Law School Discussion

Applying to Law School => Law School Admissions => Topic started by: okaymanup on November 16, 2006, 01:47:15 AM

Title: jd vs. mba
Post by: okaymanup on November 16, 2006, 01:47:15 AM
does anyone have a good broad comparison in terms of job prospects, salaries, competition and pros and cons?
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: queencruella on November 16, 2006, 06:05:27 AM
I think the conventional wisdom these days says that getting an MBA is not worth the time or money. The employment prospects are not good at all, even coming out of top schools. Only about 78% of Stanford grads have jobs lined up at graduation, and I'm sure the lower ranked schools are much worse. The starting pay is lower, and of course MBA programs are a dime a dozen so the competition is fierce. I worked with someone who had a BBA who told me there was really no reason to go get an MBA because companies like to hire people with BBAs- they're cheaper. In addition, there's no point going to get an MBA without any work experience- most good programs should require at least 2 years and generally speaking students are usually in their later 20s.

The only benefit to getting an MBA is that sometimes companies will pay for it or you can do them via distance learning. I'd say the only time it's really worth it to get one is if you're working for a company that's willing to pay for it or where you need an MBA to progress further up the career ladder.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: WildFool on November 16, 2006, 07:27:07 AM
does anyone have a good broad comparison in terms of job prospects, salaries, competition and pros and cons?


I was ready to get an MBA and then get my JD.  I took the GMAT, applied to schools, got in, was ready to send in my deposit...  but then I did one last search just to make sure it all was worth it and I found three articles to convince me it def. was not worth it.  Below are the articles listed from best to worst.  The first one is most eye opening as it states EMPIRCAL evidence shows that getting an MBA may not be worth it.  Here are the links:

http://cbet.uwaterloo.ca/MBA-reallyworth.html

http://www.quintcareers.com/MBA_degree.html

http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/oct2004/bs20041028_5621_bs001.htm
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: juliemccoy on November 16, 2006, 07:44:22 AM
I had considered the MBA, did my research, took a GMAT prep course and the day I was scheduled to take the test I cancelled my appointment. I agree with everything Queencruella said. The MBA is more of an all-purpose feather in your hat once you've been out in the business world for 2-10 years, or a mid-stream career changer into IB, IT, etc... I think it is a great idea for some (like the Aerospace Engineer who wants to get into Business Development or the Marketing Manager who wants to segue into Investment Banking), but it isn't a good idea to go with the intent that you'll figure out what to do with it later nor is it a guarantee of an easy jump into a good job with lots of money.

I feel so bad for the kids who find MBA programs fresh out of undergrad and then can't find a job b/c they don't have the work experience to match the degree and few are going to hire an MBA for an entry level position.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: Cube Farmer on November 16, 2006, 09:24:44 AM
One of my co-workers has an MBA from a pretty decent school.....He is now working at the same place I am, making the same amount of money. Is his growth potential higher, I have my doubts.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: paigeroo on November 16, 2006, 10:33:21 AM
does anyone have a good broad comparison in terms of job prospects, salaries, competition and pros and cons?

Why not a JD and MBA?
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: queencruella on November 16, 2006, 10:40:46 AM
does anyone have a good broad comparison in terms of job prospects, salaries, competition and pros and cons?

Why not a JD and MBA?

It's not really worth the extra cash. Again, it's not that hard to go back and get an MBA later on, and many employers will pay for it if they want you to have it (or at least pay for some of it), and you can do an executive MBA or a distance learning MBA.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: cbm_flyer on November 16, 2006, 10:47:02 AM
It's only another year...

;)
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: cbm_flyer on November 16, 2006, 11:05:32 AM
It's only another year...

;)

...of paying tuition, books, and fees and not earning a salary or having good health care.

Yesh, I'm having enough trouble swallowing the idea of doing that for three years, let alone four.  Of course, if the miracle happened that I got into one of these new-fangled three-year programs...

