NU Apps '11-'12 - Good Luck Hold Candidates!!!! <3 Forum

[bk1]

So, from the latest batch, how many of you are actually attending?

I'm maybe 50/50. The spirit is willing but the flesh is spongy and bruised. Any words from those of you that are definitely going at sticker or close to it? I know I should have expected sticker, but it seemed a lot different as a hypothetical instead of staring down the $250k barrel.

I'm a rising 2L attending at sticker. I think it's worth it if you really want to do corporate work (and by that I mean both trans/lit), can stand long work hours, and don't mind NYC. Prior to law school I worked at a small firm that did slip'n'fall type lit. That really wasn't the kind of place that I would want to end up at (and it's the kind of place where most lower ranked school kids do end up at if they actually get a full time legal job).

[Samara]

So, from the latest batch, how many of you are actually attending?

I'm maybe 50/50. The spirit is willing but the flesh is spongy and bruised. Any words from those of you that are definitely going at sticker or close to it? I know I should have expected sticker, but it seemed a lot different as a hypothetical instead of staring down the $250k barrel.

lulz at the bolded

I'm going to NU at sticker and I feel pretty good about it, but I have WE that gives me a solid safety net if I flameout, plus other reasons to prefer NU. Do you have any questions in particular?

[Flips88]

I'm attending at sticker. There's some sticker shock, but I don't regret it. However, I did fine grades-wise. I'd likely be singing another tune if I had gotten grade pwned.

[givemea170]

I'm attending at sticker. There's some sticker shock, but I don't regret it. However, I did fine grades-wise. I'd likely be singing another tune if I had gotten grade pwned.

Is it normal to worry that I may be the least intelligent person accepted into Northwestern?

[Icculus]

I'm attending at sticker. There's some sticker shock, but I don't regret it. However, I did fine grades-wise. I'd likely be singing another tune if I had gotten grade pwned.

This is me, too. I think most people I know are attending at sticker.

[Icculus]

I'm attending at sticker. There's some sticker shock, but I don't regret it. However, I did fine grades-wise. I'd likely be singing another tune if I had gotten grade pwned.

Is it normal to worry that I may be the least intelligent person accepted into Northwestern?

As far as I can tell I think most people are afraid of this. I had dinner with one of my profs and he said he felt the same way when he was in law school, I think a lot of people are insecure but put on a good show.

[JamMasterJ]

well, let's get that to 80/20

I notice that you sneakily did not answer the question yourself, Jam.

Can I get a 99/1?

It's basically if I get into Chi, I go there, if I get into CLS or NYU, I might go to one of those, if I get in with a shit ton of money at M or P, I consider one of those. If none of the above, then 100% NU

[bamasplitter]

So, from the latest batch, how many of you are actually attending?

I'm maybe 50/50. The spirit is willing but the flesh is spongy and bruised. Any words from those of you that are definitely going at sticker or close to it? I know I should have expected sticker, but it seemed a lot different as a hypothetical instead of staring down the $250k barrel.

lulz at the bolded

I'm going to NU at sticker and I feel pretty good about it, but I have WE that gives me a solid safety net if I flameout, plus other reasons to prefer NU. Do you have any questions in particular?

I think my WE puts me in a pretty good spot. Especially considering the boost I should get from my IP background (check out my post in the choosing a law school forum if you haven't already). Even still $250k seems like a horribly large amount of money. The conundrum though is the "what ifs?" if I choose the financially cheaper option.

[dasneak]

Right now my options are WUSTL and Northwestern. WUSTL is giving me $90k which is a really attractive option...but then again, it's freaking Northwestern. Any advice?

[bk1]

Right now my options are WUSTL and Northwestern. WUSTL is giving me $90k which is a really attractive option...but then again, it's freaking Northwestern. Any advice?

See my post above. I turned down 105k at WUSTL and 105k at GW for NU at sticker. It really depends on what kind of work you want to do and how much you're willing to risk for that kind of work.

[Samara]

Right now my options are WUSTL and Northwestern. WUSTL is giving me $90k which is a really attractive option...but then again, it's freaking Northwestern. Any advice?

See my post above. I turned down 105k at WUSTL and 105k at GW for NU at sticker. It really depends on what kind of work you want to do and how much you're willing to risk for that kind of work.

I think it also depends on where you want to work. I turned down $84k at WUSTL and $90k at GW for NU. My goals are Chicago biglaw or bust, so it was a pretty easy choice for me because of NU's Chicago dominance. I strongly considered WUSTL because of an interest in PI route, but ultimately decided it was infeasible. Basically, we need to know your goals to help you decide.

[Samara]

I think my WE puts me in a pretty good spot. Especially considering the boost I should get from my IP background (check out my post in the choosing a law school forum if you haven't already). Even still $250k seems like a horribly large amount of money. The conundrum though is the "what ifs?" if I choose the financially cheaper option.

Yeah, with your strong WE, I'd go with NU. At NU, you'll be looking at something approaching the realm of certainty that you'll get a biglaw job if you want it. At Alabama, you're still looking at significant risk of not getting that biglaw job. There's just a huge drop-off in employment once you get outside the T18.

Yes, $250k is a lot of money, but in the long-term scheme of a successful career, it's really not that much. In ten years, or even five if you are aggressive with paying down your loans, you're in the same position whether you paid the $250k or not. NU pretty much guarantees you'll get there, while 'Bama doesn't. 'Bama eliminates the risk of total debt pwnage, but I think the trade-off is too big. I'm also not very risk or debt averse.

Can't go wrong with either choice, but I'd pick NU.

[givemea170]

WSTL offered me no money? I see some people were offered really good scholarships at WSTL and then sticker at NU? Very strange I didn't get anything from WSTL.

[splitsplat]

WSTL offered me no money? I see some people were offered really good scholarships at WSTL and then sticker at NU? Very strange I didn't get anything from WSTL.

stats? I can't see how anyone with a 170 (assuming your name makes sense) didn't get money at Wash

[manofjustice]

Right now my options are WUSTL and Northwestern. WUSTL is giving me $90k which is a really attractive option...but then again, it's freaking Northwestern. Any advice?

See my post above. I turned down 105k at WUSTL and 105k at GW for NU at sticker. It really depends on what kind of work you want to do and how much you're willing to risk for that kind of work.

That seems a bit insane, but it's a personal choice.

To the poster wondering if he should go to NU at sticker: Just do the research. I have. I am summarizing it below:

There are at least two studies of large populations of lawyers that adduce the "tier premium", or the extent, after adjusting for your statistically likely class rank at a school of a certain tier, that the school will improve your career. Smart people have already answered this, our most pressing question.

The upshot? As long as the other school you attend is in the 10-20 USNWR range (and they have placement statistics to suggest they belong in that range), or as long as it has placement statistics suggesting it could be in the 10-20 USNWR range (like Boston College, BU, and Fordham; such schools must be tied to a competitive market), your prospects for a 160 + bonus job are largely the same. (Remember, this is AFTER adjusting for your statistically likely class rank, or, in other words: you absolutly should be worried about "being the least intelligent person at NU". Don't listen to anyone who says the opposite; they are dangerously wrong.)

But here's the big secret: graduating from a T14 (and substantially moreso, graduating from a T10 tied to a competitive market--yes, T10s are somewhat regional too) is a substantial asset principally for getting a single kind of 160 + bonus job, not for getting any kind of such job. These include jobs at Vault 20 firms. These firms also work their new associates the hardest (and do pay somewhat larger bonuses). They include Cravath, Wachtell, and Sullivan and Cromwell. I've only heard of Wachtell paying substantially larger bonuses (which can be 80-120 grand.)

Here's the second big secret: the significant payoff to working for these kinds of firms is not your bonus, but is your chance to make partner. (That's not to mean you're more likely to make partner at these kinds of firms: you're substantially less likely to do so.) But mostly because these firms work their new associates the hardest (and as the legal market changes, less so because these firms are the only ones reputed to be competent for certain high-value work), their partners make the most money. For the same reason, fewer new associates will ever make partner.

Here's where my information-train stops. I haven't a clue to the secret for building the book of business necessary to become a partner at a V10 firm, and I haven't a clue whether going to NU would help.

If it's V20 or bust, your choice is NU, but it's not ideal. If it's V20-V80, possibly in a non-NYC market, it's the 10-20 school described above that costs substantially less. That will translate into your being better able to a) leave Big Law if you don't like it, and b) afford a higher standard of living, and c) being able to make your minimum loan payments if you fall in the bottom half of your class.

Let me hilight c). You first need to check NUs NALP report. You then need to understand firm-compensation is almost exclusively a function of firm-size. Mostly, only firms of more than 100 lawyers pay 160 + bonus (or 145 + bonus in the "secondary" markets). You then need to understand the bifurcation of starting salaries: very few lawyers across the legal profession who do not land starting salaries of 160 + bonus (or 145 + bonus in a "secondary" market) are landing starting salaries of more than 85, and most land starting salaries of between 55 and 65. (Even some graduates at NU land such salaries: that may be why NUs reported-salary percentage is only 66%.) If you've gone to NU at sticker, you cannot make your minimum loan repayments without making at least 100. So, unless you feel you have a good shot at being in the top half of your class at NU, don't ever think of paying sticker to go. (This applies to any T10-20, including Cornell, Georgetown, and Duke.)

My Source: A shit-ton of research and analysis as I've gone through the very same choice you are going through now

[Flips88]

That seems a bit insane, but it's a personal choice.

Rhetorical tip: don't start out an informational post by calling someone's personal choice "insane." Makes you come off as a dick.

[bk1]

That seems a bit insane, but it's a personal choice.

To the poster wondering if he should go to NU at sticker: Just do the research. I have. I am summarizing it below:

Why are you lumping schools ranked roughly 11-20 together? NU/Duke/Cornell/GULC generally have better outcomes than USC/UCLA/UT/Vandy who generally have better outcomes than the best schools ranked 19 and below (e.g. BU/BC/Fordham).

The significant payoff at those firms isn't your bonus or your chance at making partner. I would say it's your base salary (exit options as well). I don't understand why you would consider something that has a snowball's chance in hell of happening as a "significant payoff."

I semi-understand your claim regarding firms. A bulk of the advantage to going to a more prestigious school is in getting a biglaw job in NYC. But the problem with your analysis is that if you do want biglaw then a bulk of those jobs are in NYC. So the advantage is huge if you truly want to do that kind of work. Sure there is less of an advantage in secondary markets but your chances of getting one of those secondary markets is so slim that someone making this choice really needs to ask themselves which of location and job type is more important. That's why I chose NU. Because it gave me a significant advantage of getting biglaw that GW/WUSTL didn't (not to mention I'd still be around 140k in debt coming out of GW and I lacked ties to the midwest that would have allowed me to use WUSTL's prestige in places like KC/STL/Indy/etc). If you want to do corporate work, your chances coming out of lower ranked schools are quite slim.

[JamMasterJ]

NU has a better LRAP than most, if not all of those schools. So if you don't end up making a lot of money, you're still not truly screwed

[rinkrat19]

I've tried to reply to manofjustice's post like eight times but it keeps disappearing.

In response to ranking 11-20 the same as BU/BC/Fordham in terms of biglaw: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

[manofjustice]

That seems a bit insane, but it's a personal choice.

To the poster wondering if he should go to NU at sticker: Just do the research. I have. I am summarizing it below:

Why are you lumping schools ranked roughly 11-20 together? NU/Duke/Cornell/GULC generally have better outcomes than USC/UCLA/UT/Vandy who generally have better outcomes than the best schools ranked 19 and below (e.g. BU/BC/Fordham).

The significant payoff at those firms isn't your bonus or your chance at making partner. I would say it's your base salary (exit options as well). I don't understand why you would consider something that has a snowball's chance in hell of happening as a "significant payoff."

I semi-understand your claim regarding firms. A bulk of the advantage to going to a more prestigious school is in getting a biglaw job in NYC. But the problem with your analysis is that if you do want biglaw then a bulk of those jobs are in NYC. So the advantage is huge if you truly want to do that kind of work. Sure there is less of an advantage in secondary markets but your chances of getting one of those secondary markets is so slim that someone making this choice really needs to ask themselves which of location and job type is more important. That's why I chose NU. Because it gave me a significant advantage of getting biglaw that GW/WUSTL didn't (not to mention I'd still be around 140k in debt coming out of GW and I lacked ties to the midwest that would have allowed me to use WUSTL's prestige in places like KC/STL/Indy/etc). If you want to do corporate work, your chances coming out of lower ranked schools are quite slim.

Lumping 11-20 along with BU/BC/Fordham, etc., makes sense. The "large firm score" on Law School Transparency for many of these schools is almost the same. And in the end, "large firm score" correlates pretty well to 160 + bonus starting salary (if it excluded 50-100 lawyer firms, it would correlate better, but proportionally few graduates at any school usually go to firms of such size). As you'll see from the schools that release their full NALP reports, almost every job in 200+ lawyer firms, and most jobs in 100-200 lawyer firms, are 160 + bonus (or 145 + bonus in "secondary markets").

You make the mistake I was warning against: you say that the 160 + bonus jobs are in NYC and you want a T10/14 to get to NYC. The mistake is made on both counts. The 160 + bonus jobs are not just in NYC, and you don't need a T10/14 to get to NYC. The V20 jobs are in NYC. You want a T10/14 to go to NYC and get a V20. Outside the V20, the 160 + bonus jobs can be found in NYC and other parts of the country by graduates of most of the 11-20. Some of these schools, like Boston College and Vandy, will send a large portion of their graduates to NYC to get these jobs while sending the rest to the top of other markets. Others won't send hardly any to NYC, including schools you regard as being among the first in the 11-20, USC and UCLA.

The base salary is pretty stable across about the top 80 to 100 firms. That "snowball's chance in hell" of making partner at a V20 is actually the principle reason to pay sticker at a T10/14. That's not uncommon. Check this: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/magaz ... lroom.html A lot of labor markets are "lotteries" offering a chance at fabulous riches but not much else. It's partially rational, but obviously risky (if you're paying a lot for the chance), and it causes large disparities between the winners and the losers (especially between the losers who paid a lot and the winners who had scholarships). The "market" for V20 is a lottery, offering no greater base salary, a slightly higher bonus (again, Wachtell is the exception, but they will work you nearly to death, perhaps twice as much as even Cravath) but a chance to pull 5 million a year as a partner, along with a million a year pension at 60.

[rinkrat19]

long-ass post

You know you can EDIT a post, right? You don't have to keep deleting it. (assuming that's what is going on)

[manofjustice]

I've tried to reply to manofjustice's post like eight times but it keeps disappearing.

In response to ranking 11-20 the same as BU/BC/Fordham in terms of biglaw: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

BU versus Vandy: 35 to 47. Nothing fantastic. Now adjust for likely class rank, which is what the studies trying to answer our questions would do. Vandy's LSAT is more competitive by about a half a standard deviation, and it has a higher GPA median.

Not to mention the NLJ 250 includes a lot of sub 160 + bonus jobs. Law School Transparency's 200+ lawyer firm percentages are a better measure.

[manofjustice]

I've tried to reply to manofjustice's post like eight times but it keeps disappearing.

In response to ranking 11-20 the same as BU/BC/Fordham in terms of biglaw: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

BU versus Vandy: 35 to 47. Nothing fantastic. Now adjust for likely class rank, which is what the studies trying to answer our questions would do. Vandy's LSAT is more competitive by about a half a standard deviation, and it has a higher GPA median.

Not to mention the NLJ 250 includes a lot of sub 160 + bonus jobs. Law School Transparency's 200+ lawyer firm percentages are a better measure.

I guess I could budge on Fordham (an NLJ 250 of 29 is a bit low). Like I said, NYC is too saturated. Sub Cornell, and you're pickin at the bone if you go to a NYC regional.

[bdubs]

I've tried to reply to manofjustice's post like eight times but it keeps disappearing.

In response to ranking 11-20 the same as BU/BC/Fordham in terms of biglaw: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

BU versus Vandy: 35 to 47. Nothing fantastic. Now adjust for likely class rank, which is what the studies trying to answer our questions would do. Vandy's LSAT is more competitive by about a half a standard deviation, and it has a higher GPA median.

Not to mention the NLJ 250 includes a lot of sub 160 + bonus jobs. Law School Transparency's 200+ lawyer firm percentages are a better measure.

I guess I could budge on Fordham (an NLJ 250 of 29 is a bit low). Like I said, NYC is too saturated. Sub Cornell, and you're pickin at the bone if you go to a NYC regional.

Those numbers are out of date. WUSTL's NLJ number went all the way down to 13%

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

There is no way you can compare NU's NLJ250 number at 52% with schools like WUSTL, BU, and Fordham that are all sub 20% (or UMN, UW etc. in the T20) . Even if the NLJ includes firms that pay 120-145k, that is still far better than the alternative.

I think NU also has better placement into non-NLJ positions that pay well. I know of several boutiques in Chicago that consistently hire NU grads and pay market. My guess is that schools in the 15-20 range can't claim as many of those positions either.

[rinkrat19]

I've tried to reply to manofjustice's post like eight times but it keeps disappearing.

In response to ranking 11-20 the same as BU/BC/Fordham in terms of biglaw: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

BU versus Vandy: 35 to 47. Nothing fantastic. Now adjust for likely class rank, which is what the studies trying to answer our questions would do. Vandy's LSAT is more competitive by about a half a standard deviation, and it has a higher GPA median.

Not to mention the NLJ 250 includes a lot of sub 160 + bonus jobs. Law School Transparency's 200+ lawyer firm percentages are a better measure.

I guess I could budge on Fordham (an NLJ 250 of 29 is a bit low). Like I said, NYC is too saturated. Sub Cornell, and you're pickin at the bone if you go to a NYC regional.

Those numbers are out of date. WUSTL's NLJ number went all the way down to 13%

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... slreturn=1

There is no way you can compare NU's NLJ250 number at 52% with schools like WUSTL, BU, and Fordham that are all sub 20%. Even if the NLJ includes firms that pay 120-145k, that is still far better than the alternative.

I think NU also has better placement into non-NLJ positions that pay well. I know of several boutiques in Chicago that consistently hire NU grads and pay market. My guess is that schools in the 15-20 range can't claim as many of those positions either.

Good lord, can't believe I used the wrong year's link. Thanks, bdubs.