Retake Forum

[nodummy]

ITT: OP asks legitimate question. Doom squad invades, tells OP to killself. OP never gets question answered. Random LSAT quip (really?)

/thread

Exactly. Can I get a decent response from someone? I would prefer hearing my only shot is at Cooley compared to these responses. (But please don't say Cooley.)

[09042014]

ITT: OP asks legitimate question. Doom squad invades, tells OP to killself. OP never gets question answered. Random LSAT quip (really?)

/thread

Exactly. Can I get a decent response from someone? I would prefer hearing my only shot is at Cooley compared to these responses. (But please don't say Cooley.)

TBF you can get a fullride at cooley.

[nodummy]

ITT: OP asks legitimate question. Doom squad invades, tells OP to killself. OP never gets question answered. Random LSAT quip (really?)

/thread

Exactly. Can I get a decent response from someone? I would prefer hearing my only shot is at Cooley compared to these responses. (But please don't say Cooley.)

TBF you can get a fullride at cooley.

That's what I don't understand...why would a full ride at some T3 not be worth it? It's a free law degree that I'm sure would be useful at some point some where...either way, no debt.

[BrownBears09]

ITT: OP asks legitimate question. Doom squad invades, tells OP to killself. OP never gets question answered. Random LSAT quip (really?)

/thread

Exactly. Can I get a decent response from someone? I would prefer hearing my only shot is at Cooley compared to these responses. (But please don't say Cooley.)

TBF you can get a fullride at cooley.

That's what I don't understand...why would a full ride at some T3 not be worth it? It's a free law degree that I'm sure would be useful at some point some where...either way, no debt.

Opportunity cost maybe? I.e. you could be in a "different" job making 40k/yearly (with possible leveling up) instead of spending 3 years in school with 40k/yearly exit options after graduation.

Scholly stipulations can be a limiting factor as well.

[nodummy]

But either way you'd have a law degree, which might eventually earn you more than the alternative.

[BrownBears09]

But either way you'd have a law degree, which might eventually earn you more than the alternative.

Perhaps... but therein lies the gamble. At no monetary cost, you're really just weighing opportunity cost.

[09042014]

ITT: OP asks legitimate question. Doom squad invades, tells OP to killself. OP never gets question answered. Random LSAT quip (really?)

/thread

Exactly. Can I get a decent response from someone? I would prefer hearing my only shot is at Cooley compared to these responses. (But please don't say Cooley.)

TBF you can get a fullride at cooley.

That's what I don't understand...why would a full ride at some T3 not be worth it? It's a free law degree that I'm sure would be useful at some point some where...either way, no debt.

This is a good question. If you just want to be a lawyer, and aren't looking for huge salary, it's probably better than paying sticker at a great school. 220K in debt is massive.

However the problem is that some of these schools only give scholarships that are conditioned on great grades. At these schools you can lose scholarships. If you just drop out no big deal, but most just pay sticker instead.

If you want to go to anything but a T14, I suggest you go for free, no matter how low you want to go.

[TheTallOne0602]

ITT: OP asks legitimate question. Doom squad invades, tells OP to killself. OP never gets question answered. Random LSAT quip (really?)

/thread

Exactly. Can I get a decent response from someone? I would prefer hearing my only shot is at Cooley compared to these responses. (But please don't say Cooley.)

TBF you can get a fullride at cooley.

That's what I don't understand...why would a full ride at some T3 not be worth it? It's a free law degree that I'm sure would be useful at some point some where...either way, no debt.

Well there is still cost of living, and you are possibly giving up over $100,000 over the course of those three years, which, while not necessarily all adding up to debt, does mean you are giving up $150,000-$200,000 to attend a terrible law school where your job prospects will be crappy.

Why would anyone want to do that? Even if you want to practice law... do you really want to practice the kind that you will be forced into by attending an awful institution? And if practicing the law is THAT important to you, why would you be opposed to spending a little extra time now retaking the LSAT in order to achieve a career closer to what you desired? If you are unwilling to do that, then how much do you really want to practice law?

[Ragged]

Flame.

[weejonbu]

Desert Fox, I hope you don't listen to these idiots. They know nothing about TLS or respect. CLEARLY. I can't believe they feign intelligence and then go on to discuss the finer points of attending Cooley... this is such a dumb thread, Lord save us...

[patrickd139]

OP don't listen to these idiots, all of your law school dreams will come true.

[Curry]

Its just not worth it to go to a TTT and the reasoning is this. Chances are, you will NEVER EVER EVER make up the money you lose while attending law school. Even if your law school costs are $0.00 (which is unlikely because COS and scholarship stipulations will most likely change that) you still lose a 40k per year salary (assuming no bonuses or raises). That puts you 120k behind right out of the gate. Assuming you can even find a job with your JD (which is is also unlikely), you probably wont be making more than that 40k to begin with, possibly even less depending on the job you got. So you spent 3 years, lost 120k in salary, for the potential of earning the same amount of money as you did before you left your initial job. Thats just not smart money management.

[BrownBears09]

Its just not worth it to go to a TTT and the reasoning is this. Chances are, you will NEVER EVER EVER make up the money you lose while attending law school. Even if your law school costs are $0.00 (which is unlikely because COS and scholarship stipulations will most likely change that) you still lose a 40k per year salary (assuming no bonuses or raises). That puts you 120k behind right out of the gate. Assuming you can even find a job with your JD (which is is also unlikely), you probably wont be making more than that 40k to begin with, possibly even less depending on the job you got. So you spent 3 years, lost 120k in salary, for the potential of earning the same amount of money as you did before you left your initial job. Thats just not smart money management.

To be fair, this is a faulty blanket generalization that assumes no job prospects - for anyone - after graduation. We all know that's not entirely true, hence the gamble.

[witorres89]

I think I'm the first person to actually answer your question but West Virginia wouldn't be a bad option. Miami would be a big reach. Keep in mind that the advice to retake is excellent. If your not willing to put the work in to study for the lsat, how are you going to fair in law school?

[bk1]

To be fair, this is a faulty blanket generalization that assumes no job prospects - for anyone - after graduation. We all know that's not entirely true, hence the gamble.

The lottery is also a gamble. Does that mean I should pay $100,000 for a single ticket?

[bk1]

Serious answer:

Stop being bullheaded and retake. Yes, it isn't what you want to hear, but you are being a stubborn jackass if you do not. Nobody wants to wait a year, but it would be stupid not to take the maximum amount of chances you have (3 LSATs per 2 years) at giving yourself the best possible scholarship or the best possible school. Maybe you can do better, maybe you can't, but the chances are so high that you would be a giant fool not to even try. The opportunity cost is not very large considering what does it matter whether you graduate law school when you are 26 versus 25, or 31 versus 30, etc, etc? The answer is it doesn't matter and you are irrationally overvaluing a year wait at a huge detriment to your future job prospects and/or increasing the size of your debt.

Your GPA does suck, but it does not lock you out of splitter-friendly schools (NU/GULC/WUSTL/UIUC/etc) or lock you out of getting huge scholarships to the local T2/T3/T4. Do yourself a favor and at least attempt a retake. It sucks, but it truly is the best option down the road.

[Curry]

Its just not worth it to go to a TTT and the reasoning is this. Chances are, you will NEVER EVER EVER make up the money you lose while attending law school. Even if your law school costs are $0.00 (which is unlikely because COS and scholarship stipulations will most likely change that) you still lose a 40k per year salary (assuming no bonuses or raises). That puts you 120k behind right out of the gate. Assuming you can even find a job with your JD (which is is also unlikely), you probably wont be making more than that 40k to begin with, possibly even less depending on the job you got. So you spent 3 years, lost 120k in salary, for the potential of earning the same amount of money as you did before you left your initial job. Thats just not smart money management.

To be fair, this is a faulty blanket generalization that assumes no job prospects - for anyone - after graduation. We all know that's not entirely true, hence the gamble.

How do you figure it assumes no job prospects. I said " Assuming you can even find a job with your JD (which is is also unlikely), you probably wont be making more than that 40k to begin with, possibly even less depending on the job you got." Bad grammar aside, I assumed the person got a job (just as I assumed the person could get a job beforehand). If the person can't get a job either way, well they're shit out of luck anyways. If you mean I'm assuming they wont get a biglaw job, well then yes, I guess thats a valid point, but considering everyone but maybe the top 10 students at a TTT has the opportunity to land a big law job, I feel as if its a safe assumption.

[BrownBears09]

To be fair, this is a faulty blanket generalization that assumes no job prospects - for anyone - after graduation. We all know that's not entirely true, hence the gamble.

The lottery is also a gamble. Does that mean I should pay $100,000 for a single ticket?

I never said the EV was positive, lol.

[bk1]

I never said the EV was positive, lol.

I know. You were just being an annoying ass by bothering to bring it up.

[Curry]

I never said the EV was positive, lol.

I know. You were just being an annoying ass by bothering to bring it up.

<3

[BrownBears09]

I never said the EV was positive, lol.

I know. You were just being an annoying ass by bothering to bring it up.

Your attempt at straw manning a legitimate fact was probably more annoying tbh.

[Curry]

I never said the EV was positive, lol.

I know. You were just being an annoying ass by bothering to bring it up.

Your attempt at straw manning a legitimate fact was probably more annoying tbh.

Except you presupposed something that wasn't there which caused him to "straw man." hth

[bk1]

Your attempt at straw manning a legitimate fact was probably more annoying tbh.

I'll go ahead and point out that at least I am being helpful.

[patrickd139]

I never said the EV was positive, lol.

I know. You were just being an annoying ass by bothering to bring it up.

Your attempt at straw manning a legitimate fact was probably more annoying tbh.

Fan of the term 'straw-man,' eh champ?

[weejonbu]

I never said the EV was positive, lol.

I know. You were just being an annoying ass by bothering to bring it up.

Your attempt at straw manning a legitimate fact was probably more annoying tbh.

You're getting to be as annoying as the OP... ugh, you people.