thank you, Brayden!

thank you!

you're welcome, John!

you're welcome, John

I think there are other videos on youtube about how people got into Harvard law. You basically have to be the best of the best, over 3.8 GPA from a top college, 170+ on the LSAT, and have impressive leadership roles. Community service is always good too. Good luck!

Ya, it's not really rocket science. High GPA and high LSAT are the top priority, then have some extracurriculars or work experience, but honestly what you do is not that important, just do something that interests you and be somewhat active (no employment gaps). People hate to hear this, but GPA and LSAT score are by far the most important factors, everything else is secondary. Also, contrary to what the other replier said, your GPA matters, but I at least disagree that where you went matters that much. For ranking purposes, a 3.8 from a community college counts the same as a 3.8 from Princeton, so in that sense they don't really care where you went that much, only what your GPA is, and they want a high GPA mainly to boost their rankings. Tons of people go to mediocre schools and get into T14's. An elite undergrad is definitely not a requirement.

Yes, I speak fast at times, that's for sure. I am glad that, despite that issue, my video was helpful to you!

Che, al final pudiste hacer las dos? Yo estoy terminando derecho y estoy interesando en hacer un mba, me lo recomendas?

@@holasoynico165 Al final dejé derecho, no me sale rentable en términos de costo de oportunidad tomando en cuenta la utilidad que podría tener en el exterior esos conocimientos; estoy enfocado totalmente en economía. Si retomo derecho va a ser en una universidad anglosajona regida por el common law, mas es una pérdida de tiempo estudiar el sistema romanista. Si pudiera volver el tiempo atrás no habría ni entrado a la universidad de derecho. En cuanto el MBA te pide como carrera de grado un título en económicas, sea economista, contador o administrador (al menos en la UNLP), así que como abogado tendrás bloqueada esa opción. Espero haberte ayudado.

@@Qu0kk4. gracias por responder che. en la unlp desconozco supongo que es así, en la unc se pide únicamente título universitario es más, para los que no vienen de económicas se les hace un ciclo de nivelación en economía contá y matemáticas creo. En la uba creo que también es así pero no estoy muy seguro

you're welcome, Laseander. I think it's tough to imagine declining prospects, given that antitrust enforcement has been historically lax in the past few decades and there seems to be a strong current of progressive thought that supports stronger antitrust enforcement (especially aimed at the tech companies). And while the world is way more competitive than it was a couple decades ago, technology allows for speed and scale that leads to more "winner take all" markets, so I believe that antitrust law is as relevant as ever. Regarding Georgetown vs. a higher-ranked school, if you get into H/Y/S, go there. Almost everyone in and out of the field of law knows offhand that they are at top of the pack and those schools will lead to more open doors for you, no question. You'll have all of the D.C. opportunities you want coming from those schools. A school like UVA or Cal Berkeley (i.e., the second half of the top 10) is a tougher call, although I'd still prioritize higher school ranking there if no other factors (e.g., cost, financial aid, personal preference for campus, location, etc.) were relevant

Brett Cenkus thank you SO much for this thoughtful answer. Really means a lot to me. Take care!

@@Laseander I went to Georgetown, and definitely, if you can get into Harvard/Yale/Stanford, go there instead. It will open up so many doors for you. You can try to work for the USDOJ Antitrust Division by applying for the USDOJ Honors Program; it is very selective and prestigious. Good luck!

Azizat, My B.A. in Economics was a broad liberal arts degree. I took courses in statistics and business that were helpful in my law practice, although I don't think they were super important. I did not take any undergrad courses in finance, which would have been helpful. I took one or two classes in accounting. Accounting knowledge is useful in corporate law practice, although I don't know that I retained a whole lot of accounting information between undergrad and my first job in law. I valued my broad liberal arts background, and I think, in addition to Economics, English and philosophy are great degrees for helping to train people to think critically and write well--two essential skills. Ultimately, though, since only so much of what you learn in undergrad (and law school, for that matter) will translate on the job, I believe in studying what you want to study. Start there. It's unlikely that anything you study in undergrad will change the trajectory of your law career. It's important to intern at a law firm (or firms) while in law school. I don't think hiring partners/managers care much about pre-law school internships at law firms, including working as a paralegal. If your undergrad major is in accounting, finance, or business, I see value in having a related internship before law school, especially if you get accounting or financial modeling/valuation exposure. I'd expect that hands-on experience to stick with you for longer than your undergrad coursework. That may not be the case, depending on how well you retain information. But, for me, it was much more helpful to get on-the-job skills than classroom work. Circling back to my earlier point, though, even though I see value in accounting and finance internships, if you're crazy passionate about European history, study that. In that case, though, a related internship will not do much for your future. If you have no work experience, it will help to have something (any internship is better than no work experience). Although, you could do all sorts of other jobs and have it fill a work void on your resume.

