probably not even close.rayiner wrote:An imperfect, but relevant study re: partnership odds: http://www.adamsmithesq.com/2012/03/thebestandbrightest. Long story short, Cornell grades who get into big law to begin with are more likely to make partner than Harvard grads.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login