Unless she has 100k cash for a deposit I seriously doubt she’s buying in London. Most likely renting and she’s right bidding is absolutely nuts atmSeems like she's looking to buy a flat in London?
She could defo get a 1 bed flat with like a £30k deposit- depends where in London she wants to live.Unless she has 100k cash for a deposit I seriously doubt she’s buying in London. Most likely renting and she’s right bidding is absolutely nuts atm
View attachment 979684
Sorry but what does this even mean looool. Didn’t realise air forces and underwear signalled “GAY”
Well first time buyers here will typically need a 15% deposit and the average one bed in London zone 2-4 is £450,000-500,000 so definitely need more than 30k.She could defo get a 1 bed flat with like a £30k deposit- depends where in London she wants to live.
Okay, let's agree to disagree haha. I live in London too and a few of my friends have recently bought with c. £30k in places like Streatham, Leyton etc. As I said, it depends where in London you want to buy but it's defo possible to buy a property here without having a £100k deposit.Well first time buyers here will typically need a 15% deposit and the average one bed in London zone 2-4 is £450,000-500,000 so definitely need more than 30k.
Fairs enough, maybe there are some hidden gems lurking about.Okay, let's agree to disagree haha. I live in London too and a few of my friends have recently bought with c. £30k in places like Streatham, Leyton etc. As I said, it depends where in London you want to buy but it's defo possible to buy a property here without having a £100k deposit.
It's the trouser brand not the underwear that's the gay thing. It's a specific trend.Unless she has 100k cash for a deposit I seriously doubt she’s buying in London. Most likely renting and she’s right bidding is absolutely nuts atm
View attachment 979684
Sorry but what does this even mean looool. Didn’t realise air forces and underwear signalled “GAY”
You can get a 5% deposit too as a first time buyer! So it wouldn’t be out of the questionFairs enough, maybe there are some hidden gems lurking about.
Anyways apologies back to Eve ahah
There still are science degree options that lead to guaranteed or almost guaranteed work including engineering, computer science and medicine.It's harder to make money in science. I think Eve is driven by wealth accumulation hence why she chose law.
It's interesting because she did do the LPC in 6 months, and it already is a huge beast to do let alone in half the time. Wasn't she already working/studying about 10 hours a day?I bet she couldn’t hack the hours and I remember reading in the FT comments of the article on her that she’s known to not be very good at her job. I think she cared more about the status of being a lawyer gave her than actually being a lawyer.
I saw it in my own cohort, the trainees who came in the most boastful and posting stories about the job- quickly leave within a few years. They thought law would be their “Suits” dream when it’s actually an incredibly stressful and complex job.
That new role she’s got will result in at least a 60-70% pay cut too, so she really wanted out.
I think she was motivated to do the LPC for the glitzy, high-paying law firm and after facing reality as to how dull, high stress/demanding it is to work in a firm and progress to partner she realised its not for her? Her motivation and passion may have just deteriorated. As opposed to not possessing the capability to hack the hours. Motivation and determination is a high driver and can get people far, though when they're at the end of the road they realise its not all that great.There still are science degree options that lead to guaranteed or almost guaranteed work including engineering, computer science and medicine.
It's interesting because she did do the LPC in 6 months, and it already is a huge beast to do let alone in half the time. Wasn't she already working/studying about 10 hours a day?
I was suprised as to why she chose corporate law when she was very much into criminal. It is way harder to make money and breakthrough in criminal law, anyone would be seduced by the 100k, the flashy firms and Eve seemed to fall for that.Mentioned it and discussed it in some small detail before but she also didn’t seem to be that interested in corporate law, judging by her YT anyway. A lot of her law “in depth” videos were on criminal law
I think if she wanted to she could cut out her channel to be a source for ‘developments in law’ (I know there’s a specific term for this but it escapes my mind) for her specific area. Law students are always encouraged to keep up with that as it’s good for interviews and what not, yet it can be a bit hard to do. It seems like an obvious choice for her to make but eh
Could you copy and paste that into a spoiler section as it is paywalled, thanksNot sure legal articles are relevant any more, given Eve is now a "woman in STEM"but this FT article is useful at explaining why firms like LL still benefit from marketing: https://www.ft.com/content/06ff299e-4114-4710-becf-c4f1590f8efe
Ah weird. It wasn't paywalled when I posted it but is now! The same story was also in a few other papers and was on the BBC here: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59949697Could you copy and paste that into a spoiler section as it is paywalled, thanks
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?