<p>Here are paths open to me:</p>
<p>Columbia Law full-ride with highest merit-based named fellowship -> 2 to 4 years of corporate law -> BB banking</p>
<p>or</p>
<p>MBB NYC office/global staffing -> M7/Tuck MBA -> BB banking</p>
<p>I would graduate from Columbia Law with about 50k in debt, but the difference between biglaw comp and pre-MBA MBB comp should make for 50k in a little over one year. I don't enjoy traveling. And, I'm not interested in MBB -> Columbia Law (with deferral) -> biglaw long term/MBB long term. I understand that I will have to make the ultimate decision, but what do you all think?</p>
<p>Unless you couldn’t possibly imagine putting up with consulting for a few years, MBB without a doubt. If you’re not interested in law and you have other options, going to law school is probably a poor decision. </p>
<p>The Corporate law to Associate at a BB transition is difficult, to say the least.
Getting into an M7 MBA out of MBB is basically guaranteed.</p>
<p>I assume that you got a Hamilton? If you have the opportunity to attend a top law school for free, no doubt take it. An understanding of law will come handy as you move up the latter. Pre-MBA MBB positions pays little compared to biglaw, and MBB will not pay for your MBA if you go into banking afterward. Traveling would be tough on you if you don’t like to fly. In your case, MBB would also be a poor decision financially.</p>
<p>Easy: Columbia Law for free, not even a legitimate question. You will need to stick with consulting for 6-7 years (including b-school) or not pay for b-school through some other means to justify giving up CLS for free -> biglaw if you dislike flying.</p>
<p>From what I’ve heard, going to Law school with no intention of practicing law is a bad idea. Yeah Robert Rubin did it, but not many others</p>
<p>I heard that too, but going to law school with no intention of practicing law is a bad idea mainly due to debt. You don’t want to be $220000 in debt and stuck in a field that you have no interest in. However, the OP is getting a full-ride, and the OP simply wants to lateral into finance after 4 years, which transactional lawyers often (i.e. distressed debt, M&A, etc.). You should work as a lawyer for 4 years before going into finance instead of seeking associate positions straight out of law school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Any idea how often this happens?
My general impression was that this path was no longer really an option, but this may be limited to the bank where I work out. The entire associate class is either promoted analysts or fresh bschool grads.</p>
<p>“Any idea how often this happens?”</p>
<p>It definitely still happens. From what I heard, it doesn’t happen very often for two specific reasons. First, most biglaw associates need the relative stability of biglaw to ensure that they get the checks they need to repay their student loans. Second, not many biglaw associates want to go into finance because their are relatively risk-averse and prefer BigFed/policy after their biglaw gigs.</p>