LOCI at the end of deferral window? Forum

[rgwen]

Hi all,

I was deferred from ED to RD at my top choice school back in November and the deadline for a decision is next week. From what I can tell, there was a pretty large waive of waitlists for people in the same boat last week and from my research that seems to be the most common result. I have also only heard of one acceptance so far of someone that was deferred.

As we get closer to the actual deadline, I am getting more and more concerned that a rejection is coming and less confident that I could be one of the few admits as I can't see why they would wait until the last moment to admit. I know the conventional wisdom is not to send an LOCI until a waitlist, but I'm starting to think it may be Hail Mary time.

Can anyone think of any downside to just going for it here with a strong letter directly to the dean? There's no downside if they are going to reject. I can't imagine that if they are planning to admit or waitlist that they would then reject if I did this. But could a well written letter indicating my strengths and suggesting I will deposit same day and remain committed to my ED decision to attend etc. be enough to push into the admit pile if I am on a margin? I corresponded once with them since the deferral to update them on a recent combat award, but have not spoken outside of that if it makes a difference.

I have 6 rejections, 2 waitlists, no acceptances, and this deferral so really trying to play it smart

[The Lsat Airbender]

This is more likely to be annoying, and bump you from low-admit to high-waitlist, than to help you. Have the LOCI ready to go in case you get waitlisted but don't preempt the adcomm's actual decision.

[rgwen]

This is more likely to be annoying, and bump you from low-admit to high-waitlist, than to help you. Have the LOCI ready to go in case you get waitlisted but don't preempt the adcomm's actual decision.

Conventional wisdom strikes again, but also probably what I needed to hear. What I can't get my head around though is why I school would potentially wait until basically the last day after several months and then accept someone. It makes sense with a waitlist because they are essentially extending the hold.

The only thing I can think of is that they have a handful of ED holds remaining that were not waitlisted last week that they are either about to reject or considering accepting. They can likely only afford to accept a few of the borderline candidates because as ED applicants we are likely to attend. Normally the high yield would be great, but not out of a group with marginal numbers. So maybe selecting the couple lucky admits is a process that goes right to the deadline?

I gotta get back to the tea leaves to keep working this, only a week left...

[rgwen]

To close the loop, I did not preemptively send the LOCI and was waitlisted. This is still a pretty good result considering this was T14 and I have a sub 3.0 and mediocre GRE.

Short of retaking the GRE or taking the LSAT which I cannot do until July (would they consider a score that late?), is there anything else I can do to increase making it off the waitlist?

I'll be sending a hopefully well-crafted LOCI in the next couple of weeks as we get closer to the first deposit deadline. I've already briefly responded to them that I appreciate the continued interest and that moving forward I do not require financial aid and would attend and deposit the same day.

[antelope]

If you're not happy with your results this cycle, you can prepare, retake and reapply earlier the next one. A july lsat would be too late for this cycle.
Since there's not much info on GRE admissions yet, it's hard to predict, but from what I've gathered they care about high GPAs since they can't report the GRE score as part of their medians, and you pretty much need a good GRE score to seal the deal, as they admit very few people with GRE, you can see in the 509 reports

Are you still waiting on more schools? Seems like, based on your results so far, you applied to reaches. If you switch to take the lsat, then your gre score won't matter anymore. Try some practice tests to see where you're at. If the gre comes easier to you, maybe you should stick to it
Best of luck in the process

[rgwen]

Antelope,

Appreciate the response.

In addition to the three waitlists, I’m waiting on one additional school but it’s a t14 so expecting the rejection in the next couple weeks. I had applied to schools from the t14 through about 80 in ranking.

I’m a pretty non traditional candidate. I have two bachelors, the first was STEM at a T1 undergrad more than ten years ago with the poor gpa. Second was a bit more respectable, but that doesn’t matter for LSAC annoyingly. Also have a more recent 3.9 masters from an Ivy. Work experience is mid level military officer with special operations and combat experience and VP in investment banking at a top three firm. Application and recs are very solid.

