USC c/o 2016 Applicants Forum

[law_app_noob]

Once we're on CR2, will the status checker change again before a decision is made? Or will we just get a decision in the mail?

[pmd49]

Once we're on CR2, will the status checker change again before a decision is made? Or will we just get a decision in the mail?

Not sure if there's any change from, say, CR2 to "Decision Complete" or something like that (I haven't read too much of this thread), but I went from CR2 on 2/5 and then had date updated to 2/20 and haven't heard, so it's possible you'll have a date update before a decision.

[BigZuck]

Once we're on CR2, will the status checker change again before a decision is made? Or will we just get a decision in the mail?

Not sure if there's any change from, say, CR2 to "Decision Complete" or something like that (I haven't read too much of this thread), but I went from CR2 on 2/5 and then had date updated to 2/20 and haven't heard, so it's possible you'll have a date update before a decision.

"Decision finalized" is the last step for most people. But you could still find out what that decision is like a month later.

[KanyeShrug]

Checking in. CR2 as of 2/20. Meh.

[VeeD101]

UR2 since January 25, why no love USC? I thought I had all the vital stats that would have you jumping all over me :(:(

[martymoose]

In Final Review as of today. Whatever that means.

[biznardos]

In Final Review as of today. Whatever that means.

I got a decision within 48 hours of this! But again, who knows...

[kaf5250]

In a few days ago with 30k/year scholarship!! However, its still going to be way expensive for me to go there considering a cross-country move ..

[SydneyC]

how long would the commute from santa monica be, 30-45 mins w/traffic? what about cost of living for a ~1 bedroom?

With traffic, I'd say you're close, but I'd lean toward 45 minutes in the morning. The evening traffic is typically worse going back that way, but you can just wait that out by studying in the library or something. You can take side streets if the 10 is really backed up and get the same results. I've never lived in Santa Monica, but friends who do seem to pay around $1200 for decent places.

$1200 for a one bedroom? Not a studio? In Santa Monica? Really???

notsureifserious.jpg

I'd say depends on how close to the beach you want to be. Within 15 blocks or so, I'd say $1200 / mo is a minimum in Santa Monica. If it helps, a friend bought a 1BD apt on 10th St (10 blocks from beach) pre-2008 for $550K. I doubt SM real estate that close to the ocean has seen much of a dip in prices even with 2008 crash.

[dproduct]

how long would the commute from santa monica be, 30-45 mins w/traffic? what about cost of living for a ~1 bedroom?

With traffic, I'd say you're close, but I'd lean toward 45 minutes in the morning. The evening traffic is typically worse going back that way, but you can just wait that out by studying in the library or something. You can take side streets if the 10 is really backed up and get the same results. I've never lived in Santa Monica, but friends who do seem to pay around $1200 for decent places.

$1200 for a one bedroom? Not a studio? In Santa Monica? Really???

notsureifserious.jpg

I'd say depends on how close to the beach you want to be. Within 15 blocks or so, I'd say $1200 / mo is a minimum in Santa Monica. If it helps, a friend bought a 1BD apt on 10th St (10 blocks from beach) pre-2008 for $550K. I doubt SM real estate that close to the ocean has seen much of a dip in prices even with 2008 crash.

Yeah, SM is a giant city. My first apartment post-ugrad was technically in SM (sorta near Brentwood area) and it was $2000 for a 3bd. Pretty nice too. You can have dogs (we did not, but our neighbor did). Also came with 2 parking spots.

There were plenty of 1k ish 1bds in the area. Mainly smaller buildings. Stay away from buildings with property managers. You pay an extra $200 premium for the "24 hour customer service" crap.

[megagnarley]

how long would the commute from santa monica be, 30-45 mins w/traffic? what about cost of living for a ~1 bedroom?

