Define "Sticker"

Discuss various money matters here. Loans (federal and private), scholarships, lottery winnings, or other school finance related information and queries.
User avatar
stingray
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:37 pm

Define "Sticker"

Postby stingray » Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:29 pm

There is always a lot of talk on TLS about which schools are and are NOT worth going to, if the student will have to pay “sticker” to attend. Without going into that discussion, what does everyone consider to be “sticker?” Tuition alone, or tuition plus living expenses?
Here is my situation. I have just about a full ride at Tulane (the State I’m from) with no real grade requirements (I just have to stay in the top 75%). I’m anticipating an acceptance to GW, but I do not plan to have any scholarship money. GW’s tuition is 44k, but with living expenses it is over 70k. When I hear people say that a school is not worth attending at “sticker,” I assume that they mean tuition + living expenses.
Because my wife is an RN and makes decent money, I’ll only have to take out loans for tuition and NOT the 210K that I would otherwise have to take out if I was single and needing loans to avoid homelessness and starvation. Having her work while I’m in school, allows us to avoid taking out loans for living expenses, health insurance, travel, etc. We both paid for our undergrad degrees out-of-pocket, and we’ve saved up enough to cover law books, emergencies, and maybe even a small portion of tuition. We have no kids and no debt.
So, for those of you unwilling to attend a certain school at sticker because of the massive debt associated with it, would you be more willing to attend if you could limit loans to strictly tuition costs?
…and yes, yes, I know that regardless of whether you take out loans or pay up front, you are still paying “sticker.” But paying for a large portion of your legal education now is a lot cheaper than paying for it over a 30 year period.

User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby JamMasterJ » Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:38 pm

sticker is full price. I would say, in your situation that the common rules are slightly off, but I still wouln't pay full price at GW.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby IAFG » Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:41 pm

GW is effing expensive relative to the job prospects. Were you planning on coming home to LA?

User avatar
stingray
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:37 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby stingray » Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:12 pm

Thanks for the input guys! Not necessarily planning on coming home to Louisiana. Would be happy working in D.C. for a while. Is it their tuition that gives GW an expensive reputation, or is it D.C.'s cost of living that makes it so expensive? COL in D.C. is pretty outrageous, but my wife would be making signifcantly more mone there than anywhere in Louisiana.

User avatar
20130312
Posts: 3842
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby 20130312 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:35 pm

Full tuition (even without COL) is to be avoided at GW :shock:

User avatar
stingray
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:37 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby stingray » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:13 pm

InGoodFaith wrote:Full tuition (even without COL) is to be avoided at GW :shock:

Please elaborate. Not that I don't believe you, I just hear that about a lot of schools, but I never hear the specifics. Are the job prospects that bad?
I'm leaning towards Tulane, mainly because I am cheap--probably to a fault. But I genuinely want to go to George Washington. It really does concern me when people say that it is not worth the price, and I would be lying if I didn't say that hearing stuff like that, even from anonymous strangers on TLS, wasn't affecting my decion. But I want to know why it isn't worth the price.
And I know that "worth the price" can mean different things to people in different circumstances. Here are my circumstances: 1)I want to be a good lawyer, so I want to go to a good school for my numbers, and 2) being a recent History grad, my current job prospects look like $0 a year, so even bad job prospects may seem good to me.

headandshoulderos
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:12 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby headandshoulderos » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:15 pm

stingray wrote:
InGoodFaith wrote:Full tuition (even without COL) is to be avoided at GW :shock:

Please elaborate. Not that I don't believe you, I just hear that about a lot of schools, but I never hear the specifics. Are the job prospects that bad?
I'm leaning towards Tulane, mainly because I am cheap--probably to a fault. But I genuinely want to go to George Washington. It really does concern me when people say that it is not worth the price, and I would be lying if I didn't say that hearing stuff like that, even from anonymous strangers on TLS, wasn't affecting my decion. But I want to know why it isn't worth the price.
And I know that "worth the price" can mean different things to people in different circumstances. Here are my circumstances: 1)I want to be a good lawyer, so I want to go to a good school for my numbers, and 2) being a recent History grad, my current job prospects look like $0 a year, so even bad job prospects may seem good to me.


