Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle) Forum

ajax · Post by **ajax** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:18 am

TLSSwag:

"well ajax, unfortunately i think beginning law school at all for you would be "likely a terrible idea" with your 3.3, 163 LSAT and previous considerations of Rutgers on not even a 50% scholarship..."

and another gem from you not too long ago:

"

166/3.4

I am currently on the WL at 2 t30 schools (think GW/BU/Fordham/BC) and admitted with nearly a full scholarship to a few other t50 ones. I am pretty set on retaking in June, as I practice tested consistently within the 169-172 range, net average of over 170. I was disappointed with my score but decided to apply this cycle regardless. I know I can perform better on the LSAT and I will be thrilled if I get off a WL at one of these schools, but my question is, given my GPA, what score would be advisable to reapply and blanket the t14, with a reasonably good chance at getting one? I guess I am trying to gauge at what threshold I should consider reapplying. I do wish to go to law school this fall but certainly understand the value in holding off if its worthwhile.

Thanks!
"

So, TLSSwag, you do wish to go to law school this fall, but certainly understand the value in holding off if its worthwhile? How about legal employment being at an all time low as a reason to hold off if its worthwhile.

ajax · Post by **ajax** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:22 am

ned wrote:
ajax wrote:
ned wrote:
DTDT wrote:The trading analogy is broken. You plan on legging into your law degree? That's dumb.

I'm planning on attending in the Fall and hopefully I can take some profits by 2L and hold a small short into year 3 vs my long Cornell 2L.

PS I am not a SD native but I've been to Coronado twice. I'm sorry for the future weather you will experience here in NYC.
I will approach my law school decision with a derivatives trading analogy. For my 1L, I'm going with a call on Dec 2012 and also May 2013. But I'm gonna offset that risk with some long-term puts for 2L and 3L, just in case the job market takes another dive. Meanwhile, I'll set up an iron condor over each summer and earn premium from Fordham's off-season volatility. Once I'm within a couple months of graduation, I'll go heavy into the May 2015 calls at 130 and 145. So if I wind up with biglaw, I'm set, but if I wind up somewhere else, I'm still covered.

Are you trying to impress, because you're an option trader? Most people with those jobs went to good schools... on athletic scholarship.

Try spouting some more about volatility though. Doesn't take a genius to figure out that selling options is shorting volatility. It also doesn't take a genius to realize that beginning law school fall 2012 is likely a terrible idea.

Cheers.
Haha, this is hilarious. Yeah, I went to MIT on an athletic scholarship. And I don't actually work in finance. Fine art is more like it. And FYI trading options is not shorting volatility, though you can do that with certain complex trades. I was just making light of your silly analogy is all. You don't need to be a genius to get that. So hopefully now you get that.

Hahahhahahahah. If you read what I said, you'll see I said, "Doesn't take a genius to figure out that selling options is shorting volatility." Selling options is shorting volatility clown. I never stated "Trading options is shorting volatility." FYI.

dingbat · Post by **dingbat** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:31 am

ajax wrote:Hahahhahahahah. If you read what I said, you'll see I said, "Doesn't take a genius to figure out that selling options is shorting volatility." Selling options is shorting volatility clown. I never stated "Trading options is shorting volatility." FYI.

are you talking about selling put options or selling call options?
What about selling covered calls?

"selling options is shorting volatility" is a great oversimplification.
(although, I think that might be the point you were trying to make)

ned · Post by **ned** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:27 pm

dingbat wrote:
ajax wrote:Hahahhahahahah. If you read what I said, you'll see I said, "Doesn't take a genius to figure out that selling options is shorting volatility." Selling options is shorting volatility clown. I never stated "Trading options is shorting volatility." FYI.
are you talking about selling put options or selling call options?
What about selling covered calls?