Still dig those boobs; less crazy about the actress wearing them.  But that would be for another board.  :)
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: plaintext10 on November 16, 2006, 05:29:34 PM

A MBA certainly has value, but not in the manner I believe the question is being raised.  If you have an interest in corporate law or going in-house, your employer should pay for it at the time it is needed (7 to 10 years post graduation).  If you plan on getting your JD, I certainly wouldn't acquire additional debt.  Wait until you qualify for an executive MBA, and do it on your employer's dime.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: gillesthegreat on November 16, 2006, 05:47:13 PM
Does anyone else find it odd that to be admitted to the Northwestern JD/MBA, one needs only to take the GMAT, and not the LSAT?
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: cbm_flyer on November 16, 2006, 07:32:52 PM
Does anyone else find it odd that to be admitted to the Northwestern JD/MBA, one needs only to take the GMAT, and not the LSAT?

I did not know that; very interesting!  Of course, if you don't get into Kellogg, [imho] you're not going to NW Law either.

  K   -->   NW

Wow, I'm putting in all kinds of .02s today!  ;)
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: plaintext10 on November 17, 2006, 12:30:11 PM

i like this article

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/CollegeAndFamily/SavingForCollege/IsYourDegreeWorth1million.aspx

Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: cbm_flyer on November 19, 2006, 09:11:58 AM

i like this article

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/CollegeAndFamily/SavingForCollege/IsYourDegreeWorth1million.aspx



Thanks!  That eased some of my anxiety over the loans...  :P
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: jarhead on November 19, 2006, 04:03:04 PM
an MBA/JD is a good thing to get...without going into my whole story if you've read any of my other posts you'll know that im a non-trad with a good amount of work experience...in my opinion the only time you should get an MBA is if it's necessary for you to advance in your current job or necessary for you to transition to another area in your field i.e. move into investment banking etc.... in any company there are generally two ways to go... you can become a specialist which means you get really good at what you do and are basically the subject matter expert...this is great if you really like what you do and don't want to play the management game...problem is at some point you will be stuck and not able to move any higher...decisions will be made that affect you that you have no say over and could begin to make the job you love to do suck...the other way is upper management...this is where an MBA becomes beneficial it puts you ahead of some of your competition who probably have similar seniority and experience but haven't bothered to get a graduate degree....long story short a JD is the most valuable graduate degree you can get for business...you can tailor you upper level courses to cover the same topics that you would get from an MBA program...a lawyer can be a CEO, Vice President etc. an MBA can't be a lawyer...unless he goes to law school...make sense?
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: gillesthegreat on November 19, 2006, 04:16:27 PM
Quote
a lawyer can be a CEO, Vice President etc. an MBA can't be a lawyer...unless he goes to law school...make sense?

Well, if you become an important ($$$) enough CEO, you get to write checks to the GOP and you can write your own laws. Is that the same as being a lawyer?
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: jarhead on November 19, 2006, 04:24:26 PM
Quote
a lawyer can be a CEO, Vice President etc. an MBA can't be a lawyer...unless he goes to law school...make sense?

Well, if you become an important ($$$) enough CEO, you get to write checks to the GOP and you can write your own laws. Is that the same as being a lawyer?


in light of the recent election results i would say no
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: Sweetpri on November 19, 2006, 04:25:06 PM
Does anyone else find it odd that to be admitted to the Northwestern JD/MBA, one needs only to take the GMAT, and not the LSAT?

I think it's weird...similar at American University you only need to take the LSAT, not the GMAT to get in their dual program.  

Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: JGCESQ on November 28, 2006, 10:37:06 PM
The answer depends on whether you actually prefer the law. If you go to law school, do it because you love the law, not because you want to get rich. If you're coming out of college, and your primary goal is to get rich, go to work at an investment bank, brokerage house, real-estate development firm, or computer-technology company and learn how that businesses works. While you're there, think about starting your own business or going to business school. 

Having been out of law school for a few years, I can't help but smile when I see so many people obsessed with the law-school admissions process. Unfortunately, the primary impetus for this competition appears to be money. The ironic truth, however, is that even the people who go to the most prestigious schools and work for the most prestigious firms very rarely get rich, and the few who do get rich will nevertheless wind up making salaries that are dwarfed by those of successful businessmen. Look at Forbes's list of the 400 richest Americans. How many practicing lawyers made the list? One. How many people from the finance, real estate, and computer-technology fields made the list? Hundreds.

Generally, law-school applicants fall into one of two categories: (1) those who have a genuine passion for the law; and (2) middle- and upper-middle-class kids who mistakenly think that practicing law is a good way to become rich. Of course, those who actually are rich know better. Indeed, very few children of the super rich go to law school, and even fewer go with the intention of practicing law. Why? Because they have no illusions regarding money.
 
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: jarhead on November 29, 2006, 04:54:05 PM
The answer depends on whether you actually prefer the law. If you go to law school, do it because you love the law, not because you want to get rich. If you're coming out of college, and your primary goal is to get rich, go to work at an investment bank, brokerage house, real-estate development firm, or computer-technology company and learn how that businesses works. While you're there, think about starting your own business or going to business school. 

Having been out of law school for a few years, I can't help but smile when I see so many people obsessed with the law-school admissions process. Unfortunately, the primary impetus for this competition appears to be money. The ironic truth, however, is that even the people who go to the most prestigious schools and work for the most prestigious firms very rarely get rich, and the few who do get rich will nevertheless wind up making salaries that are dwarfed by those of successful businessmen. Look at Forbes's list of the 400 richest Americans. How many practicing lawyers made the list? One. How many people from the finance, real estate, and computer-technology fields made the list? Hundreds.

Generally, law-school applicants fall into one of two categories: (1) those who have a genuine passion for the law; and (2) middle- and upper-middle-class kids who mistakenly think that practicing law is a good way to become rich. Of course, those who actually are rich know better. Indeed, very few children of the super rich go to law school, and even fewer go with the intention of practicing law. Why? Because they have no illusions regarding money.
 



agree, i may be one of the few on here who have no intention of being a lawyer i want the law degree because it will help me with my business
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: ->Soon on May 10, 2007, 02:01:49 PM
http://money.cnn.com/2007/05/10/markets/nyc_london/index.htm?postversion=2007051011


i wonder how this will affect the IB's and those living near the city...
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: Above & Beyond on May 10, 2007, 02:11:03 PM
Regarding IB, there are some people with JDs.  But if you want to work in IB as an associate on up (industry groups, M&A, etc.) then for the most part you need a JD or MBA, cause a bachelor's degree won't cut it.  There are some 3rd year analysts who do get promoted straight up, but doesn't happen very often, especially because banks can choose from the top MBA programs.  Same for private equity on the buyside.

Having worked in IB, I would think an MBA is more useful than a JD because of the networking and connections made during the 2 year MBA program.  Especially if one wants to move around from firm to firm, its nice to know that you could drop your resume with a fellow alummus rather than going through HR.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: WeeSqueak on May 10, 2007, 03:01:03 PM
The answer depends on whether you actually prefer the law. If you go to law school, do it because you love the law, not because you want to get rich. If you're coming out of college, and your primary goal is to get rich, go to work at an investment bank, brokerage house, real-estate development firm, or computer-technology company and learn how that businesses works. While you're there, think about starting your own business or going to business school. 

Having been out of law school for a few years, I can't help but smile when I see so many people obsessed with the law-school admissions process. Unfortunately, the primary impetus for this competition appears to be money. The ironic truth, however, is that even the people who go to the most prestigious schools and work for the most prestigious firms very rarely get rich, and the few who do get rich will nevertheless wind up making salaries that are dwarfed by those of successful businessmen. Look at Forbes's list of the 400 richest Americans. How many practicing lawyers made the list? One. How many people from the finance, real estate, and computer-technology fields made the list? Hundreds.

Generally, law-school applicants fall into one of two categories: (1) those who have a genuine passion for the law; and (2) middle- and upper-middle-class kids who mistakenly think that practicing law is a good way to become rich. Of course, those who actually are rich know better. Indeed, very few children of the super rich go to law school, and even fewer go with the intention of practicing law. Why? Because they have no illusions regarding money.
 


I agree with what you said about being super rich.  If you want to be super rich law is not the way to go.  However, if you just want to be in the upper echelons of upper-middle class law is a more sure bet (imho) than being a doctor or investment banker, etc for most of the population because it requires a more broad and more easily acquired skill set. 

I think more people can hack law school than can hack med school and I think there are a lot of people that are numbers shy that think they could never go into banking but could see doing law an alternative.  In many ways law is the "safe" option for job security and money.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: bamf on May 10, 2007, 03:14:54 PM
The MBA is more of an all-purpose feather in your hat once you've been out in the business world for 2-10 years, or a mid-stream career changer into IB, IT, etc...

TITCR.  An MBA with no fulltime experience is no different than a b-school grad with no experience.  If you want to work in business get some work experience, and then if you feel you want to move upwards in management head to the MBA program.

In terms of comparing the two degrees, the JD is a degree that enables you to do a job that no one without that degree can do.  An MBA is just a resume builder, there to make you stand out from a bunch of other moderately-experienced applicants.
And while people on this board joke about TTT law schools not being worth it (I am not evaluating the value of that statement), the general opinion seems to be that TTT MBA programs are truly pretty worthless, unless you think you need to extra classes so that you can perform better once you do get into the working world.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: lovethelaw2010 on May 10, 2007, 04:25:59 PM
Somebody asked the question about why not a JD and a MBA and I actually was going to do this until very recently.  I decided not to for a couple of reasons.  One is if you are interested in working for a BigLaw firm I contacted a couple of firms that I would like to work for and they don't like hiring people with MBA and JD's because they don't feel like they are going to stick with the law firm for very long.  One firm that I talked to did say they don't actually look at it as a negative but they also don't really care much about it because they still are only going to look at your grades.  Maybe if you are going to be in house counsel at a company it could come in handy but I don't know.  Anyways that is just what I've found in my research but good luck to you whatever you end up deciding.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: Hank Rearden on May 11, 2007, 01:08:16 AM


I agree with what you said about being super rich.  If you want to be super rich law is not the way to go.  However, if you just want to be in the upper echelons of upper-middle class law is a more sure bet (imho) than being a doctor or investment banker, etc for most of the population because it requires a more broad and more easily acquired skill set. 



Define super rich?
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: WeeSqueak on May 11, 2007, 07:20:23 AM


I agree with what you said about being super rich.  If you want to be super rich law is not the way to go.  However, if you just want to be in the upper echelons of upper-middle class law is a more sure bet (imho) than being a doctor or investment banker, etc for most of the population because it requires a more broad and more easily acquired skill set. 



Define super rich?

From the context of the original comment I took it to mean around $15 million or more.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: Hank Rearden on May 11, 2007, 08:50:57 AM


I agree with what you said about being super rich.  If you want to be super rich law is not the way to go.  However, if you just want to be in the upper echelons of upper-middle class law is a more sure bet (imho) than being a doctor or investment banker, etc for most of the population because it requires a more broad and more easily acquired skill set. 



Define super rich?

From the context of the original comment I took it to mean around $15 million or more.

You could go to law school and eventually earn that much, but I suppose you'd have to quit becoming a lawyer.   :D  Doesn't mean your legal training wasn't valuable in getting you that position though. 
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: Captain on May 11, 2007, 09:20:19 AM


I agree with what you said about being super rich.  If you want to be super rich law is not the way to go.  However, if you just want to be in the upper echelons of upper-middle class law is a more sure bet (imho) than being a doctor or investment banker, etc for most of the population because it requires a more broad and more easily acquired skill set. 



Define super rich?

From the context of the original comment I took it to mean around $15 million or more.

You could go to law school and eventually earn that much, but I suppose you'd have to quit becoming a lawyer.   :D  Doesn't mean your legal training wasn't valuable in getting you that position though. 

Actually, a good plaintiff lawyer can make A LOT more than that. Class action suits take a long time, but you can make a lot of money. In bigger cases, the lawyer takes home more than a parner at Wachtell makes per-year. Of course, you ONLY get paid when you win a case...

Also, lets not forget the king-of-torts, Joe Jamail, who was worth $1.2 Billion dollars.

The owner of the Baltimore Orioles is also a trial lawyer from Maryland.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: Hank Rearden on May 11, 2007, 09:23:07 AM
Eh, I guess, but I was talking more about the Wachtell partners.  I think they top off around 10 mil per year. 
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: WeeSqueak on May 11, 2007, 10:41:23 AM
However you defineit my point was that law was a more safe bet than other proffessions to make say $2-5 mil a year, which in my opinion is way more than comfortable and way more than I need.  I'd be ok with $1 mil a year.
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: Hank Rearden on May 11, 2007, 11:51:08 AM
However you defineit my point was that law was a more safe bet than other proffessions to make say $2-5 mil a year, which in my opinion is way more than comfortable and way more than I need.  I'd be ok with $1 mil a year.

Yeah, I mean, how many summer houses do you need?  I would be fine with a modest salary of $2-5 mil.   :) ::)
Title: Re: jd vs. mba
Post by: WeeSqueak on May 11, 2007, 11:52:27 AM
he he