If you go to GW, there is an 80% chance that you will not get a job at all for years after graduation except contract document review work at $15-$25 an hour with no benefits, if you are lucky.

That clear enough for you?

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby IAFG » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:16 pm

stingray wrote:
InGoodFaith wrote:Full tuition (even without COL) is to be avoided at GW :shock:

Please elaborate. Not that I don't believe you, I just hear that about a lot of schools, but I never hear the specifics. Are the job prospects that bad?
I'm leaning towards Tulane, mainly because I am cheap--probably to a fault. But I genuinely want to go to George Washington. It really does concern me when people say that it is not worth the price, and I would be lying if I didn't say that hearing stuff like that, even from anonymous strangers on TLS, wasn't affecting my decion. But I want to know why it isn't worth the price.
And I know that "worth the price" can mean different things to people in different circumstances. Here are my circumstances: 1)I want to be a good lawyer, so I want to go to a good school for my numbers, and 2) being a recent History grad, my current job prospects look like $0 a year, so even bad job prospects may seem good to me.

Is there a quick 1-pager summing up the basic TLS philosophy on this shit we could start linking to? With links to hiring stats or something? Because I don't even know how to start at ground 0 like this.

User avatar
20130312
Posts: 3842
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby 20130312 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:23 pm

IAFG wrote:Is there a quick 1-pager summing up the basic TLS philosophy on this shit we could start linking to? With links to hiring stats or something? Because I don't even know how to start at ground 0 like this.


Maybe we should just link them to the Legal Employment forum and let them poke around?

User avatar
stingray
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:37 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby stingray » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:34 pm

IAFG wrote:
stingray wrote:
InGoodFaith wrote:Full tuition (even without COL) is to be avoided at GW :shock:

Please elaborate. Not that I don't believe you, I just hear that about a lot of schools, but I never hear the specifics. Are the job prospects that bad?
I'm leaning towards Tulane, mainly because I am cheap--probably to a fault. But I genuinely want to go to George Washington. It really does concern me when people say that it is not worth the price, and I would be lying if I didn't say that hearing stuff like that, even from anonymous strangers on TLS, wasn't affecting my decion. But I want to know why it isn't worth the price.
And I know that "worth the price" can mean different things to people in different circumstances. Here are my circumstances: 1)I want to be a good lawyer, so I want to go to a good school for my numbers, and 2) being a recent History grad, my current job prospects look like $0 a year, so even bad job prospects may seem good to me.

Is there a quick 1-pager summing up the basic TLS philosophy on this shit we could start linking to? With links to hiring stats or something? Because I don't even know how to start at ground 0 like this.

That's the thing, I've been looking at the stats. Law School Transparency has 24% going into NLJ 250, and another 6% going into judicial clerkships. That's 30% of the class with what I would consider great jobs. That's not that far from somewhere like UT. Is 70% of the class destined to work for $15/hour and no benefits? Seems like there has to be a middle ground. 30% get job at an NLJ 250 or clerkship, and everyone else gets minimum wage?

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby IAFG » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:36 pm

Yes. That's the problem. There's not really much middle ground. It's not QUITE as grim as that, but it's close.

User avatar
20130312
Posts: 3842
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby 20130312 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:39 pm

IAFG wrote:Yes. That's the problem. There's not really much middle ground. It's not QUITE as grim as that, but it's close.


http://abovethelaw.com/2010/07/nalp-gives-more-information-on-expected-lawyer-salary/

Keep in mind, this is for salaries REPORTED. Obviously, people that make big cash probably have more of an incentive to report. But as you can see, there's a bimodal distribution.

