Is NYU at sticker worth it? Forum

[005618502]

On midlaw in a secondary, many seem to have a lower base with extremely compressed raises, so is 200k really likely?

I work at what could be considered a "midlaw" firm (I think) and they start people at market. You raise up slower, but people basically make partner if they work hard and stick around for 6-7 years. I think after 5 years that are well over 200k

[Aqualibrium]

I really don't see how it could ever be worth it. By all accounts the type of job that NYU gets you/you'd have to take to service that kind of debt is just a miserable existence. So you bust your ass for 2 years (cuz 3L year with offer in hand is a joke), then you bust your ass for 4-5 years in a job you hate so you can pay off your loans, then you either get the ok to stick around and see if you can make partner or get booted? Maybe I'm missing something...

[rayiner]

I really don't see how it could ever be worth it. By all accounts the type of job that NYU gets you/you'd have to take to service that kind of debt is just a miserable existence. So you bust your ass for 2 years (cuz 3L year with offer in hand is a joke), then you bust your ass for 4-5 years in a job you hate so you can pay off your loans, then you either get the ok to stick around and see if you can make partner or get booted? Maybe I'm missing something...

You realize even if you get booted out after 5 years, you've got a 30-35 year career ahead of you? And as a big law washout you've got training and qualifications that set you apart from people who never got big law in the first place?

[Real Madrid]

I really don't see how it could ever be worth it. By all accounts the type of job that NYU gets you/you'd have to take to service that kind of debt is just a miserable existence. So you bust your ass for 2 years (cuz 3L year with offer in hand is a joke), then you bust your ass for 4-5 years in a job you hate so you can pay off your loans, then you either get the ok to stick around and see if you can make partner or get booted? Maybe I'm missing something...

You realize even if you get booted out after 5 years, you've got a 30-35 year career ahead of you? And as a big law washout you've got training and qualifications that set you apart from people who never got big law in the first place?

It is weird to think about starting a career at such a high salary only to see it go down after a few years - and significantly. Do most just lateral to another big law gig to try and make partner? And if not, are you likely to ever return to the 160k+ salary range?

[TheProsecutor]

Even if the economy stays on the upswing and you hit that 80% chance you won't even have the principal on 270k paid down to 200k by the time most are out of big law on the 10 year plan. Live like a pauper and maybe have it to 180k. JFC

You make a relevant point that too few people think about before they enter school, but as others have pointed out, I think you overstate it.

Big law in NYC is about 95k a year or so after taxes. Its not unreasonable to pay 50k a year to the loan and live off of 45k (not a ton of money in NYC but not living like a pauper in my opinion). Both those numbers bump up as you go up the pay scale. Therefore, you can pay off that amount of debt in around 6 years if you're able to stay in a firm that long, which is certainly not a given. More likely you last 3-4 years, which would leave you with a significant but probably manageable amount of debt. Most people leaving big law take a significant pay cut, but still bring home enough in their next job to service that type of a loan.

Nevertheless, I completely agree that getting biglaw does not automatically make sticker worth it. NYU at full cost is a gamble that will pay off for a majority of the people who take it, but its still a very large risk, one that I admit I would likely not take.

Nobody pays 50k on their loans per year in NYC. Housing alone will eat up about 24-36k. Then food. Then you're talking about entertainment. Then transportation costs....

It sounds good in theory, but going sticker at NYU is unwise. It is unwise to pay sticker at Harvard or Yale for that matter.

[Real Madrid]

Even if the economy stays on the upswing and you hit that 80% chance you won't even have the principal on 270k paid down to 200k by the time most are out of big law on the 10 year plan. Live like a pauper and maybe have it to 180k. JFC

You make a relevant point that too few people think about before they enter school, but as others have pointed out, I think you overstate it.

Big law in NYC is about 95k a year or so after taxes. Its not unreasonable to pay 50k a year to the loan and live off of 45k (not a ton of money in NYC but not living like a pauper in my opinion). Both those numbers bump up as you go up the pay scale. Therefore, you can pay off that amount of debt in around 6 years if you're able to stay in a firm that long, which is certainly not a given. More likely you last 3-4 years, which would leave you with a significant but probably manageable amount of debt. Most people leaving big law take a significant pay cut, but still bring home enough in their next job to service that type of a loan.

Nevertheless, I completely agree that getting biglaw does not automatically make sticker worth it. NYU at full cost is a gamble that will pay off for a majority of the people who take it, but its still a very large risk, one that I admit I would likely not take.

Nobody pays 50k on their loans per year in NYC. Housing alone will eat up about 24-36k. Then food. Then you're talking about entertainment. Then transportation costs....

It sounds good in theory, but going sticker at NYU is unwise. It is unwise to pay sticker at Harvard or Yale for that matter.

You're a fool. Nobody likes a fool.

[TheProsecutor]

Even if the economy stays on the upswing and you hit that 80% chance you won't even have the principal on 270k paid down to 200k by the time most are out of big law on the 10 year plan. Live like a pauper and maybe have it to 180k. JFC

You make a relevant point that too few people think about before they enter school, but as others have pointed out, I think you overstate it.

Big law in NYC is about 95k a year or so after taxes. Its not unreasonable to pay 50k a year to the loan and live off of 45k (not a ton of money in NYC but not living like a pauper in my opinion). Both those numbers bump up as you go up the pay scale. Therefore, you can pay off that amount of debt in around 6 years if you're able to stay in a firm that long, which is certainly not a given. More likely you last 3-4 years, which would leave you with a significant but probably manageable amount of debt. Most people leaving big law take a significant pay cut, but still bring home enough in their next job to service that type of a loan.

Nevertheless, I completely agree that getting biglaw does not automatically make sticker worth it. NYU at full cost is a gamble that will pay off for a majority of the people who take it, but its still a very large risk, one that I admit I would likely not take.

Nobody pays 50k on their loans per year in NYC. Housing alone will eat up about 24-36k. Then food. Then you're talking about entertainment. Then transportation costs....

It sounds good in theory, but going sticker at NYU is unwise. It is unwise to pay sticker at Harvard or Yale for that matter.

You're a fool. Nobody likes a fool.

Why is that?

[boosk]

FYI - Here was my analysis:

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 1&t=179998

[rayiner]

I really don't see how it could ever be worth it. By all accounts the type of job that NYU gets you/you'd have to take to service that kind of debt is just a miserable existence. So you bust your ass for 2 years (cuz 3L year with offer in hand is a joke), then you bust your ass for 4-5 years in a job you hate so you can pay off your loans, then you either get the ok to stick around and see if you can make partner or get booted? Maybe I'm missing something...

You realize even if you get booted out after 5 years, you've got a 30-35 year career ahead of you? And as a big law washout you've got training and qualifications that set you apart from people who never got big law in the first place?

It is weird to think about starting a career at such a high salary only to see it go down after a few years - and significantly. Do most just lateral to another big law gig to try and make partner? And if not, are you likely to ever return to the 160k+ salary range?

It's possibly a bit weird, but it's not unusual--the same thing happens to consultants, and bankers. As for "likely" outcomes--after you get big law it's just like any other career. If you're willing to keep putting in a lot of hours, and have some talent for business development, you can move to a mid-size firm and try to make partner there. You can go in-house, you can go into federal government. If you look at the Robert Half data linked above you can see that $150k-$250k is an approachable outcome in the first two, and the latter tops out around $150k. Of course not everyone gets these jobs, but that's true in every profession. There are a ton of engineers stuck at $90k because they don't have people skills to go into management.

The fact of the matter is that you have 30+ years of career after your law degree. And for the large majority of people paying sticker at NYU, in that 30+ years you'll make back your investment many times over. Even if you wash out big law litigation after three years and land in the Cook County ASA's office making $75k/year (with full benefits and government pension), you're still likely in a better position than you would have been with just your undergraduate degree. At least it's interesting work at a livable salary, and your family is secure in having health insurance. That's more than you can say for the average job in this country. At least you're not in a job that has been strictly regimented by consultants and face the constant threat of unemployment, lack of health insurance, etc.

[TheProsecutor]

I really don't see how it could ever be worth it. By all accounts the type of job that NYU gets you/you'd have to take to service that kind of debt is just a miserable existence. So you bust your ass for 2 years (cuz 3L year with offer in hand is a joke), then you bust your ass for 4-5 years in a job you hate so you can pay off your loans, then you either get the ok to stick around and see if you can make partner or get booted? Maybe I'm missing something...

Well biglaw becomes a lot more maneagable after year 5. The pay is truly outstanding, you have more responsibility, you have gained experience and expertise and you can somewhat manage your schedule.

For those that leave before then, they can go to government where six figures is standard, but well below biglaw. You could transfer to midlaw and make less, but have somewhat better hours.

You just have to be smart and invest your money while paying down your loans. Live frugally.

[goodthings]

...

[TheProsecutor]

Having lived in NYC on (significantly) less than $45k/yr, I'm not seeing what's impossible about paying down loans at $50k per year (or more, with the willpower to devote all extra cash flow like bonuses and tax returns). Granted, some aspects of the budget like clothing and food would need to expand, but not to the tune of $10+k/yr. Though it would be nice to (be able to) pay $24-36k for a nice solo apartment in Manhattan, I don't think it's necessary if you are serious about paying down the loans. What am I missing?

I mean, yeah but...at this point you have to ask yourself are you any better off than when you went to law school? You're making 100k more and living like a person who is making 45k a year. And you'll do this for at least 5 years with nothing to show for it because it is hard to invest and save in NYC when you're devoting those resources to loans. And what happens if you get deweypwned? Do you have six months of savings to live on?

[flem]

I mean, yeah but...at this point you have to ask yourself are you any better off than when you went to law school? You're making 100k more and living like a person who is making 45k a year. And you'll do this for at least 5 years with nothing to show for it because it is hard to invest and save in NYC when you're devoting those resources to loans. And what happens if you get deweypwned? Do you have six months of savings to live on?

And then you have future earning power way larger than before you went to law school and can bank 150K plus a year for the rest of your life. You're not a big picture guy, are you?

Your second point is a pretty specific example.

[TheProsecutor]

I mean, yeah but...at this point you have to ask yourself are you any better off than when you went to law school? You're making 100k more and living like a person who is making 45k a year. And you'll do this for at least 5 years with nothing to show for it because it is hard to invest and save in NYC when you're devoting those resources to loans. And what happens if you get deweypwned? Do you have six months of savings to live on?

And then you have future earning power way larger than before you went to law school and can bank 150K plus a year for the rest of your life. You're not a big picture guy, are you?

Your second point is a pretty specific example.

well I thought the thread was about paying sticker price for NYU? Am I incorrect? The alternative, for the big picture, is to go to another school with a scholly and be much much better off in the long run.

Also, it is ALOT to ask for a kid to go 5 years in biglaw. As a biglaw associate, there are times when I want to jump out the window. Most of my class is already gone, man.

And this pipe dream about a job for the rest of your life at 150k+ is not going to happen for a significant portion of people. It is the reality.

Edit: Dewey is specific, but recent. I could instead detail all the law firms that laid off associates within the last 3 years, deferred them or rescinded their offers all together. Biglaw is not a stable place. And it is much less stable now where the work is a tad bit slower.

[goodthings]

...

[rayiner]

I mean, yeah but...at this point you have to ask yourself are you any better off than when you went to law school? You're making 100k more and living like a person who is making 45k a year. And you'll do this for at least 5 years with nothing to show for it because it is hard to invest and save in NYC when you're devoting those resources to loans. And what happens if you get deweypwned? Do you have six months of savings to live on?

And then you have future earning power way larger than before you went to law school and can bank 150K plus a year for the rest of your life. You're not a big picture guy, are you?

Your second point is a pretty specific example.

well I thought the thread was about paying sticker price for NYU? Am I incorrect? The alternative, for the big picture, is to go to another school with a scholly and be much much better off in the long run.

Also, it is ALOT to ask for a kid to go 5 years in biglaw. As a biglaw associate, there are times when I want to jump out the window. Most of my class is already gone, man.

And this pipe dream about a job for the rest of your life at 150k+ is not going to happen for a significant portion of people. It is the reality.

Edit: Dewey is specific, but recent. I could instead detail all the law firms that laid off associates within the last 3 years, deferred them or rescinded their offers all together. Biglaw is not a stable place. And it is much less stable now where the work is a tad bit slower.

The alternative is to go to another school with a scholarship and have a smaller chance of getting big law in the first place. That $75k or whatever isn't going to be much comfort when you're still looking at $100k+ of debt with no job or one paying $50k/year.

As for your characterization of big law as a particularly unstable place... The layoffs of 2009-2010 amounted to about 4% of the NLJ 250, during the biggest slump in legal demand in decades. Meanwhile, just this month, in the middle of a tech boom, Yahoo is laying off 14% of its workforce. RIM laid-off 10% of its work force last year, and is looking at laying off more people this year. Ericsson is laying off 10% of its workforce. Sony is laying off 10,000 people. IBM just laid off 1,800 people in the US. It's understandable over the turmoil of the last few years to see big law as an unstable place, but compared to peoples' alternatives it really isn't.

[rayiner]

Though I do endorse the position above. I think it's a good, even lucky position to be in for a Gen-Y-er to just be debt-free with a stable career and strong long-term earning power 10 years post-graduation. It certainly didn't used to be the case, but that's the world we live in now.

This is really the heart of it. If you can last long enough in big law to build up some savings and exit into an $80k/year job working as a state attorney in your early 30's, you're in a much better off than 90% of Americans, and probably 75% of college graduates.

[redbullvodka]

I know that in year 6ish, people start leaving because they're being pushed out, so I get that 5 years is a good horizon for having control over your career in biglaw, but I'm just wondering...does anybody here actually want to make a career out of biglaw? It is 100% my most desired scenario, and I feel like it's a minority position on these boards.

FWIW, never been a social planner -- have made 90% of my social plans that night. So maybe that's why I don't have any problem with the unpredictability of the career.

[Bronck]

I know that in year 6ish, people start leaving because they're being pushed out, so I get that 5 years is a good horizon for having control over your career in biglaw, but I'm just wondering...does anybody here actually want to make a career out of biglaw? It is 100% my most desired scenario, and I feel like it's a minority position on these boards.

FWIW, never been a social planner -- have made 90% of my social plans that night. So maybe that's why I don't have any problem with the unpredictability of the career.

50% of people exit biglaw at year 3, which is understandable since that's when desirable exit options become more attainable. 80% are out by year 5. So no, people don't start leaving at year 6ish.

Of course some people want to make a career out of biglaw.

[TheProsecutor]

I mean, yeah but...at this point you have to ask yourself are you any better off than when you went to law school? You're making 100k more and living like a person who is making 45k a year. And you'll do this for at least 5 years with nothing to show for it because it is hard to invest and save in NYC when you're devoting those resources to loans. And what happens if you get deweypwned? Do you have six months of savings to live on?

And then you have future earning power way larger than before you went to law school and can bank 150K plus a year for the rest of your life. You're not a big picture guy, are you?

Your second point is a pretty specific example.

well I thought the thread was about paying sticker price for NYU? Am I incorrect? The alternative, for the big picture, is to go to another school with a scholly and be much much better off in the long run.

Also, it is ALOT to ask for a kid to go 5 years in biglaw. As a biglaw associate, there are times when I want to jump out the window. Most of my class is already gone, man.

And this pipe dream about a job for the rest of your life at 150k+ is not going to happen for a significant portion of people. It is the reality.

Edit: Dewey is specific, but recent. I could instead detail all the law firms that laid off associates within the last 3 years, deferred them or rescinded their offers all together. Biglaw is not a stable place. And it is much less stable now where the work is a tad bit slower.

The alternative is to go to another school with a scholarship and have a smaller chance of getting big law in the first place. That $75k or whatever isn't going to be much comfort when you're still looking at $100k+ of debt with no job or one paying $50k/year.

As for your characterization of big law as a particularly unstable place... The layoffs of 2009-2010 amounted to about 4% of the NLJ 250, during the biggest slump in legal demand in decades. Meanwhile, just this month, in the middle of a tech boom, Yahoo is laying off 14% of its workforce. RIM laid-off 10% of its work force last year, and is looking at laying off more people this year. Ericsson is laying off 10% of its workforce. Sony is laying off 10,000 people. IBM just laid off 1,800 people in the US. It's understandable over the turmoil of the last few years to see big law as an unstable place, but compared to peoples' alternatives it really isn't.

This month alone, a biglaw firm laid off all of its associates. 4% is huge! And that doesn't even begin to tell the story of the law school kids who were told not to come at all. Not only did biglaw people get laid off, but many firms contracted hiring pushing many would be biglaw people in previous years to ITE pwned.

This doesn't even get into the fact that biglaw stinks. And if you're paying sticker for a school, you are essentially trapped in that job until you can get the debt under control.

[rayiner]

This month alone, a biglaw firm laid off all of its associates. 4% is huge! And that doesn't even begin to tell the story of the law school kids who were told not to come at all. Not only did biglaw people get laid off, but many firms contracted hiring pushing many would be biglaw people in previous years to ITE pwned.

This doesn't even get into the fact that biglaw stinks. And if you're paying sticker for a school, you are essentially trapped in that job until you can get the debt under control.

In the last few months, dozens of companies larger than Dewey filed for bankruptcy. Eastman Kodak is a company 15 times the size of Dewey that filed for bankruptcy this year. No doubt that 4% is huge, but it's not that much compared to other industries. In the past four years, the finance sector has shed half a million jobs. New York lost 6% of its finance positions, Chicago and Los Angeles 11%, etc.

During the recession, the economy as a whole shed 8-9 million jobs, or about 6% of total jobs: http://articles.businessinsider.com/201 ... yroll-data. Note that this figure is net of people who got laid off and found other jobs--the number of layoffs is higher. Statistically, big law was less risky by a good margin than the economy as a whole during the recession.

[TheProsecutor]

This month alone, a biglaw firm laid off all of its associates. 4% is huge! And that doesn't even begin to tell the story of the law school kids who were told not to come at all. Not only did biglaw people get laid off, but many firms contracted hiring pushing many would be biglaw people in previous years to ITE pwned.

This doesn't even get into the fact that biglaw stinks. And if you're paying sticker for a school, you are essentially trapped in that job until you can get the debt under control.

In the last few months, dozens of companies larger than Dewey filed for bankruptcy. Eastman Kodak is a company 15 times the size of Dewey that filed for bankruptcy this year. No doubt that 4% is huge, but it's not that much compared to other industries. In the past four years, the finance sector has shed half a million jobs. New York lost 6% of its finance positions, Chicago and Los Angeles 11%, etc.

During the recession, the economy as a whole shed 8-9 million jobs, or about 6% of total jobs: http://articles.businessinsider.com/201 ... yroll-data. Note that this figure is net of people who got laid off and found other jobs--the number of layoffs is higher. Statistically, big law was less risky by a good margin than the economy as a whole during the recession.

So what? My argument was that biglaw is not stable. Are you agreeing with me or just arguing that other industries are unstable as well? Or are you saying biglaw is more stable than the finance sector? I'm just trying to understand here.

Also, I don't understand your point about biglaw being less risky. Sure, but most people didn't have to pay 230k to get a 2% increase in job security....

The point of all this, in my view, is that it is unwise to pay sticker price for NYU. The debt burden is too high, the prospects for a job are not as great as they used to be, the stability of the job isn't there, the satisfaction level in jobs that can help pay down the debt is poor. NYU is a great school if you can get a scholarship or some grant aid to defer some of the cost...but going 200k in for NYU...I wouldn't advise anyone to do it.

[TheProsecutor]

I know that in year 6ish, people start leaving because they're being pushed out, so I get that 5 years is a good horizon for having control over your career in biglaw, but I'm just wondering...does anybody here actually want to make a career out of biglaw? It is 100% my most desired scenario, and I feel like it's a minority position on these boards.

FWIW, never been a social planner -- have made 90% of my social plans that night. So maybe that's why I don't have any problem with the unpredictability of the career.

50% of people exit biglaw at year 3, which is understandable since that's when desirable exit options become more attainable. 80% are out by year 5. So no, people don't start leaving at year 6ish.

Of course some people want to make a career out of biglaw.

I think he is making the argument that people don't get pushed out until year six, so they have about 5 years where the choice is theirs of whether to be in biglaw or not.

[rayiner]

So what? My argument was that biglaw is not stable. Are you agreeing with me or just arguing that other industries are unstable as well? Or are you saying biglaw is more stable than the finance sector? I'm just trying to understand here.

Also, I don't understand your point about biglaw being less risky. Sure, but most people didn't have to pay 230k to get a 2% increase in job security....

The point of all this, in my view, is that it is unwise to pay sticker price for NYU. The debt burden is too high, the prospects for a job are not as great as they used to be, the stability of the job isn't there, the satisfaction level in jobs that can help pay down the debt is poor. NYU is a great school if you can get a scholarship or some grant aid to defer some of the cost...but going 200k in for NYU...I wouldn't advise anyone to do it.

The point is that "stable" is a relative term. If we define stability such that big law is not considered stable, even when the economy as a whole shed 50% more jobs on a per capita basis, then that definition isn't very meaningful. By your definition of "stable" pretty much only the medical profession is "stable."

Your problem is that you're comparing big law circa 2012 to big law circa 1995, rather than to its alternatives circa 2012. Everyone's debt is higher, everyone's job prospects are lower, everyone's job stability is lower, everyone's job satisfaction is lower. In the last 20 years consultants have destroyed pretty much the whole country. If you think big law is bad, imagine working a job where people keep track of your bathroom breaks! My friends from college all have good jobs for our age (graduated during the boom from a state flagship), and they work big law hours for a fraction of the pay and worse benefits. I had a great job before law school as an engineer, with great benefits, but I worked 60+ hours a week. And even after debt service I'll be making more at a firm.

[redbullvodka]

I know that in year 6ish, people start leaving because they're being pushed out, so I get that 5 years is a good horizon for having control over your career in biglaw, but I'm just wondering...does anybody here actually want to make a career out of biglaw? It is 100% my most desired scenario, and I feel like it's a minority position on these boards.

FWIW, never been a social planner -- have made 90% of my social plans that night. So maybe that's why I don't have any problem with the unpredictability of the career.

50% of people exit biglaw at year 3, which is understandable since that's when desirable exit options become more attainable. 80% are out by year 5. So no, people don't start leaving at year 6ish.

Of course some people want to make a career out of biglaw.

I think he is making the argument that people don't get pushed out until year six, so they have about 5 years where the choice is theirs of whether to be in biglaw or not.

+1. Trying to ascertain whether aspiring career biglaw lawyers really get pushed/fired/w/e you want to call it before year 5. Seems like a lot of this is your choice for the first 5 years, so someone committed to 4-5 years of biglaw should be fine paying sticker at a place like NYU. Someone who wants a biglaw career has even less of a choice ITE -- they should largely be shooting for the best placing school they can get into.