Thank you so much!

Just jumping in to say it depends. If you want to continue investing in real estate, there's really no reason to get a JD unless you want to do real estate closings too. If you can get into your state law school and pay in-state tuition, that would be a lot better than going to an overpriced private school. Good luck!

Mitchell, you do not need to go to a top law school to have a great career in transactional (corporate) law or real estate law (or any other type of law). Top schools open doors and some opportunities are more easily (sometimes only) accessed from top schools, although it would be wrong to conclude that most doors and opportunities are closed off to students who don't graduate from top law schools. That is not true. And there are other paths into M&A, including through consulting (the Big Four Accounting firms have corporate transaction groups that work on M&A deals) and investment banking.

@@BrettCenkus Thank you for your response it is much appreciated. There aren't many transnational law firms in Oregon so I haven't had that many people to chat with, your advice is much appreciated!

Michael, I learned a lot about business management and strategy by reading Inc. magazine for two decades, although that's a lot of reading and I don't think that trying to learn business management skills would be your best use of time if the goal is to be a better corporate lawyer (not to mention that reading about business management is ultimately less valuable than doing it). And, if you wanted to pick up some business management/strategy knowledge, I'd start with In Search for Excellence (Peters and Waterman) and Good to Great (Collins). If you want a better bang for the buck on your reading time, again with the goal of preparing you to be a corporate lawyer and/or making you a better corporate lawyer, take a look at: 1) Barbarians at the Gate (this book tells the story of the leveraged buyout of RJR Nabisco in the 80s. The world has changed a lot since the 80s, which were infused with leveraged buyouts and hostile takeovers, although it remains largely relevant in explaining the roles of various participants in major M&A events and it is one of the most entertaining business books I've ever read) 2) Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It (negotiating is a big part of the job) 3) Term Sheets & Valuations: A Line by Line Look ... (this is specific to venture capital, which is just one corner of corporate law, although it's an important corner and the concepts will port over into other areas of corporate finance) 4) Financial Statements: A Step-By-Step Guide to Understanding and Creating Financial Reports (I haven't read this one, although it looks great and being able to read and understand financial statements is a critical skill for corporate lawyers)

Brett, thanks for the suggestions! Will be starting with barbarians at the gate and never split the difference. looking forward to reading them!

That answer was pure gold. Writing down everything.

Sure, your finance experience will be a big plus if you want to do corporate law, business litigation, or tax law. Or even if you want to do divorce cases, your expertise can come in handy. Good luck!

Suleiman, Thank you for the positive feedback! M&A has not gotten boring to me yet, and I'm 22 years into it. There are always new legal issues on almost every deal, regardless of the size. That's probably the same in any field of law. The problems that are new to me are more and more niche/nuanced, although that doesn't make them, from my perspective, any less enjoyable to grapple with. Also, what's great about a general M&A practice (vs. an industry-specific practice) is that we get to see so many different business models and understand how the businesses work and compete. I love that about my practice. If you're willing to work for what is likely less money than you make with your current services, I think you could quickly obtain some "main street level" M&A engagements -- businesses selling for a few hundred thousand dollars. Those businesses tend to be very budget-conscious for a good reason. If you can be super competitive and you're willing to work hard and spend the time you need "off the clock" to deliver on those deals, that feels like a viable path for you. The transactions of that size that are looking for lawyers through the lead generation platforms (e.g., Avvo, etc.) primarily price shoppers. They want a sharp lawyer, although I don't feel like it would turn many of them off to know that you're new in this space. And those are not difficult deals to handle. Yes, you'll need some help, although there are lots of resources out there (Practical Law is one that comes to mind). I just realized that you may not have those lead gen services in your jurisdiction. I suspect, though, that there is still some way to connect with sellers for small deals, and that's a tried and true path for breaking into any new field. I wouldn't spend any more time thinking about i-banking or the CFA designation until you handle some M&A deals from the law side. I may be off here, although it feels like those options may be appealing to you because you believe that you'll quickly have business once you have the designation, for example. If you have a law degree and you're already brushing up against corporate work with formations and your real estate work, shifting into small market M&A is a viable path. Those other things will prove to be equally as challenging in their own ways (they won't be easy paths to the top of the M&A world). I think you are likely closer now with what you have / where you are at than moving onto those paths.