--ImageRemoved--
Last edited by 20130312 on Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby JamMasterJ » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:40 pm

stingray wrote:
IAFG wrote:
stingray wrote:
InGoodFaith wrote:Full tuition (even without COL) is to be avoided at GW :shock:

Please elaborate. Not that I don't believe you, I just hear that about a lot of schools, but I never hear the specifics. Are the job prospects that bad?
I'm leaning towards Tulane, mainly because I am cheap--probably to a fault. But I genuinely want to go to George Washington. It really does concern me when people say that it is not worth the price, and I would be lying if I didn't say that hearing stuff like that, even from anonymous strangers on TLS, wasn't affecting my decion. But I want to know why it isn't worth the price.
And I know that "worth the price" can mean different things to people in different circumstances. Here are my circumstances: 1)I want to be a good lawyer, so I want to go to a good school for my numbers, and 2) being a recent History grad, my current job prospects look like $0 a year, so even bad job prospects may seem good to me.

Is there a quick 1-pager summing up the basic TLS philosophy on this shit we could start linking to? With links to hiring stats or something? Because I don't even know how to start at ground 0 like this.

That's the thing, I've been looking at the stats. Law School Transparency has 24% going into NLJ 250, and another 6% going into judicial clerkships. That's 30% of the class with what I would consider great jobs. That's not that far from somewhere like UT. Is 70% of the class destined to work for $15/hour and no benefits? Seems like there has to be a middle ground. 30% get job at an NLJ 250 or clerkship, and everyone else gets minimum wage?

yeah, headandshoulders was being a bit over dramatic. 30% shot at BigLaw or clerkship, some chance of homelessness, and a large group making around 50K per year, which will not service sticker debt

ETA: scooped

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby IAFG » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:41 pm

While you're clicking links, I'd read this: http://www.elsblog.org/the_empirical_le ... -2008.html

headandshoulderos
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:12 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby headandshoulderos » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:48 pm

i mean, still. you would bet your entire future with a 70% chance of falling flat on your face??? that is not rational behavior. remember, your odds of a 50k job now, with just a BA, are as good as finding one with a JD, without losing 3 years of earning potential and taking out 100k+ in loans. the sad truth about the legal market is you either get a 160k job or you struggle for a 30k job. The 50k-100k jobs practically don't exist (less than 5% of the total market).

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby IAFG » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:51 pm

headandshoulderos wrote:i mean, still. you would bet your entire future with a 70% chance of falling flat on your face??? that is not rational behavior. remember, your odds of a 50k job now, with just a BA, are as good as finding one with a JD, without losing 3 years of earning potential and taking out 100k+ in loans. the sad truth about the legal market is you either get a 160k job or you struggle for a 30k job. The 50k-100k jobs practically don't exist (less than 5% of the total market).

wait... what? where are you getting that?

headandshoulderos
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:12 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby headandshoulderos » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:52 pm

IAFG wrote:
headandshoulderos wrote:i mean, still. you would bet your entire future with a 70% chance of falling flat on your face??? that is not rational behavior. remember, your odds of a 50k job now, with just a BA, are as good as finding one with a JD, without losing 3 years of earning potential and taking out 100k+ in loans. the sad truth about the legal market is you either get a 160k job or you struggle for a 30k job. The 50k-100k jobs practically don't exist (less than 5% of the total market).

wait... what? where are you getting that?


my ass. but it's for a good cause.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby bk1 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:56 pm

IAFG wrote:
stingray wrote:
InGoodFaith wrote:Full tuition (even without COL) is to be avoided at GW :shock:

Please elaborate. Not that I don't believe you, I just hear that about a lot of schools, but I never hear the specifics. Are the job prospects that bad?
I'm leaning towards Tulane, mainly because I am cheap--probably to a fault. But I genuinely want to go to George Washington. It really does concern me when people say that it is not worth the price, and I would be lying if I didn't say that hearing stuff like that, even from anonymous strangers on TLS, wasn't affecting my decion. But I want to know why it isn't worth the price.
And I know that "worth the price" can mean different things to people in different circumstances. Here are my circumstances: 1)I want to be a good lawyer, so I want to go to a good school for my numbers, and 2) being a recent History grad, my current job prospects look like $0 a year, so even bad job prospects may seem good to me.

Is there a quick 1-pager summing up the basic TLS philosophy on this shit we could start linking to? With links to hiring stats or something? Because I don't even know how to start at ground 0 like this.


I tried it once. It was meh.

User avatar
stingray
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:37 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby stingray » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:02 pm

headandshoulderos wrote:
IAFG wrote:
headandshoulderos wrote:i mean, still. you would bet your entire future with a 70% chance of falling flat on your face??? that is not rational behavior. remember, your odds of a 50k job now, with just a BA, are as good as finding one with a JD, without losing 3 years of earning potential and taking out 100k+ in loans. the sad truth about the legal market is you either get a 160k job or you struggle for a 30k job. The 50k-100k jobs practically don't exist (less than 5% of the total market).

wait... what? where are you getting that?


my ass. but it's for a good cause.

This is why nobody heeds the warnings, everything is hyperbole. I actually want to take all of this information into account, but you can't determine who's giving you accurate information. Thanks for the charts, those actually are helpful.

headandshoulderos
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:12 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby headandshoulderos » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:05 pm

stingray wrote:
headandshoulderos wrote:
IAFG wrote:
headandshoulderos wrote:i mean, still. you would bet your entire future with a 70% chance of falling flat on your face??? that is not rational behavior. remember, your odds of a 50k job now, with just a BA, are as good as finding one with a JD, without losing 3 years of earning potential and taking out 100k+ in loans. the sad truth about the legal market is you either get a 160k job or you struggle for a 30k job. The 50k-100k jobs practically don't exist (less than 5% of the total market).

wait... what? where are you getting that?


my ass. but it's for a good cause.

This is why nobody heeds the warnings, everything is hyperbole. I actually want to take all of this information into account, but you can't determine who's giving you accurate information. Thanks for the charts, those actually are helpful.


If you can't figure out that GW at sticker is a bad decision, you deserve the consequences.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby vanwinkle » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:14 pm

stingray wrote:This is why nobody heeds the warnings, everything is hyperbole.

Here's the core of the problem, in this errant sentence.

Nobody heeds the warnings because they mistake legit warnings for hyperbole. Hyperbole refers to exaggeration beyond the truth. A lot of warnings are harsh and dire, but they're still accurate. People instinctively want to dismiss extreme-sounding warnings and seek more reassuring responses, but that's a huge mistake when things actually are extreme. They tune out the truth because it sounds so terrible they can't imagine it being true.

It's not hyperbole; things just actually are that bad.

User avatar
jim
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby jim » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:15 pm

GW is the not the best school in its market, yet has an extreme price tag.

User avatar
stingray
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:37 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby stingray » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:17 pm

headandshoulderos wrote:If you can't figure out that GW at sticker is a bad decision, you deserve the consequences.

Thank you!
On a completely unrelated note, I wonder if bad job prospects are somehow more prevalent for people with zero tact, and who are, all in all, unpleasant individuals that no one would want to hire after an OCI. Once again, completely unrelated.

User avatar
jim
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby jim » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:19 pm

stingray wrote:
headandshoulderos wrote:If you can't figure out that GW at sticker is a bad decision, you deserve the consequences.

Thank you!
On a completely unrelated note, I wonder if bad job prospects are somehow more prevalent for people with zero tact, and who are, all in all, unpleasant individuals that no one would want to hire after an OCI. Once again, completely unrelated.


You seem like quite the unpleasant individual yourself.

User avatar
stingray
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:37 pm

Re: Define "Sticker"

Postby stingray » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:20 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
stingray wrote:This is why nobody heeds the warnings, everything is hyperbole.

Here's the core of the problem, in this errant sentence.

Nobody heeds the warnings because they mistake legit warnings for hyperbole. Hyperbole refers to exaggeration beyond the truth. A lot of warnings are harsh and dire, but they're still accurate. People instinctively want to dismiss extreme-sounding warnings and seek more reassuring responses, but that's a huge mistake when things actually are extreme. They tune out the truth because it sounds so terrible they can't imagine it being true.

It's not hyperbole; things just actually are that bad.

I know it's bad out there. I was making reference to the statement that only 5% of lawyers make $50-100k. They admitted that it isn't true, but said that it was still ok to say it because it makes the point that you either make 160k or peanuts.




Return to “Financial Aid”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest