How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

rustyburger2
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 5:12 pm

How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby rustyburger2 » Wed Dec 10, 2014 4:38 am

If you had to put a price tag on it, how much do you think it would be worth?

How about a 175 or 180?

Really just asking out of curiosity, I feel like it would be interesting to see how much LSAT scores are valued by people.

User avatar
bhowton
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 3:54 am

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby bhowton » Wed Dec 10, 2014 5:43 am

rustyburger2 wrote:If you had to put a price tag on it, how much do you think it would be worth?


I'm not sure how to interpret your question. Do you mean how much you can sell it for, taking someone else's test for example? Or how much scholarship money it can get? Test scores are not the type of thing that can be monetized, so there would have to be a range, say between $0 and about—I don't know—whatever amount one may hope to make over a 30-40 year career.

How much do you think it's worth?

User avatar
eriedoctrine
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 1:00 am

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby eriedoctrine » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:06 am

Dammit Ross.

BP Robert
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:50 am

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby BP Robert » Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:07 pm

Haha I agree with the above that this is a tricky q to answer in its current form. However, to give you a very rough idea, one might expect that with a 3.8 and a 168 they stand a good chance at USC. However, with a 3.8 and a 170 I think it likely that they could expect a scholarship -- plausibly something that (over the course of three years and considering that you dodge some interest on your student loans) could total roughly $40,000.

Or you could think of the 170 as helping them out of USC and into a T14. Those 3.8/170 numbers are probably competitive for, say, Michigan. It's plausible that Michigan bumps you into the top-tier big law firms that pull $160k straight out of law school, as opposed to the $125k firms (wow this is a lot of speculating) to which USC grads typically funnel. At that point, we could reasonably say that that score nets you at least $30k in the first year alone, and potentially well over $100k in the long run.

In short, and more reputably, one can safely say that a 170 is very "valuable." Every point on the LSAT has the potential to equate to thousands of dollars in scholarship $ and job offers, if you go the money-making route after law school. I'd feel comfortable guessing that something like 4 points could in many cases equate to a couple hundred thousand dollars in lifetime earnings. Maybe more. It's pretty important.

Best,

Blueprint LSAT Prep

User avatar
Rigo
Posts: 11953
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby Rigo » Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:44 pm

If you have a 3.8/168, you're getting a decent chunk of money from USC.
3.8/170 is likely full ride territory.

Let's compare a 167 applicant to a 172 applicant.
167
Pays close to sticker for a T14, or goes to a non-T14 with a nice scholarship.
In the first case, that's $200k+ in debt. In the second scenario, less debt but also way less of a chance of getting a high-paying biglaw job.

172
Could potentially pull full rides at several lower T14's (Penn thru Cornell) so minimal debt and a probable shot at landing biglaw.

Let's say the typical legal career is 30+ years. The difference in lifetime income and opportunities between a 167 and a 172 is in the millions.
That's why retaking is TCR.
Last edited by Rigo on Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rebexness
Posts: 4163
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:24 am

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby rebexness » Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:51 pm

Last edited by rebexness on Thu Jan 29, 2015 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rigo
Posts: 11953
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby Rigo » Fri Dec 12, 2014 6:56 pm

rebexness wrote:
Dirigo wrote:If you have a 3.8/168, you're getting a decent chunk of money from USC.
3.8/170 is likely full ride territory.

Their 75th is 167, so a 168 should net you a full ride or Rothman imo.

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. The correct estimate is undoubtedly more liberal than BP Robert's sticker price.

AReasonableMan
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby AReasonableMan » Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:17 pm

As opposed to what? A 150? 165? It's all relative. It's also speculative to put a price on it, but if you are dead set on only practicing law and use the percentages of outcomes from different schools than a 170 vs. 150 is worth millons of dollars. The issue nowadays is the 150 will likely never have the opportunity to get very far or get good experience so "practice skills" are irrelevant. It's more likely the 175, 170 and 165 will rise and fall based on these sort of skills.

User avatar
mornincounselor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:37 am

Post removed.