With traffic, I'd say you're close, but I'd lean toward 45 minutes in the morning. The evening traffic is typically worse going back that way, but you can just wait that out by studying in the library or something. You can take side streets if the 10 is really backed up and get the same results. I've never lived in Santa Monica, but friends who do seem to pay around $1200 for decent places.

$1200 for a one bedroom? Not a studio? In Santa Monica? Really???

notsureifserious.jpg

I'd say depends on how close to the beach you want to be. Within 15 blocks or so, I'd say $1200 / mo is a minimum in Santa Monica. If it helps, a friend bought a 1BD apt on 10th St (10 blocks from beach) pre-2008 for $550K. I doubt SM real estate that close to the ocean has seen much of a dip in prices even with 2008 crash.

I would say it's less about how close to the beach you want to be and more about North/South of wilshire and proximity to Montana. For example 20th and Montana is 20 blocks from the beach but a 1br will still cost you $1600+. Head south of Wilshire and you can see that price drop towards 1,000$.

Honestly anything in the SM/Brentwood area for less than $1200 is going to be pretty crappy (speaking about 1br's).

[BigZuck]

I lived in a 3 bed/2 bath apartment on Wilshire and 20th and it was $3150. This was years ago.

[wbrother]

So where can I stay for sub $700 a month? In a 1b/studio?

[megagnarley]

So where can I stay for sub $700 a month? In a 1b/studio?

That's going to be a tall task my friend. Try Hancock Park, just north of Melrose.

[law_app_noob]

So where can I stay for sub $700 a month? In a 1b/studio?

West of Hoover, around Washington. There are several apartment complexes that have 3 bdrm apartments for around 2000/mnth. They're super ghetto, but my SO lived in one her 1L year at USC. It's livable. Just find a couple roommates.

[jimmy_dean]

So where can I stay for sub $700 a month? In a 1b/studio?

with a wealthy significant other?

[Tuler09]

Posted this in UCLA but figured it should really be ITT:

Just to throw my two cents in the USC/UCLA debate and possibly to help anyone in the same position who won't have the opportunity to visit:

I recently had the chance to visit each school, tour, sit in on classes, meet with current students, etc. I have the same aid offer from both schools, but went into it thinking USC would really have to wow me to make me consider them over UCLA.

Like had been said over and over ITT, it really comes down to personal preferences and what your specific goals are to find the differences that will matter between the two. However, if you're like me and small class sizes and lots of personalized help and attention are important to you, then USC comes out on top. The smaller student body allows offices such as career services and financial aid to give you much more individualized attention than at UCLA.

What really sold it for me, though, was USC's transparency and willingness to put everything on the table. At UCLA when I asked the tough questions about employment statistics there was a general answer from faculty and students that seemed to kind of want to sweep things under the rug. A lot of "Well...you know...it's getting a lot better...don't worry!". At USC they were super upfront, told you what needed to improve and what they were working on doing better at. The professor I had lunch with also basically told me to go to Columbia, and while that just made me hyperventilate more about my law school decision, I really appreciated how open and honest every single person I talked to was. Along those same lines I had multiple students not involved with admissions or the tours coming up to me at USC and wanting to tell me how much they loved the school and why I should attend, something that did not happen at UCLA.

Obviously, this is all very anecdotal and more personal preference. But if you're someone like me who went to an undergad institution where they had to constantly deal with red tape, or found that offices that were supposed to help you made your life harder, USC really went out of their way to show how that does not happen at the law school. And again, what really changed my mind was just the attitude of the students and faculty who didn't feel the need to hide their flaws under false pretenses. Everything, good and bad, was laid out on the table and that really sold me.

[CO2016YEAH]

So where can I stay for sub $700 a month? In a 1b/studio?

In a 1br. shared with a friend.

[zman]

Posted this in UCLA but figured it should really be ITT:

Just to throw my two cents in the USC/UCLA debate and possibly to help anyone in the same position who won't have the opportunity to visit:

I recently had the chance to visit each school, tour, sit in on classes, meet with current students, etc. I have the same aid offer from both schools, but went into it thinking USC would really have to wow me to make me consider them over UCLA.

