UCLA ($$$) or RETAKE - poll Forum

[uncleleo]

EDIT: I see people are still voting - if possible could you comment as well about your reasoning specifically pertaining to my situation, particularly those who are voting to take the money? I haven't seen much of an argument in that direction in the comments even though it's the majority vote. Would be very helpful. Thanks so much guys!!

Obviously I will have a few other options, but with my ~173/3.6 and very late application, my prospects for significant $ at higher ranked schools is seeming slim. I've been waitlisted from a few T14s and am waiting to hear back from the others.

I don't like debt, will not attend any law school without scholarship, and will likely not attend anything below HYSCCN without close to a full ride. If this means not becoming a lawyer then so be it.

I am confident that I can retake at least a bit closer to 180 in September, and with an earlier application my prospects will likely be much better.

My question is, in the climate of today's legal industry, is it ever a smart decision for someone who..

- would like to practice in the entertainment industry (cue "OP: do you know what entertainment lawyers do?" "entertainment law is not a real thing.")

- is debt averse

- likes warm weather

..to go to UCLA on almost a full ride?

assuming transactional law in the music industry IS a real thing, this is definitely something I would like to do eventually - is UCLA the best way to position myself for that? or would, hypothetically, NYU-->better chance at initial biglaw be the better option? if so, im not opposed to taking an extra year for a better chance at CCN $.

(note: Judging by a couple of recent TLS threads, the logic here is that NYU @ sticker is not a worthwhile investment, but that when faced with NYU sticker vs UCLA $$$, NYU is the better option. this would make UCLA $$$ a complete waste of time....?)

[reyals]

First, I don't know anything about entertainment law so I can't really comment.

UCLA with significant $$$ seems like a good investment. However, if you are really trying to avoid debt remember that the high cost of living in LA will take its toll.

Given the choice between a T14 and UCLA, I would say that T14 is still the safer bet. Attending a lower T14 (Penn, UVA, Michigan) with a little money is probably the route to go.

It seems to me you have been accepted to UCLA and are getting impatient/nervous about your other applications. My advice is to wait it out, see what options you have, then make a decision.

[Golden Bear 11]

Would OP's numbers be competitive for Northwestern's ED $150,000 scholarship if he/she applies next cycle?

$120,000 at UCLA, assuming in-state + striking out at OCI, is about $95,000 in debt at repayment.

[uncleleo]

thanks for the replies. im not in-state..also i would use whatever other offers come in to vehemently try to negotiate up to a full ride..

this years employment stats seem to put big law/fed clerkship for UCLA at just about 40% - would i be deluded to go there hoping for a shot? i guess im wondering about the other 60% of outcomes and whether they could potentially get me to where i want to be ultimately..

you're right, i am getting antsy about the other applications, but i was putting strong thought into UCLA/USC anyway because of my career aspirations. re: MVP, i have been wait listed by 2 out of 3 of those so far..

[megagnarley]

$120,000 at UCLA is still a ton of debt. Well into six figure by the time you factor in interest.

I would wait if you can't negotiate it up.

[BigZuck]

I would wait for better offers this cycle or better yet ED NU this cycle. Great choice for someone debt averse.

UCLA seems like a waste for someone with your numbers. Also I think going to UCLA without CA ties is a potential recipe for debt pwnedness. A bunch of people at UCLA/USC don't even become lawyers period although I haven't looked at their most recent data so maybe they are getting better in that regard.

[romothesavior]

That's on the high end of what I think UCLA is worth. You have solid numbers and could probably do better if you apply earlier in the cycle this fall. I'd wait a year.

[jbagelboy]

$120,000 is more than I got at UCLA ($100,000), and I consider that my best "deal"; then again I'm in-state and could potentially live rent free. So from my perspective sure it can be a good decision! It's a really nice scholarship offer, and definitely worth considering over the chance of getting a much, much smaller scholarship out east.