Postby mornincounselor » Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:22 pm

Post removed.
Last edited by mornincounselor on Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
schmelling
Posts: 1090
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:15 am

Post removed.

Postby schmelling » Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:37 pm

Post removed.
Last edited by schmelling on Sat Dec 05, 2015 1:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

AReasonableMan
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby AReasonableMan » Fri Dec 12, 2014 10:54 pm

mornincounselor wrote:Then we have to consider the score's impact on the trajectory of a student with a less than stellar GPA. When the return on investment is the difference in career prospects between a regional at nearly full cost vs a lower t14 at a similar cost I suspect the true value is even further magnified. In such an instance the 170 LSAT could literally be the difference between a 50k PI job and a big law job.

I think every moment invested in good LSAT prep promises significant returns. Greater returns than most things a student could do prior to law school including the run of the mill full-time jobs.

You're assuming that a PI job is something people settle for. There are obvious benefits to PI (hours, loan repayment, a cause you may care about), and the personalities of the people tend to be very different. I'm assuming you're not in the industry yet. LSGPA's and school ranks may be more scattered, but the idea that they're the weaker attorneys or are settling is wrong.

You have to look at each category separately: PI vs. no PI, and big law vs. five person firm. A person from a top school has a big advantage getting most PI jobs over someone from a TTT. In big law, I agree the difference probably winds up being millions of dollars, but there are variables at every stage. There may also be some overlap between the other skills the 170 has, and being more successful.

Most people cannot get a 170, and most people cannot acquire the self-discipline and longterm planning to go from a 150 to 170. Even discounting the benefit of going to a better school, a person who makes such an improvement has to have a lot other traits that are highly correlated with success. The bevy of 150's who refuse to study correctly are going to find reasons not to study correctly in law school, and more reasons not to do good work. This isn't to say that many people don't do the latter two correctly, and just get screwed. Rather, the people with the 150's who comprise the 1% tend to outwork the 170s to wind up at the same place. Most of them would have probably had a better outcome than the 170 had they started at the same school.

User avatar
PeanutsNJam
Posts: 3699
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:57 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby PeanutsNJam » Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:35 am

Depends on the individual. If your GPA is 4.0 and you suck ass at LSAT, and after 4 takes you can't top 165, then I'd pay hundreds of thousands for a 175+ because you can make it back immediately in a Hamilton.

If your gpa is a 3.0 and you can already score a 170, I would pay a few hundred bucks for a 175+, because really I'm shut out of anywhere that that makes a difference.

User avatar
mornincounselor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:37 am

Post removed.

Postby mornincounselor » Sat Dec 13, 2014 3:49 pm

Post removed.
Last edited by mornincounselor on Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
WaltGrace83
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:55 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby WaltGrace83 » Sat Dec 13, 2014 5:36 pm

I don't know but it seemingly is worth the hundreds and hundreds of hours a 170+ taker would put into it.

AReasonableMan
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby AReasonableMan » Sat Dec 13, 2014 5:38 pm

mornincounselor wrote:
AReasonableMan wrote:
mornincounselor wrote:Then we have to consider the score's impact on the trajectory of a student with a less than stellar GPA. When the return on investment is the difference in career prospects between a regional at nearly full cost vs a lower t14 at a similar cost I suspect the true value is even further magnified. In such an instance the 170 LSAT could literally be the difference between a 50k PI job and a big law job.

I think every moment invested in good LSAT prep promises significant returns. Greater returns than most things a student could do prior to law school including the run of the mill full-time jobs.

You're assuming that a PI job is something people settle for. There are obvious benefits to PI (hours, loan repayment, a cause you may care about), and the personalities of the people tend to be very different. I'm assuming you're not in the industry yet. LSGPA's and school ranks may be more scattered, but the idea that they're the weaker attorneys or are settling is wrong.

You have to look at each category separately: PI vs. no PI, and big law vs. five person firm. A person from a top school has a big advantage getting most PI jobs over someone from a TTT. In big law, I agree the difference probably winds up being millions of dollars, but there are variables at every stage. There may also be some overlap between the other skills the 170 has, and being more successful.

Most people cannot get a 170, and most people cannot acquire the self-discipline and longterm planning to go from a 150 to 170. Even discounting the benefit of going to a better school, a person who makes such an improvement has to have a lot other traits that are highly correlated with success. The bevy of 150's who refuse to study correctly are going to find reasons not to study correctly in law school, and more reasons not to do good work. This isn't to say that many people don't do the latter two correctly, and just get screwed. Rather, the people with the 150's who comprise the 1% tend to outwork the 170s to wind up at the same place. Most of them would have probably had a better outcome than the 170 had they started at the same school.


I don't think I'm making this particular assumption. What I mean to say is that a significant portion of the "good outcomes" from a t-14 is big law while a roughly similar portion of the "good outcomes" from a regional are PI jobs. I don't mean to say anyone "settles" for PI.

I also am not suggesting that students who get into t-14 are necessarily going to be better lawyers (although I think the skills required for top LSAT scores have some correlation to skills needed in many fields of law) but rather the students will often be given better opportunities.

I take your third paragraph to mean that students who start in the 150s and end in the 170s have to study well over months in pursuit of a single opportunity to put the lessons into play in a designed exercise, and that is it the cultivation of this willingness to study that is truly valuable for them. I think this is where our disagreement lies. I assume that getting a 170 requires such cultivation (or at least the utilization of the skills cultivated earlier) per se. You make the point that a high LSAT score without this cultivation isn't as valuable as I suggest.

I can't point to many instances where a student got to the 170s without either:

a) Cultivating the described skills over a long period of time while studying for the LSAT;

or

b) Relying on previously cultivated skills from past work experience or undergrad experience, other standardized test preparation etc. and utilizing them in the LSAT context.

I assumed the thread asks about the value of a student working for and acquiring the skills (I feel) necessary for a 170 on the LSAT and you're assuming the thread is asking about a student who hires a Mike Ross to take the LSAT for them and therefore has the 170 without the work involved. Would you agree?

No, being naturally good at something is always advantageous. If someone got a 170 on the LSAT with no studying and then worked as hard as the person who improved by 20 points, they're likelier to do better insofar as the LSAT is an accurate measure of exam ability. It's more that a person with certain personality traits can compensate for having a less prestigious pre-law education or a lower IQ.

I think in most instances the t-14 student will be a better lawyer than the TTT lawyer. Let's be honest. If a person can't make time to do well on a test they can take at any quarter you wish and know greatly impacts their future, is it likely a light will certainly flash when they start practicing? The student who gets a good first job is also being placed in a position to succeed aside from the money. They have secretaries and tech people available to help them, and they are around successful people a few years older than them who they learn from by observation (how most people learn best). There's also value in having your work scrutinized and altered by a really good attorney even if they scold you for being an idiot. Finally, being conditioned to perceive your time as more important than money (use seamless, have secretaries handle the little things, etc.) might burn you out, but it also instills confidence that makes it easier to succeed. Compare this with the doc reviewer being placed in a rat infested basement, or the attorney working for a solo who needs to put on a song and dance every time they want to get the bathroom key.

Even if the 170 were illegally attained, it would have value for the above reasons, which is prob part of why such serious precautions are taken relative to other standardized tests. I would also say that a person going to law school with a 150 today versus 10 years ago probably has some long term planning issues that are going to repeat.

WordPass
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:56 am

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby WordPass » Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:02 pm

Thought this was an interesting question.

I generally don't think looking at it mainly in terms of the potential future earnings the score will bring is a good way to answer the question. I mean, a pen or computer or any good or service has the potential to change someone's potential earnings drastically, but we don't charge people based on that (in most cases), right?

