Completely get how frustrating it can be to condense a strong answer into just 90 seconds! It can be really tough to know, too, whether you've struck the right balance between depth and conciseness. That said, in these cases, I think it's really important to ask yourself whether you can comfortably fit in three points without them feeling rushed or superficial (some people can do this effortlessly - not me though (ha)). It’s absolutely fine to stick with two more in-depth points if that feels more natural, and you can spend about 45 seconds on each, which allows you to provide more substance without feeling pressed for time.
I’d also suggest asking someone to review your answer or record yourself to see how it comes across. The aim is to be concise but still nuanced (on that note, I'd recommend avoiding the typical 'I'm interested in commercial law because I'm interested in business and law'). The other thing I'd say here is that if you end up going with 2 points instead of 3, I'd suggest that you avoid overloading your answer with too much detail. This can effectively dilute your key message and make it harder for the viewer to follow your answer. As long as you’re thoughtful and clear, the interviewer should be able to connect with your reasoning. Good luck!