"selling options is shorting volatility" is a great oversimplification.
(although, I think that might be the point you were trying to make)

Yeah "selling" isn't a very descriptive term with options trading. Call versus put, strike versus underlying price, simple versus complex trade, time horizon, hedge versus speculation... So many complex relationships.... Like law school.

dingbat · Post by **dingbat** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:30 pm

ned wrote:
dingbat wrote:
ajax wrote:Hahahhahahahah. If you read what I said, you'll see I said, "Doesn't take a genius to figure out that selling options is shorting volatility." Selling options is shorting volatility clown. I never stated "Trading options is shorting volatility." FYI.
are you talking about selling put options or selling call options?
What about selling covered calls?

"selling options is shorting volatility" is a great oversimplification.
(although, I think that might be the point you were trying to make)
Yeah "selling" isn't a very descriptive term with options trading. Call versus put, strike versus underlying price, simple versus complex trade, time horizon, hedge versus speculation... So many complex relationships.... Like law school.

I think I'm going to like having class with you

ajax · Post by **ajax** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:21 am

ned wrote:
dingbat wrote:
ajax wrote:Hahahhahahahah. If you read what I said, you'll see I said, "Doesn't take a genius to figure out that selling options is shorting volatility." Selling options is shorting volatility clown. I never stated "Trading options is shorting volatility." FYI.
are you talking about selling put options or selling call options?
What about selling covered calls?

"selling options is shorting volatility" is a great oversimplification.
(although, I think that might be the point you were trying to make)
Yeah "selling" isn't a very descriptive term with options trading. Call versus put, strike versus underlying price, simple versus complex trade, time horizon, hedge versus speculation... So many complex relationships.... Like law school.

It doesn't need to be descriptive. Selling options is selling volatility. How much volatility, well then that depends.

ajax · Post by **ajax** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:29 am

This is why I think it's advantageous to wait:

http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/

57% of Fordham's class of 2011 had long term employment that required a JD. Again, I think Fordham is an excellent school. However, to pony up 150k for tuition, and then at least another 75k for living expenses, all for a 57% shot at long term employment, sounds ridiculous.

FYI just to pay the per/mo interest on 225k is 1600/mo. Try that without big law in nyc. Hah, even try it with biglaw in nyc.

Once again, I think Fordham is an excellent law school. The horrible legal economy is not the law school's fault, but they could at least lower tuition, or offer more in scholarships to those who have decided to attend in this awful market.

JenDarby · Post by **JenDarby** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:44 am

ajax wrote:This is why I think it's advantageous to wait:

http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/

57% of Fordham's class of 2011 had long term employment that required a JD. Again, I think Fordham is an excellent school. However, to pony up 150k for tuition, and then at least another 75k for living expenses, all for a 57% shot at long term employment, sounds ridiculous.

FYI just to pay the per/mo interest on 225k is 1600/mo. Try that without big law in nyc. Hah, even try it with biglaw in nyc.

Once again, I think Fordham is an excellent law school. The horrible legal economy is not the law school's fault, but they could at least lower tuition, or offer more in scholarships to those who have decided to attend in this awful market.

That 57% of that class had a job requiring a JD in no way means that 43% had no job/were underemployed.

For example, a few attorneys in my office decided to forgo practicing for other lucrative offers straight out of LS and only recently decided to transition into JD required work in the the past year.

Also arguing you should not attend law school this year is an ENTIRELY different argument than arguing you shouldn't take out 250k in loans.

ajax · Post by **ajax** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:57 am

JenDarby wrote:
ajax wrote:This is why I think it's advantageous to wait:

http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/

57% of Fordham's class of 2011 had long term employment that required a JD. Again, I think Fordham is an excellent school. However, to pony up 150k for tuition, and then at least another 75k for living expenses, all for a 57% shot at long term employment, sounds ridiculous.

FYI just to pay the per/mo interest on 225k is 1600/mo. Try that without big law in nyc. Hah, even try it with biglaw in nyc.

Once again, I think Fordham is an excellent law school. The horrible legal economy is not the law school's fault, but they could at least lower tuition, or offer more in scholarships to those who have decided to attend in this awful market.
That 57% of that class had a job requiring a JD in no way means that 43% had no job/were underemployed.

For example, a few attorneys in my office decided to forgo practicing for other lucrative offers straight out of LS and only recently decided to transition into JD required work in the the past year.

Also arguing you should not attend law school this year is an ENTIRELY different argument than arguing you shouldn't take out 250k in loans.

It's not an entirely different argument. If you take out loans, you have to repay. In order to repay, one generally needs employment. The legal market has not recovered, therefore the odds of you landing a job to repay your loans are still low. So arguing you should not attend law school this year is NOT ENTIRELY different than arguing you shouldn't take out 250k in loans if there are no jobs to repay them.

How about taking a gander at this if you refuse to accept any of my points:

http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/

O, and that's not just some blogger. That's a Law Professor.

ned · Post by **ned** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:02 am

ajax wrote:This is why I think it's advantageous to wait:

http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/

57% of Fordham's class of 2011 had long term employment that required a JD. Again, I think Fordham is an excellent school. However, to pony up 150k for tuition, and then at least another 75k for living expenses, all for a 57% shot at long term employment, sounds ridiculous.

FYI just to pay the per/mo interest on 225k is 1600/mo. Try that without big law in nyc. Hah, even try it with biglaw in nyc.

Once again, I think Fordham is an excellent law school. The horrible legal economy is not the law school's fault, but they could at least lower tuition, or offer more in scholarships to those who have decided to attend in this awful market.

Yeah, I'm aware it is a particularly challenging time. But keep in mind that these stats are like looking at a distant star through a telescope. The light (placement data) makes a rather long journey and gives us a picture of the past, not the present. So the Class of 2011's big law placement took a big dip. This is seriously disappointing. BUT, these are people whose OCIs happened in 2009! Decisions on placement were made 3 years ago for many of these people. During the depth of the recession! And law firms who didn't see it coming got caught with too many new hires, creating a sizable (but not endless) backlog. Thus, c/o 2011, 2012, and probably 2013 experienced an employment recession just like the rest of the world did in 2008 and 2009. But things started bouncing back in 2010, so look for improvement in the placement of c/o 2013 and on. Also, there was a major dip in class size, it seems.

So, if you are fresh out of undergrad and have a secure lucrative job you don't hate, you can afford to wait until things are booming again (can you wait 12 years?). Many of us aren't in that position. You assess the risks, assess your own abilities, and then you set about living the life you want, rather than waiting for things to hopefully get easier some day.

JenDarby · Post by **JenDarby** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:04 am

That you entirely missed the boat on my comment says a lot

Once again, this is not the proper thread for you to rant on the overall gloom of law school ajax.

ned · Post by **ned** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:19 am

JenDarby wrote:That you entirely missed the boat on my comment says a lot

Once again, this is not the proper thread for you to rant on the overall gloom of law school ajax.

+1

Ajax, your anxiety is understandable, but get a hold of yourself. It's never as bad as it seems. And no need to pretend to understand options. It's okay.

So I suggest a time-out and some positive visualization techniques.

mijenks · Post by **mijenks** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:21 am

JenDarby wrote:That you entirely missed the boat on my comment says a lot

Once again, this is not the proper thread for you to rant on the overall gloom of law school ajax.

Seriously. Can we get some mods in this thread already? I don't know why I even check it anymore, except to creep on who my future classmates will be . . .

lawschoolgal12 · Post by **lawschoolgal12** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:09 pm

anyone hear from stein scholars post interview?

jwsb777 · Post by **jwsb777** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:46 pm

Hello all, waitlister here. Just saw my status date changed to today's date. Is this any indication of a good sign?

JCFindley · Post by **JCFindley** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:49 pm

lawschoolgal12 wrote:anyone hear from stein scholars post interview?

I was just about as late applying for that as I was applying for LS in general. So, I will be waiting and seeing what happens....

Good luck to you on it.....

JCFindley · Post by **JCFindley** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:50 pm

jwsb777 wrote:Hello all, waitlister here. Just saw my status date changed to today's date. Is this any indication of a good sign?

It can change quite a few times before anything happens jw but my inclination is that it does mean they are at least looking at it...

jwsb777 · Post by **jwsb777** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:53 pm

JCFindley wrote:
jwsb777 wrote:Hello all, waitlister here. Just saw my status date changed to today's date. Is this any indication of a good sign?
It can change quite a few times before anything happens jw but my inclination is that it does mean they are at least looking at it...

This is the first change since I was waitlisted in April. Hopefully it is a good sign. Thanks.

JCFindley · Post by **JCFindley** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:10 pm

jwsb777 wrote:
JCFindley wrote:
jwsb777 wrote:Hello all, waitlister here. Just saw my status date changed to today's date. Is this any indication of a good sign?
It can change quite a few times before anything happens jw but my inclination is that it does mean they are at least looking at it...
This is the first change since I was waitlisted in April. Hopefully it is a good sign. Thanks.

FWIW, mine changed Apr 23 and 24th and got the best email ever on the 1st....

hadisious · Post by **hadisious** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 5:51 pm

jwsb777 wrote:
JCFindley wrote:
jwsb777 wrote:Hello all, waitlister here. Just saw my status date changed to today's date. Is this any indication of a good sign?
It can change quite a few times before anything happens jw but my inclination is that it does mean they are at least looking at it...
This is the first change since I was waitlisted in April. Hopefully it is a good sign. Thanks.

I'm also WL'd and no change here. Probably a good sign for you, best of luck!

dingbat · Post by **dingbat** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 7:43 pm

lawschoolgal12 wrote:anyone hear from stein scholars post interview?

Considering my career goals, it would be really disingenuous for me to apply for a Stein.
Good luck to everyone else though

JCFindley · Post by **JCFindley** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:08 pm

dingbat wrote:
lawschoolgal12 wrote:anyone hear from stein scholars post interview?
Considering my career goals, it would be really disingenuous for me to apply for a Stein.
Good luck to everyone else though

LOL DB, to be honest it might even hurt them.... I can see it now, "well sure Mr. Bat, you're number 1 in your class but you seem to be focusing on PI. Heck, we notice you interned last year with the Bronx PD office. So, are you sure you aren't just using us as a stepping stone to the USDA's office?"

dingbat · Post by **dingbat** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:22 pm

JCFindley wrote:
dingbat wrote:
lawschoolgal12 wrote:anyone hear from stein scholars post interview?
Considering my career goals, it would be really disingenuous for me to apply for a Stein.
Good luck to everyone else though
LOL DB, to be honest it might even hurt them.... I can see it now, "well sure Mr. Bat, you're number 1 in your class but you seem to be focusing on PI. Heck, we notice you interned last year with the Bronx PD office. So, are you sure you aren't just using us as a stepping stone to the USDA's office?"

My understanding is that Stein is for people interested in Public Interest.
Well, I have no interest in the public

Just kidding. It's just that my area of focus is not what would be considered PI and I wouldn't feel right applying for a PI scholarship.

JCFindley · Post by **JCFindley** » Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:56 pm

dingbat wrote:
JCFindley wrote:
dingbat wrote:
lawschoolgal12 wrote:anyone hear from stein scholars post interview?
Considering my career goals, it would be really disingenuous for me to apply for a Stein.
Good luck to everyone else though
LOL DB, to be honest it might even hurt them.... I can see it now, "well sure Mr. Bat, you're number 1 in your class but you seem to be focusing on PI. Heck, we notice you interned last year with the Bronx PD office. So, are you sure you aren't just using us as a stepping stone to the USDA's office?"
My understanding is that Stein is for people interested in Public Interest.
Well, I have no interest in the public

Just kidding. It's just that my area of focus is not what would be considered PI and I wouldn't feel right applying for a PI scholarship.

And you are correct which is in fact what I want to do so I gave it a shot.... We will see.

SDPalmTree · Post by **SDPalmTree** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:03 pm

Just got an email regarding Financial Aid, Loans, etc. Was able to request my Loans today as well...

Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle) Forum

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Register for access!

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Register now!

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Register now, it's still FREE!

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Re: Fordham c/o 2015/16 (2011-2012 Cycle)

Seriously? What are you waiting for?