I think a better way to phrase the question or what you're looking for (correct me if I'm wrong) is how much it'd go for on an open market. That is, supply/demand. We have a certain (very limited) pool of people providing a 170+ (think of this as a single good) and a bigger pool of potential demanders. Of course, not everyone wants or even needs a 170+. Some people are okay going to schools that they don't need a 170+ to get in to and others might have other factors affecting their odds that they feel they don't need such a score either (take an underrepresented minority, for example). We'd have to first have to see how many people would actually want a 170+ (regardless of GPA) and then see how many of the 170+ people are willing to sell it on the open market.

What I'm really trying to figure out is, would there really be that much of a demand for a 170+? Because this isn't a representative sample, we can't simply look at this forum's population. I'm almost certain most people here would be willing to pay for a 170+ in some respect. However, the whole US population? A little unsure.

I mean, as the rhetoric goes, the LSAT is a learnable test. Does that mean that an average college student can attain a 170+ (maybe just a straight 170) if they set their mind to it for a solid 5 months? If so, then wouldn't they have already done that if they wanted it that badly? Does that mean most people are okay not hitting a 170+?

Interesting question, definitely.

AReasonableMan
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby AReasonableMan » Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:08 pm

WordPass wrote:Thought this was an interesting question.

I generally don't think looking at it mainly in terms of the potential future earnings the score will bring is a good way to answer the question. I mean, a pen or computer or any good or service has the potential to change someone's potential earnings drastically, but we don't charge people based on that (in most cases), right?

I think a better way to phrase the question or what you're looking for (correct me if I'm wrong) is how much it'd go for on an open market. That is, supply/demand. We have a certain (very limited) pool of people providing a 170+ (think of this as a single good) and a bigger pool of potential demanders. Of course, not everyone wants or even needs a 170+. Some people are okay going to schools that they don't need a 170+ to get in to and others might have other factors affecting their odds that they feel they don't need such a score either (take an underrepresented minority, for example). We'd have to first have to see how many people would actually want a 170+ (regardless of GPA) and then see how many of the 170+ people are willing to sell it on the open market.

What I'm really trying to figure out is, would there really be that much of a demand for a 170+? Because this isn't a representative sample, we can't simply look at this forum's population. I'm almost certain most people here would be willing to pay for a 170+ in some respect. However, the whole US population? A little unsure.

I mean, as the rhetoric goes, the LSAT is a learnable test. Does that mean that an average college student can attain a 170+ (maybe just a straight 170) if they set their mind to it for a solid 5 months? If so, then wouldn't have already done that if they wanted it that badly? Does that most people are okay not hitting a 170+?

Interesting question, definitely.

The risk of getting caught, having limited recourse if the person fails to come through and the immorality of it all greatly stunt its value. If you picture a world where none of these 3 things factor in, I think you could get close to a million for it. The demand is limited but there are many rich parents who would pay a shit ton to make their loser kid successful. As long as the supply remains low, they're going to bid against each other. If you were a multimillionaire who had one child, and this one child wanted to become an attorney how much would you pay to place them in the best position them to succeed?

WordPass
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:56 am

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby WordPass » Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:34 pm

AReasonableMan wrote:
WordPass wrote:Thought this was an interesting question.

I generally don't think looking at it mainly in terms of the potential future earnings the score will bring is a good way to answer the question. I mean, a pen or computer or any good or service has the potential to change someone's potential earnings drastically, but we don't charge people based on that (in most cases), right?

I think a better way to phrase the question or what you're looking for (correct me if I'm wrong) is how much it'd go for on an open market. That is, supply/demand. We have a certain (very limited) pool of people providing a 170+ (think of this as a single good) and a bigger pool of potential demanders. Of course, not everyone wants or even needs a 170+. Some people are okay going to schools that they don't need a 170+ to get in to and others might have other factors affecting their odds that they feel they don't need such a score either (take an underrepresented minority, for example). We'd have to first have to see how many people would actually want a 170+ (regardless of GPA) and then see how many of the 170+ people are willing to sell it on the open market.

What I'm really trying to figure out is, would there really be that much of a demand for a 170+? Because this isn't a representative sample, we can't simply look at this forum's population. I'm almost certain most people here would be willing to pay for a 170+ in some respect. However, the whole US population? A little unsure.

