Loyola LA 2011 Forum

[Danteshek]

Ok will I get in with a 162/3.2?

You should not expect to get in with those numbers. Sorry.

[vanwinkle]

You guys are stressing me out.

You do realize you're free to stop reading at any time, right?

[longhornlaw]

You guys are stressing me out.

You do realize you're free to stop reading at any time, right?

Preposterous!

[Danteshek]

You guys are stressing me out.

You do realize you're free to stop reading at any time, right?

Oh my favorite moderator!

[dtl]

Ok will I get in with a 162/3.2?

You should not expect to get in with those numbers. Sorry.

That is actually right on the border. Looking through the numbers we know on the waitlist its actually a realistic albeit small chance depending on softs.

[Danteshek]

Ok will I get in with a 162/3.2?

You should not expect to get in with those numbers. Sorry.

That is actually right on the border. Looking through the numbers we know on the waitlist its actually a realistic albeit small chance depending on softs.

Hope springs eternal

[david787]

Fine, I want a dollar if I get in then.

[Danteshek]

Fine, I want a dollar if I get in then.

You got it. Ask me when you arrive on campus. My initials are LRH. 3L on Law Review.

[dtl]

Ok will I get in with a 162/3.2?

You should not expect to get in with those numbers. Sorry.

That is actually right on the border. Looking through the numbers we know on the waitlist its actually a realistic albeit small chance depending on softs.

Hope springs eternal

Have you looked at the numbers on the WL or are you going from your experience in your own cycle?

[Danteshek]

If you are looking at WL then by definition you are not a competitive candidate. I did look at lawschoolnumbers for this cycle and it looks like the only folks getting in with those numbers are URMs. A couple more points on the LSAT the story changes.

I transferred to Loyola, btw. Did not get in the first time.

[dtl]

Well yes that is true but at the same time the pool they are picking the still available spots from are the ones on the waitlist. When comparing relative chance of acceptance thats all we have to look at!

It all depends how far down on the WL a 3.2, 162 is... and its not near as far down (from our small lsn sample) as its been in past years.

Hope? Sure. It is not 50/50 but I would not say give up and make alternate arrangements till we see what kind of numbers are being pulled in the first wave of WL acceptances.

[Shammis]

Hey dtl...if we both get in, lets grab a beer. 3.1/163. Good luck, competition lol.

[lalalawya]

You guys are stressing me out. Law school admissions is a numbers game. If you do not have the numbers, you will not get in. If you have the numbers, you will get in. I know you all think you are special, but this is all quite simple really. These status checker posts are getting really old.

You do realize that this is the Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists forum, right? There really isn't much else to talk about BUT our waitlist statuses...also, I am sure you were a little like us during your cycle.

Also, "If you have the numbers, you will get in." That is a very drastic statement. Having the numbers in no way guarantees acceptance. I know a few people last cycle that were not accepted to their choice schools despite "having the numbers."

[janefbk]

If you are looking at WL then by definition you are not a competitive candidate. I did look at lawschoolnumbers for this cycle and it looks like the only folks getting in with those numbers are URMs. A couple more points on the LSAT the story changes.

I transferred to Loyola, btw. Did not get in the first time.

Not to be super 'stalkerish' Dante but doesn't this attitude go against WAM's Core Values? lol.. such a small world.

[Danteshek]

If you are looking at WL then by definition you are not a competitive candidate. I did look at lawschoolnumbers for this cycle and it looks like the only folks getting in with those numbers are URMs. A couple more points on the LSAT the story changes.

I transferred to Loyola, btw. Did not get in the first time.

Not to be super 'stalkerish' Dante but doesn't this attitude go against WAM's Core Values? lol.. such a small world.

Awesome. I realized early on that 99 percent of WAM associates are perma-associates. Two years of client service and not a single client meeting, and none on the horizon. No thanks. I did, however, enjoy my time working there.

[janefbk]

If you are looking at WL then by definition you are not a competitive candidate. I did look at lawschoolnumbers for this cycle and it looks like the only folks getting in with those numbers are URMs. A couple more points on the LSAT the story changes.

I transferred to Loyola, btw. Did not get in the first time.

Not to be super 'stalkerish' Dante but doesn't this attitude go against WAM's Core Values? lol.. such a small world.

Awesome. I realized early on that 99 percent of WAM associates are perma-associates. Two years of client service and not a single client meeting, and none on the horizon. No thanks. I did, however, enjoy my time working there.

That's what I heard from some CSAs. No wonder why CS has such heavy turnover every year. Unless there is a spot open for CSE you're pretty much stuck :/.. Flick is great though.. same goes for most people at WAM. I bet you're missing the bond market..lol. Anyway, congrats on your transfer to Loyola!

[Shammis]

Who is feelin' lucky today? Feels like decisions off the waitlist are brewin'...

[lalalawya]

Who is feelin' lucky today? Feels like decisions off the waitlist are brewin'...

Hopefully :/.

[lalalawya]

Everyday I wake up and think to myself "Today will be the day." Loyolaaaaaa </3.

Also, is anyone else having trouble getting through to the admissions office when they call? No matter what time I call, I get their voicemail saying they are unavailable. I don't want to leave a message, because I want to ask an anonymous question...leaving my phone number would kinda ruin that anonymity.

[Danteshek]

Don't bother them. They are busy. If you have the numbers, you'll get in.

[david787]

does anyone know when they went to the waitlist last year?

[chenalex]

My friend, who never got the waitlist reconfirmation letter, got a letter from Loyola saying that they were removing her app because she never sent in the reconfirmation. She is UPSET.

[lalalawya]

My friend, who never got the waitlist reconfirmation letter, got a letter from Loyola saying that they were removing her app because she never sent in the reconfirmation. She is UPSET.

That is terrible. I am assuming she has tried to talk to them about this? It was sent through snail mail, so I am not sure if there is even a way she can confirm that she DIDN'T receive it. Poor girl :/

[071816]

My friend, who never got the waitlist reconfirmation letter, got a letter from Loyola saying that they were removing her app because she never sent in the reconfirmation. She is UPSET.

pwned

[chenalex]

My friend, who never got the waitlist reconfirmation letter, got a letter from Loyola saying that they were removing her app because she never sent in the reconfirmation. She is UPSET.

That is terrible. I am assuming she has tried to talk to them about this? It was sent through snail mail, so I am not sure if there is even a way she can confirm that she DIDN'T receive it. Poor girl :/

She'll call today to find out what happened, but yeah, I'm not sure what she can do either. The letter came yesterday, which probably meant that they just finished sorting through the returned reconfirmation letters over the weekend.