Columbia vs Duke (60k)

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
rickgrimes69
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:56 am

Re: Columbia vs Duke (60k)

Postby rickgrimes69 » Mon Apr 13, 2015 10:58 pm

wons wrote:
rickgrimes69 wrote:
wons wrote:Dukes placement into top Biglaw is not that good. I checked a couple of the top firms (S&C and DPW) as a back of the envelope check, and they had about 8 times as many CLS alumni associates as Duke alumni. Even adjusting for class size, that's a massive difference.


Oh well if you performed a back of the envelope check then I'm sure you are right

And we all know if you don't get hired at a V5 then law school was basically pointless


No one is arguing that law school is "pointless" other than you, Pancho. The point is that your expected future earnings are much higher if you start at a V5 than a firm lower down on the totem pole


lol do you actually believe this?

I'm sure many, even most folks at Duke get Biglaw, and that's great, but pretending that a ob pushing paper in BigCharlotteLaw is the same as a spot n the Simpson Thacher M&A group grossly distorts reality and will lead people to leave value on the table by foregoing acceptances at better schools for marginally lower tuition.


Geez dude don't forget to wear your Simpson Thacher shoulderbag with the Simpson Thacher logo facing outward

BigCharlotteLaw would actually be pretty sweet bc $145k there is like royalty but it turns out those jobs are actually really hard to get. Tons of people gun hard for BigCharlotteLaw or BigTexasLaw or whatever and have no interest in NYC. Less than a quarter of Duke's class even goes there. I'm not saying (nor did I ever say) that Duke's placement power equals CLS, it doesn't - but it's not ~$80k (plus interest) better, and certainly not for DC.

wons
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: Columbia vs Duke (60k)

Postby wons » Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:03 pm

rickgrimes69 wrote:
wons wrote:
rickgrimes69 wrote:
wons wrote:Dukes placement into top Biglaw is not that good. I checked a couple of the top firms (S&C and DPW) as a back of the envelope check, and they had about 8 times as many CLS alumni associates as Duke alumni. Even adjusting for class size, that's a massive difference.


Oh well if you performed a back of the envelope check then I'm sure you are right

And we all know if you don't get hired at a V5 then law school was basically pointless


No one is arguing that law school is "pointless" other than you, Pancho. The point is that your expected future earnings are much higher if you start at a V5 than a firm lower down on the totem pole


lol do you actually believe this?

I'm sure many, even most folks at Duke get Biglaw, and that's great, but pretending that a ob pushing paper in BigCharlotteLaw is the same as a spot n the Simpson Thacher M&A group grossly distorts reality and will lead people to leave value on the table by foregoing acceptances at better schools for marginally lower tuition.


Geez dude don't forget to wear your Simpson Thacher shoulderbag with the Simpson Thacher logo facing outward

BigCharlotteLaw would actually be pretty sweet bc $145k there is like royalty but it turns out those jobs are actually really hard to get. Tons of people gun hard for BigCharlotteLaw or BigTexasLaw or whatever and have no interest in NYC. Less than a quarter of Duke's class even goes to NYC. I'm not saying (nor did I ever say) that Duke's placement power equals CLS in NYC, it doesn't - but it's not ~$80k (plus interest) better, and certainly not for DC.


Folks who don't have a few years of legal work experience behind them shouldn't be giving advice to others on the differences between biglaw jobs. Those Charlotte jobs are deadweight, and $145 is nice in year one but earning 66% of NYC by year six really blows, as it does in other minor markets. It can't be overstated how much more valuable a good biglaw job is than an ordinary one; if you start at a good firm and washout the mediocre firms will fall over themselves to hire you; if you start at a mediocre firm and washout, your next job is manning the fry station at McDowells.

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 3864
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Columbia vs Duke (60k)

Postby rpupkin » Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:09 pm

wons wrote:Folks who don't have a few years of legal work experience behind them shouldn't be giving advice to others on the differences between biglaw jobs. Those Charlotte jobs are deadweight, and $145 is nice in year one but earning 66% of NYC by year six really blows, as it does in other minor markets. It can't be overstated how much more valuable a good biglaw job is than an ordinary one; if you start at a good firm and washout the mediocre firms will fall over themselves to hire you; if you start at a mediocre firm and washout, your next job is manning the fry station at McDowells.

As your post demonstrates, it can be overstated. Like, really, really overstated.

So, you have a few years of legal work experience behind you, and you actually believe these things? Where do you work?

User avatar
BiglawAssociate
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Columbia vs Duke (60k)

Postby BiglawAssociate » Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:57 pm

wons wrote: Folks who don't have a few years of legal work experience behind them shouldn't be giving advice to others on the differences between biglaw jobs. Those Charlotte jobs are deadweight, and $145 is nice in year one but earning 66% of NYC by year six really blows, as it does in other minor markets. It can't be overstated how much more valuable a good biglaw job is than an ordinary one; if you start at a good firm and washout the mediocre firms will fall over themselves to hire you; if you start at a mediocre firm and washout, your next job is manning the fry station at McDowells.


I know people who went to higher ranked firms in the "booming" practice groups like finance. A lot of "prestigious" firms just want bodies right now.

A lot of people burn out of law (from firms of all ranks). "Washing out" isn't the end of the world (especially for those of us who marry into money). Also I believe that you can do whatever the fuck you want for life (as long as you don't have kids). So moral of the story? Don't have kids and do whatever the fuck you want, forever.

If you don't make partner (IMO), then practicing law is a huge waste of time because you get paid shit per hour and you have to work a lot of hours. If you work at a firm/some in house jobs you get paid well but get worked to death. If you do state gov/local gov/ some fed gov/PI, you get paid shit compared to nurses. If you do fed gov, this might be the best balance but pay isn't that high compared to some other fields where you still only work 9 to 5.

Also pushing paper 12 to 18 hours a day gets old. (All office jobs are kind of shitty but at least they don't work on average 12 to 18 hours a day.) Plus some lawyers are just really, really, really insufferable - "I'm a lawyer. Didn't you know I'm "sooooo fucking prestigious"? (Says the broke ass lawyer who has never known any rich people and thinks he's the shit)




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 2 guests