Like had been said over and over ITT, it really comes down to personal preferences and what your specific goals are to find the differences that will matter between the two. However, if you're like me and small class sizes and lots of personalized help and attention are important to you, then USC comes out on top. The smaller student body allows offices such as career services and financial aid to give you much more individualized attention than at UCLA.

What really sold it for me, though, was USC's transparency and willingness to put everything on the table. At UCLA when I asked the tough questions about employment statistics there was a general answer from faculty and students that seemed to kind of want to sweep things under the rug. A lot of "Well...you know...it's getting a lot better...don't worry!". At USC they were super upfront, told you what needed to improve and what they were working on doing better at. The professor I had lunch with also basically told me to go to Columbia, and while that just made me hyperventilate more about my law school decision, I really appreciated how open and honest every single person I talked to was. Along those same lines I had multiple students not involved with admissions or the tours coming up to me at USC and wanting to tell me how much they loved the school and why I should attend, something that did not happen at UCLA.

Obviously, this is all very anecdotal and more personal preference. But if you're someone like me who went to an undergad institution where they had to constantly deal with red tape, or found that offices that were supposed to help you made your life harder, USC really went out of their way to show how that does not happen at the law school. And again, what really changed my mind was just the attitude of the students and faculty who didn't feel the need to hide their flaws under false pretenses. Everything, good and bad, was laid out on the table and that really sold me.

that's a suprise because UCLA does have a great repuation in that department. I know people when it comes to USC complained about the traffic when visiting for MBA,JD programs and so on. but USC is smaller so it does have more of a family atmosphere.

[uconjak]

Posted this in UCLA but figured it should really be ITT:

Just to throw my two cents in the USC/UCLA debate and possibly to help anyone in the same position who won't have the opportunity to visit:

I recently had the chance to visit each school, tour, sit in on classes, meet with current students, etc. I have the same aid offer from both schools, but went into it thinking USC would really have to wow me to make me consider them over UCLA.

Like had been said over and over ITT, it really comes down to personal preferences and what your specific goals are to find the differences that will matter between the two. However, if you're like me and small class sizes and lots of personalized help and attention are important to you, then USC comes out on top. The smaller student body allows offices such as career services and financial aid to give you much more individualized attention than at UCLA.

What really sold it for me, though, was USC's transparency and willingness to put everything on the table. At UCLA when I asked the tough questions about employment statistics there was a general answer from faculty and students that seemed to kind of want to sweep things under the rug. A lot of "Well...you know...it's getting a lot better...don't worry!". At USC they were super upfront, told you what needed to improve and what they were working on doing better at. The professor I had lunch with also basically told me to go to Columbia, and while that just made me hyperventilate more about my law school decision, I really appreciated how open and honest every single person I talked to was. Along those same lines I had multiple students not involved with admissions or the tours coming up to me at USC and wanting to tell me how much they loved the school and why I should attend, something that did not happen at UCLA.

Obviously, this is all very anecdotal and more personal preference. But if you're someone like me who went to an undergad institution where they had to constantly deal with red tape, or found that offices that were supposed to help you made your life harder, USC really went out of their way to show how that does not happen at the law school. And again, what really changed my mind was just the attitude of the students and faculty who didn't feel the need to hide their flaws under false pretenses. Everything, good and bad, was laid out on the table and that really sold me.

that's a suprise because UCLA does have a great repuation in that department. I know people when it comes to USC complained about the traffic when visiting for MBA,JD programs and so on. but USC is smaller so it does have more of a family atmosphere.

Thanks for the info, i am going next week to check out both schools and talk to them about money!

[zman]

Posted this in UCLA but figured it should really be ITT:

Just to throw my two cents in the USC/UCLA debate and possibly to help anyone in the same position who won't have the opportunity to visit:

I recently had the chance to visit each school, tour, sit in on classes, meet with current students, etc. I have the same aid offer from both schools, but went into it thinking USC would really have to wow me to make me consider them over UCLA.