I mean, as the rhetoric goes, the LSAT is a learnable test. Does that mean that an average college student can attain a 170+ (maybe just a straight 170) if they set their mind to it for a solid 5 months? If so, then wouldn't have already done that if they wanted it that badly? Does that most people are okay not hitting a 170+?

Interesting question, definitely.

The risk of getting caught, having limited recourse if the person fails to come through and the immorality of it all greatly stunt its value. If you picture a world where none of these 3 things factor in, I think you could get close to a million for it. The demand is limited but there are many rich parents who would pay a shit ton to make their loser kid successful. As long as the supply remains low, they're going to bid against each other. If you were a multimillionaire who had one child, and this one child wanted to become an attorney how much would you pay to place them in the best position them to succeed?



All those things definitely add complexity to the issue.

If I had that kind of money, idk lol. It's hard for me to really say because I don't even know what a million dollars looks like. Like I could throw out a figure ...say $50,000, but would I actually pay that amount if push came to shove? It's a form of response bias. but if I were to just throw a number out there, I probably might go up to the tens of thousands.

Still, I think that family wouldn't really be representative if we're trying to get an overall estimate. I'm sure, on the other end, there is some guy or girl willing to pay only a couple bucks. Maybe they'd like a 170+, but they've scored a 166(fuck PT 50)-169 for the past 40 preptests and a 170+ won't impact their chances that much (and the risk isn't that worth it either). Again, I'm not sure if they'd be representative of the general pool of demanders so their willingness to pay wouldn't be a good, sole basis to judge.

Theoretically, the price on a 170+, I would guess, would be very high (or at least higher than in the real world).

In reality, though, I'm assuming it'd be a lot lower. One main reason being that the amount people pay would be constrained by the amount they make, so that's already a limit on what can be paid to begin with.

AReasonableMan
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby AReasonableMan » Sat Dec 13, 2014 10:51 pm

WordPass wrote:
AReasonableMan wrote:
WordPass wrote:Thought this was an interesting question.

I generally don't think looking at it mainly in terms of the potential future earnings the score will bring is a good way to answer the question. I mean, a pen or computer or any good or service has the potential to change someone's potential earnings drastically, but we don't charge people based on that (in most cases), right?

I think a better way to phrase the question or what you're looking for (correct me if I'm wrong) is how much it'd go for on an open market. That is, supply/demand. We have a certain (very limited) pool of people providing a 170+ (think of this as a single good) and a bigger pool of potential demanders. Of course, not everyone wants or even needs a 170+. Some people are okay going to schools that they don't need a 170+ to get in to and others might have other factors affecting their odds that they feel they don't need such a score either (take an underrepresented minority, for example). We'd have to first have to see how many people would actually want a 170+ (regardless of GPA) and then see how many of the 170+ people are willing to sell it on the open market.

What I'm really trying to figure out is, would there really be that much of a demand for a 170+? Because this isn't a representative sample, we can't simply look at this forum's population. I'm almost certain most people here would be willing to pay for a 170+ in some respect. However, the whole US population? A little unsure.

I mean, as the rhetoric goes, the LSAT is a learnable test. Does that mean that an average college student can attain a 170+ (maybe just a straight 170) if they set their mind to it for a solid 5 months? If so, then wouldn't have already done that if they wanted it that badly? Does that most people are okay not hitting a 170+?

Interesting question, definitely.

The risk of getting caught, having limited recourse if the person fails to come through and the immorality of it all greatly stunt its value. If you picture a world where none of these 3 things factor in, I think you could get close to a million for it. The demand is limited but there are many rich parents who would pay a shit ton to make their loser kid successful. As long as the supply remains low, they're going to bid against each other. If you were a multimillionaire who had one child, and this one child wanted to become an attorney how much would you pay to place them in the best position them to succeed?



All those things definitely add complexity to the issue.