But it does depend on what kind of law you are okay practicing. As you know, coming out theres a decent-ish chance of getting big-law in southern california (30%ish?), an even greater chance of practicing in a medium sized or boutique LA firm with a couple alumns, and a smaller chance of being underemployed.

The whole "T6" (really T7 w/ penn) idea is that statistically all things considered you have a greater than not chance of getting a six figure position when you graduate.

[BigZuck]

$120,000 is more than I got at UCLA ($100,000), and I consider that my best "deal"; then again I'm in-state and could potentially live rent free. So from my perspective sure it can be a good decision! It's a really nice scholarship offer, and definitely worth considering over the chance of getting a much, much smaller scholarship out east.

But it does depend on what kind of law you are okay practicing. As you know, coming out theres a decent-ish chance of getting big-law in southern california (30%ish?), an even greater chance of practicing in a medium sized or boutique LA firm with a couple alumns, and a smaller chance of being underemployed.

The whole "T6" (really T7 w/ penn) idea is that statistically all things considered you have a greater than not chance of getting a six figure position when you graduate.

Source for the bolded? The word "boutique" implies a desirable outcome.

[jvincent11]

OP do you definitely want to work in LA? If so, UCLA on that scholarship sounds like a good choice. If not, blanket NYU down in September and you could get similar money to one or more schools.

If OP applies again next cycle, will UCLA be less inclined to offer him another scholarship??

[BigZuck]

OP do you definitely want to work in LA? If so, UCLA on that scholarship sounds like a good choice. If not, blanket NYU down in September and you could get similar money to one or more schools.

If OP applies again next cycle, will UCLA be less inclined to offer him another scholarship??

OP would still need big law to service that debt and considering his lack of CA ties I think he would have a tough time getting big law out of UCLA if he ends up with average grades.

OP I just don't think you should waste those numbers on a school like UCLA. Aim higher.

[romothesavior]

$120,000 is more than I got at UCLA ($100,000), and I consider that my best "deal"; then again I'm in-state and could potentially live rent free. So from my perspective sure it can be a good decision! It's a really nice scholarship offer, and definitely worth considering over the chance of getting a much, much smaller scholarship out east.

But it does depend on what kind of law you are okay practicing. As you know, coming out theres a decent-ish chance of getting big-law in southern california (30%ish?), an even greater chance of practicing in a medium sized or boutique LA firm with a couple alumns, and a smaller chance of being underemployed.

The whole "T6" (really T7 w/ penn) idea is that statistically all things considered you have a greater than not chance of getting a six figure position when you graduate.

Source for the bolded? The word "boutique" implies a desirable outcome.

The odds of getting a job in a strong mid-sized or boutique firm straight out of law school are many, many, many times lower than getting a biglaw job. There aren't many, and they rarely hire 3Ls.

jbagel, you're way off base with that comment bro.

[uncleleo]

thanks for the advice everyone! the vote is in favor of UCLA, but the comments are in favor of waiting..

i guess im curious about the general rationale for picking UCLA now. losing 1 year in my early twenties seems insignificant compared to getting on the right career path, so UCLA on scholarship would have to be pretty close to my ideal outcome for it to not be worth waiting another year for better options, if that makes sense. seemingly earlier apps and a higher LSAT will mean $ from better schools.

i think the X factor is whether UCLA will give me the best shot at getting into the entertainment industry..since if not it just remains an inferior school to whatever other options i could have next year. is it likely UCLA will offer me opportunities in this regard that, say, cornell, uva, or nyu wont be able to?

i have an uncle and other family in LA but that probably doesnt count as 'ties'....

[uncleleo]

also, bigzuck, when you say ED NU 'this cycle' - are you talking about for this coming fall? would it not be too late for that?

[BigZuck]

I definitely meant "next" cycle. Sorry, typo

[uncleleo]

cool, thanks.

does anyone who posted thinks this may change significantly if i can push it to a full ride? (with $120k, im about $40k short)

maybe i should make a new thread for this

[hephaestus]

cool, thanks.

does anyone who posted thinks this may change significantly if i can push it to a full ride? (with $120k, im about $40k short)

maybe i should make a new thread for this

I'd consider taking it if it were a full ride. I'd probably reapply though. You would likely get a lot of money from the lower T14 if you apply early (Cornell specifically would probably give you a lot, as would GULC).

[Doorkeeper]

Wait a year. 173/3.6x should get you multiple T14 offers with scholarship.

Also, wtf is with this "entertainment law" bullshit? It's everywhere on TLS.

[uncleleo]

Frankly I don't understand why it's bullshit. Just because something is hard to get doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or that positioning yourself in the best path to getting it is absurd.

[cahwc12]

I voted UCLA but upon reading the comments I think I'll defer to Romo on this one. He's right and you'd probably fare at least as well by waiting and applying in Sept/Oct. If you want to retake in June/Oct or both, it can only help.

It's worth noting that Westwood is an exorbitantly pricey area, and it doesn't depreciate all that much as you get further away--unless you want to live in inglewood, which is always up to no good.

[uncleleo]

I voted UCLA but upon reading the comments I think I'll defer to Romo on this one. He's right and you'd probably fare at least as well by waiting and applying in Sept/Oct. If you want to retake in June/Oct or both, it can only help.

It's worth noting that Westwood is an exorbitantly pricey area, and it doesn't depreciate all that much as you get further away--unless you want to live in inglewood, which is always up to no good.

ok cool thanks for the advice!

[bizzybone1313]

Frankly I don't understand why it's bullshit. Just because something is hard to get doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or that positioning yourself in the best path to getting it is absurd.

I know what you mean OP. Anyone that doesn't want corporate Big Law on TLS is immediately called a troll. Some of us don't have the goal in life of just making money (it is a really sad goal to have to say the least). I know, I know, guys that is very hard to believe, but some of us just want to be in a career that makes us happy. I want to practice immigration, civil rights or plaintiff side employment law.

[052220151]

Frankly I don't understand why it's bullshit. Just because something is hard to get doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or that positioning yourself in the best path to getting it is absurd.

I know what you mean OP. Anyone that doesn't want corporate Big Law on TLS is immediately called a troll. Some of us don't have the goal in life of just making money (it is a really sad goal to have to say the least). I know, I know, guys that is very hard to believe, but some of us just want to be in a career that makes us happy. I want to practice immigration, civil rights or plaintiff side employment law.

Have you ever work on L&E cases? They are the worst.

[cahwc12]

I voted UCLA but upon reading the comments I think I'll defer to Romo on this one. He's right and you'd probably fare at least as well by waiting and applying in Sept/Oct. If you want to retake in June/Oct or both, it can only help.

It's worth noting that Westwood is an exorbitantly pricey area, and it doesn't depreciate all that much as you get further away--unless you want to live in inglewood, which is always up to no good.

ok cool thanks for the advice!

although that was a serious post, in case you missed the reference

Frankly I don't understand why it's bullshit. Just because something is hard to get doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or that positioning yourself in the best path to getting it is absurd.

I know what you mean OP. Anyone that doesn't want corporate Big Law on TLS is immediately called a troll. Some of us don't have the goal in life of just making money (it is a really sad goal to have to say the least). I know, I know, guys that is very hard to believe, but some of us just want to be in a career that makes us happy. I want to practice immigration, civil rights or plaintiff side employment law.

The problem with this and sentiments like it is because most people who claim to not want biglaw don't understand that when they go $250k in debt, that is their only option to service that debt if they can get a job. It's not like there is some career fair at law schools and you go up to the environmental law booth if you want environmental law, and the biglaw booth if you want biglaw. If you're going to school for free, you do have that luxury, but few people are in that position.

[uncleleo]

although that was a serious post, in case you missed the reference

lol - my bad - nicely done.

Would OP's numbers be competitive for Northwestern's ED $150,000 scholarship if he/she applies next cycle?

I am also wondering what people think about this...