I seem to have a pretty consistent ceiling with standardized tests and generally hit high 80s to low 90s percentiles after substantial studying. I spent over a year on the GMAT and went through tutoring and performance coaches etc, but I just end up moving too slowly. My strategy with the GRE was to apply on a whole person concept and only hurt one median vs two. I think even with a substantial amount of studying I’d still land low to mid 160s and then be below most top school medians anyway.

I’d also likely have ditch my 300k a year job to be able to study at the level needed to hit the mid 160s and frankly I’m getting close to considering that. I’m in a weird spot in that the only cost I have for law school is opportunity cost, but it’s very high. I can’t really justify going to a school that won’t give me outcomes in line with where I’m already at in the mid to long run. There’s enough good in my profile that top schools are waitlisting me but I don’t know how to overcome my first undergrad gpa without being able to hit 95+ percentile lsat scores.

Frustratingly I acknowledge that the advice/answer here is likely fairly binary. Either figure out how to hit that type of lsat score or accept that a top school isn’t likely. It’s just tough to acknowledge that formula when I’ve had so much hard work and success in the other areas in my life outside of these two numbers.

[decimalsanddollars]

I’d also likely have ditch my 300k a year job to be able to study at the level needed to hit the mid 160s and frankly I’m getting close to considering that. I’m in a weird spot in that the only cost I have for law school is opportunity cost, but it’s very high. I can’t really justify going to a school that won’t give me outcomes in line with where I’m already at in the mid to long run. There’s enough good in my profile that top schools are waitlisting me but I don’t know how to overcome my first undergrad gpa without being able to hit 95+ percentile lsat scores.

If you make $300k a year now and can understand opportunity cost, why do you want to go to law school? Paying sticker at a T14 is going to cost $250-300k, and you will miss out on $900k or perhaps as much as a million dollars in income over 3 years. The best possible outcome, at least income-wise, from law school is $205k per year (counting bonus) at a firm working hard hours for unsympathetic clients and difficult partners, which does not sound to me like a better option than what you have, let alone an option worth a $1.3 million opportunity cost to pursue.

[rgwen]

Decimals,

The degree and most living costs would be funded by the GI Bill and yellow ribbon program. By September I’ll be at 425k liquid and am single with no debt. Much like big law, banking isn’t something most people want to do for the long haul and while it’s been good to me I couldn’t stomach a lifetime of it. Given that I’m interested in litigation, I view spending the next 10 years moving between school, big law, clerkships, AUSA/big gov, and the occasional deployment as a much more exciting and varied path than being deep in the same spreadsheets and monotony over the same period.

I also think my skills are more suited for law than they are for banking and that in the long run if I chose to stick with big law then I’d likely end up ahead of my banking path regardless.

The short term opportunity cost is moderate, but the risk is somewhat mitigated if I can go to a school that doesn’t hurt my existing pedigree and can get me into big law.

[decimalsanddollars]

Decimals,

The degree and most living costs would be funded by the GI Bill and yellow ribbon program. By September I’ll be at 425k liquid and am single with no debt. Much like big law, banking isn’t something most people want to do for the long haul and while it’s been good to me I couldn’t stomach a lifetime of it. Given that I’m interested in litigation, I view spending the next 10 years moving between school, big law, clerkships, AUSA/big gov, and the occasional deployment as a much more exciting and varied path than being deep in the same spreadsheets and monotony over the same period.

I also think my skills are more suited for law than they are for banking and that in the long run if I chose to stick with big law then I’d likely end up ahead of my banking path regardless.

The short term opportunity cost is moderate, but the risk is somewhat mitigated if I can go to a school that doesn’t hurt my existing pedigree and can get me into big law.

Okay, yes, it sounds like you're thinking about this the right way. I do think taking the LSAT will help, not hurt, your chances at T14, but I admit that if I were in your position and got into T14 with my GRE score, I would go ahead and do it.