If I had that kind of money, idk lol. It's hard for me to really say because I don't even know what a million dollars looks like. Like I could throw out a figure ...say $50,000, but would I actually pay that amount if push came to shove? It's a form of response bias. but if I were to just throw a number out there, I probably might go up to the tens of thousands.

Still, I think that family wouldn't really be representative if we're trying to get an overall estimate. I'm sure, on the other end, there is some guy or girl willing to pay only a couple bucks. Maybe they'd like a 170+, but they've scored a 166(fuck PT 50)-169 for the past 40 preptests and a 170+ won't impact their chances that much (and the risk isn't that worth it either). Again, I'm not sure if they'd be representative of the general pool of demanders so their willingness to pay wouldn't be a good, sole basis to judge.

Theoretically, the price on a 170+, I would guess, would be very high (or at least higher than in the real world).

In reality, though, I'm assuming it'd be a lot lower. One main reason being that the amount people pay would be constrained by the amount they make, so that's already a limit on what can be paid to begin with.

You're underestimating the percentage of law students whose parents are millionaires. It's a minority, but a large minority. It definitely exceeds the # of law students with scores in the 170s. If you think about why someone would try to convince their child to let them pay for them to attend a TTT at sticker price, and the value a 170 would have to the parent's objective, I think you're underestimating how much it's worth. You're right there wouldn't be a consistent market price, but as long as it remained limited, you'd fetch a ton for it.

KaNa1986
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:32 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby KaNa1986 » Sat Dec 13, 2014 11:08 pm

rustyburger2 wrote:If you had to put a price tag on it, how much do you think it would be worth?

How about a 175 or 180?

Really just asking out of curiosity, I feel like it would be interesting to see how much LSAT scores are valued by people.


178+ (combined with 3.95+ GPA) would pretty much guarantee Hamilton/Ruby, this combo is worth at least $170k-$180k.

User avatar
banjo
Posts: 1345
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:00 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby banjo » Sun Dec 14, 2014 4:53 am

If it were legal, I would take the LSAT for someone and guarantee a 170+ for about $1500. I would probably do it for less too. Could use the money.

User avatar
DKM
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby DKM » Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:10 am

About tree fiddy..

AReasonableMan
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby AReasonableMan » Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:08 pm

banjo wrote:If it were legal, I would take the LSAT for someone and guarantee a 170+ for about $1500. I would probably do it for less too. Could use the money.

On second thought, people like you would destroy the market by willing to do it for much less making market price too low. It's a shame.

WordPass
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:56 am

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby WordPass » Tue Dec 16, 2014 3:07 am

AReasonableMan wrote:
banjo wrote:If it were legal, I would take the LSAT for someone and guarantee a 170+ for about $1500. I would probably do it for less too. Could use the money.

On second thought, people like you would destroy the market by willing to do it for much less making market price too low. It's a shame.


haha, I mean, if you guys were operating under what is our current system today, you couldn't price fix anyway. The market would fix itself (sorta) and that number would probably be higher than his $1500 but not as high as people would be willing to truly pay.

User avatar
PeanutsNJam
Posts: 3699
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:57 pm

Re: How much do you think a 170 on the LSAT is worth?

Postby PeanutsNJam » Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:55 am

I mean, you have to remember that even if he offers his services for $1500, he can only do it for one person per administration. So if we're turning this into a business, one person undercutting wouldn't affect the market at all. I can still charge $100k for a guaranteed 170 if he does this.

However, the only people who understand the true value of a 170+ (scholarship, prestige importance), are likely to be intelligent enough to study for that themselves. I know I'd go through the entire process of LSAT studying for my score than to pay 100k for it, even if it's "worth" 100k.

The only people who would go for your services are those that are both extremely wealthy and extremely lazy. Extremely wealthy and lazy college kids don't go to law school. They spend daddy's money.

TL;DR: You either charge way, way below it's "true value" for a 170 or you don't have any customers at all. A 170+ is the easiest 150k to make. 4-6 months of studying ~3-4 hours a day? Done.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests