Taking the GMAT after being admitted...

recruiters ask about your gmat score?

Yes, especially for competitive consulting and IB jobs.

yes.

LoL I am seriously never taking this test again - a 710 is good enough for me, if someone else has a problem with it, they can plop down $250 and spend the months of misery it takes to get > 90th percentile.

I hear ya. But I think a 99th% looks good on your resume esp if there's GND. Also, most of what you studied will probably come back to you quickly. It will be a matter of refreshing, sharpening, and performing. I think I'll give myself a month, a month and a half TOPS, and give it a go.

Anything under 700, and I'd be

Good luck with that - I am sure you can do it I just dont think its worth it. Plus, if you do give it another shot and score 99th percentile wont you wonder if you could have gotten in to a different school (unless of course you are in at the school of your dreams)? I dunno - thats a tough call. I also heard you might have to report your scores to jobs so wouldnt that look funny if you retook?

Every time I find some of my notes from those days I get this nasty feeling in my stomach. I HATED that entire endeavor and will NEVER do it again. EVER. I would rather apply to a million other schools (HBS included) and do my interviews naked than take the GMAT again. Yep.

LOL! I don't know if taking GMAT again beats interviewing naked... although being naked is certainly easier!

I'm considering taking the LSAT just for kicks. Other than the logic puzzles, it seems to be somewhat similiar to the GMAT (CR/RC). Just curious if I can even score over a 160 with minimal prep.

You are one sick puppy. Taking the LSAT for FUN?

You know... we all talk about how people list GMAT scores... and we know they do... but does anyone actually know how much they matter to recruiters? I can't imagine them using it as anything more than a quick litmus test type thing ... 'yea, ok, he did fine.'

I don't think it worths either. It would be better if you concentrate on some pre-MBA courses.
But I'd better retake GMAT than a naked interview. Just don't like the idea of being naked in front of others and have them asking me some questions while staring at my body.

Regarding the LSAT, your ability to do well will depend a lot on how fast you read. The LSAT has 2 CR sections and 1 RC section, plus a logic games section. The CR and RC on the LSAT are generally harder than those on the GMAT, but more importantly, they take much more time to get through. I can tell you from personal experience that I finished the GMAT verbal section with about 20 minutes to spare, got a perfect score (more or less) in the section, and felt I had plenty of time to work slowly through the entire section. On the LSAT, I had work as fast as I could, and generally finished each section with just a minute or two to spare. I recall reading (years ago) a stat that 95% of LSAT test-takers must guess during the exam because they don't have the time to read each question fully. I believe the exam is set up in this way because law school calls for a lot of reading, comprehension and analysis and those that read write faster have a distinct advantage both in law school and on the job.

The logic games section of the LSAT is generally considered to be the toughest. For me, it was always the most time intensive. I could finish the other sections with 1-2 minutes to spare generally (I'm a very fast reader), but I always found myself going 1-2 minutes over on the games section. I think most people would probably need to spend a good amount of time to prepare specifically for this section. For reference, I had basically the same percentile score on the GMAT and LSAT.

Regarding whether to take the GMAT again, that's a tough one. Obviously everyone feels differently about studying for and taking the exam. I actually didn't mind it too much. For people targeting MC, IB and many of the structured management training programs, you will likely have to disclose your GMAT score during the course of the application process - you may even get grilled on it during your interviews (probably only with MC & IB). The question isn't whether higher is better - higher is in fact better. The question is whether you need a higher score to accomplish what you'd like.

If you have a great background in finance with experience at name-brand firms and lot's of responsibility and promotions, you can probably get through the first few rounds of IB recruiting without a great GMAT score. If, on the other hand, you are a career switcher without a lot of applicable experience, then your GMAT score will be a huge part of your application.

Another thing to consider is the name-brand of your school (we can go by cluster here). If you're at an ultra-elite, then you can probably move ahead in the interview process for most industries regardless of your score. At the most competitive firms (GS, McK, etc.) they will obviously want strength in all areas. If you're at an elite, then a higher GMAT will likely help you secure and move ahead with more interviews. If you are at anything lower, then your GMAT score might be the most important part of your application, especially of the firm you want to work for doesn't visit your campus.

A top firm might select a handful of people to meet with, or might just pick out one or two resumes from among a pile that are submitted. A high GMAT score might be the only thing that can save your application from the circular file at this point.

Finally, (this is obvious), but you should only plan on retaking the GMAT if you are willing to put for the effort to get the score that you want. I think in most situations, a 750+ will be a big plus on most resumes, but only go for it if you're ready to work and have the ability to get it.

So, the decision should come down to 1) where you would like to work), 2) how strong your prior work experience is, 3) the brand-quality of your school, 4) your current GMAT and your chances of improvement.

Notes? For the GMAT? Man, this is why I know I will take it again. I might take notes and stuff.

Anything beyond five sheets of paper with numbers and A-E on them will be more notes.

Hmmm, I guess none of us knows for sure. So why not give it another go? From my perspective, I don't figure to be losing much except maybe some weekends and $250. Who knows, I might not even go through with it.

But I don't want someone with a 770 getting an edge on me for a job that I really want because I got lazy for a month and a half. Who knows if I'll get into IB/MC but I might as well keep my options open.

The LSAT is verbal heavy. Actually, it's a verbal beatdown. I think rhyme (and most verbal-inclined) might actually do very well on it. But it's a different breed of verbal compared with GMAT. It's a lot more convoluted, dense and inference heavy. The only thing that trips up most test takers is logic games which is more suited for the the quant inclined.

I don't think it will make a difference for bschool admission (97th% to 99th%) but I think it might for recruiting, esp at IB/MC.