Like had been said over and over ITT, it really comes down to personal preferences and what your specific goals are to find the differences that will matter between the two. However, if you're like me and small class sizes and lots of personalized help and attention are important to you, then USC comes out on top. The smaller student body allows offices such as career services and financial aid to give you much more individualized attention than at UCLA.

What really sold it for me, though, was USC's transparency and willingness to put everything on the table. At UCLA when I asked the tough questions about employment statistics there was a general answer from faculty and students that seemed to kind of want to sweep things under the rug. A lot of "Well...you know...it's getting a lot better...don't worry!". At USC they were super upfront, told you what needed to improve and what they were working on doing better at. The professor I had lunch with also basically told me to go to Columbia, and while that just made me hyperventilate more about my law school decision, I really appreciated how open and honest every single person I talked to was. Along those same lines I had multiple students not involved with admissions or the tours coming up to me at USC and wanting to tell me how much they loved the school and why I should attend, something that did not happen at UCLA.

Obviously, this is all very anecdotal and more personal preference. But if you're someone like me who went to an undergad institution where they had to constantly deal with red tape, or found that offices that were supposed to help you made your life harder, USC really went out of their way to show how that does not happen at the law school. And again, what really changed my mind was just the attitude of the students and faculty who didn't feel the need to hide their flaws under false pretenses. Everything, good and bad, was laid out on the table and that really sold me.

that's a suprise because UCLA does have a great repuation in that department. I know people when it comes to USC complained about the traffic when visiting for MBA,JD programs and so on. but USC is smaller so it does have more of a family atmosphere.

Thanks for the info, i am going next week to check out both schools and talk to them about money!

you probably won't get past 120,000 with USC unless you get the rothman and those invited come out in a few days.

[jimmy_dean]

how difficult is it to get into the usc-owned housing? anybody have anything specific to say about:

bel-air
regent
senator
sunset

[sean21]

Is there a USC 2016 Facebook group?

[goden]

I'll make one if there isn't already/no one else will.

[jbagelboy]

Posted this in UCLA but figured it should really be ITT:

Just to throw my two cents in the USC/UCLA debate and possibly to help anyone in the same position who won't have the opportunity to visit:

I recently had the chance to visit each school, tour, sit in on classes, meet with current students, etc. I have the same aid offer from both schools, but went into it thinking USC would really have to wow me to make me consider them over UCLA.

Like had been said over and over ITT, it really comes down to personal preferences and what your specific goals are to find the differences that will matter between the two. However, if you're like me and small class sizes and lots of personalized help and attention are important to you, then USC comes out on top. The smaller student body allows offices such as career services and financial aid to give you much more individualized attention than at UCLA.

What really sold it for me, though, was USC's transparency and willingness to put everything on the table. At UCLA when I asked the tough questions about employment statistics there was a general answer from faculty and students that seemed to kind of want to sweep things under the rug. A lot of "Well...you know...it's getting a lot better...don't worry!". At USC they were super upfront, told you what needed to improve and what they were working on doing better at. The professor I had lunch with also basically told me to go to Columbia, and while that just made me hyperventilate more about my law school decision, I really appreciated how open and honest every single person I talked to was. Along those same lines I had multiple students not involved with admissions or the tours coming up to me at USC and wanting to tell me how much they loved the school and why I should attend, something that did not happen at UCLA.

Obviously, this is all very anecdotal and more personal preference. But if you're someone like me who went to an undergad institution where they had to constantly deal with red tape, or found that offices that were supposed to help you made your life harder, USC really went out of their way to show how that does not happen at the law school. And again, what really changed my mind was just the attitude of the students and faculty who didn't feel the need to hide their flaws under false pretenses. Everything, good and bad, was laid out on the table and that really sold me.

so are you going to columbia?