Hi @@BrettCenkus Thank you very much for taking the time to give me this insight. I totally agree with you, I'm better off gaining experience in the field of M&A at this stage than veering off to study I.Banking or the CFA. Though as you rightly guessed, we don't have lead genetors in my Jurisdiction, which makes it extremely difficult getting your foot through the door, I'd still be taking a deep dive at M&A. I love it already. Your wise counsel is much appreciated. Thank you.

Lilia, if your most significant motivation to pursue a JD/MBA is to acquire business knowledge to put you on more even footing with other corporate attorneys, I'd stick with just the JD and get super curious about business, self teach throughout law school (i.e., take courses and read books on the basics of accounting and finance, et.), take business courses if your law school offers them (we had two great corporate finance classes), and then learn on the job. You can get the same amount of knowledge through the DIY and on-the-job approach and, ultimately, while I believe in education and think that MBA coursework at reputable schools has value, there is only so much you can learn and truly internalize in the classroom anyway. Once you are practicing law, stay curious, and read everything you can about the business side of the deals you're working on -- that will put you far ahead in the long run.

@@BrettCenkus Thank you! This advise is exactly what I needed to hear.

Chad, I am not familiar with the 2-year JD programs. although I'm assuming they're viewed a little differently than traditional 3-year programs? If you can get into a top school that only offers a 3-year full-time program (I'm also assuming that most of the top schools only offer this type of option), I think the decision is easy to go that route and get a degree from a top school, even though that means dealing with more opportunity cost. I'm not sure where you'd want to set the cutoff for "top" school in this context - top 10 or 15 schools, something like that. Outside of that decision (i.e., if you're not weighing an offer to go to a top school), I think part-time is fine if your opportunity cost is high. Sounds like the MBA wouldn't do a lot for you, career-wise, that you don't already have and, given the opportunity cost concerns, I wouldn't worry about the joint degree.

Pablo, It doesn't sound to me like a joint degree is an ideal fit for you. If you're not committed to practicing law for some time, I don't think you will get that much out of it. There is so much to read and learn and only so much of it that you can genuinely understand without applying it in the real world, let alone retain for any amount of time. I think you'd be better served with self-study in the areas of the law where you feel a need to learn enough to have context for your business negotiations. Granted, with some self-study work, it's easy to feel like you did not learn much, that you still feel a bit shaky on the concepts. However, that is a feeling many of us had after spending three years in law school, so be careful of taking the longer, more expensive track to achieve that feeling. My answer may be different if you intend to practice law for two or three years. That is a bare minimum amount of time for a decent amount of the classroom knowledge to take practical form and crystalize a bit). However, doing all of that (the additional joint degree classroom work and practicing law for a few years) merely to feel more confident in your business roles would be an outsized sacrifice for what I'd expect it to do for you overall. One last thought regarding self-study. An excellent exercise for a business person without a legal background is to work through the most important contracts in their world, e.g., Stock Purchase Agreements, Merger Agreements, and Stockholders' Agreements in your case (for VC and PE). Go through them carefully to understand every sentence, every word even. Keep working through each concept, searching for explanations online, asking lawyers to explain them, and looking for alternative approaches (different wording). Learn those contracts inside and out, and you will feel way more confident!

@@BrettCenkus Thank you so much for taking the time to give me such a thorough answer. This is exactly what I needed to hear.

@@pablopenalba9245 My pleasure, Pablo.

Probably not if you intend to continue working in the same field. Law school is already 3 years, but maybe you could continue working while going to evening law school. Just an idea. Best wishes.

(Or investment company

The JD/MBA will have relevance for a career in buying/selling/growing companies (which sounds more like private equity (PE)). The question is whether it's worth the opportunity cost for you. If you spend two+ years at McKinsey and can get into a top MBA program, you'll have a lot of opportunities available to you, i.e., likely a good shot at getting into PE with just that route. I'm aware that there are three-year JD/MBA programs now. If you can get into a top school that offers that, a year of opportunity cost might be worth it for you. 2 years, though, that's a lot, assuming you don't need the dual degree differentiator to get into the right PE opportunity (again, seems like you wouldn't, based on what you're telling me). And, I've made the point before that, unless you practice law for a few years after graduating, the law degree will not give you an enormous amount of practical knowledge.

Yes, at some schools, although I am not aware of any top tier programs that offer part-time options (they may but I haven't seen them, and I know for sure that a few of the top programs do not).

Juris Doctor (law degree). Similar to LLB (Bachelor of Laws). Different jurisdictions have different degree requirements.

Juris Doctor, also called a Doctor or Jurisprudence degree (a U.S. law degree)