I think the point is not that it's impossible to get this kind of job, but just that these jobs are so rare, so competitive, and require so much else to go right that the marginal chances of getting that kind of employment shouldn't weigh heavily on your choice of school.greta wrote:I don't understand why this is so impossible to work in this field. I would have gone to either Harvard or Stanford Law School, I have pretty advanced proficiency in two European languages (although neither is French), and I have worked and studied in Europe. I don't say this to imply that I think that I'm entitled to get anything, but is it really almost impossible to get a spot in the international arbitration practice of a place like Freshfields or Cleary or White & Case in London or in NYC with the potential to transfer?TaipeiMort wrote:My only point is that the OP wont be doing international arbitration anyway, so it wont matter, and Harvard will offer him more Magic Circle firms to try to practice any cross-border deals work, but also more and competition-- the OP is probably not getting Magic Circle anyway, and Stanford offers him a better chance at getting a biglaw job and less competition for any job (except for maybe Keker, Quinn, or another very selective CA shop).
Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work Forum
- Nelson
- Posts: 2058
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:43 am
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
- TaipeiMort
- Posts: 869
- Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
If you are looking to do cross-border deals work (capital markets or M&A) in Europe, then the possibility of starting in the US or London is real. However, getting into international arbitration groups is very hard. Of the seven or so real seats of arbitration (Hong Kong, Singapore, Tokyo, Paris, Geneva, London, NYC), you lack the language skills for four or five of them off the bat. That leaves London and NYC to start in (you may be able to lateral later). Of these offices, the number of starter positions doing this work is really, really small because the attorneys who actually end up doing to work manytimes come in as laterals for XX domestic firm. I don't think school selection will increase this chance much. However, go to Columbia or Harvard if you want to try to backdoor into these positions (eg. network, appropriately express interest through the right channels, write alumni, find work while in school, etc.). Columbia may be a bit better because they have a gigantic LLM alumni/partner base, but Harvard would be great too.Nelson wrote:I think the point is not that it's impossible to get this kind of job, but just that these jobs are so rare, so competitive, and require so much else to go right that the marginal chances of getting that kind of employment shouldn't weigh heavily on your choice of school.greta wrote:I don't understand why this is so impossible to work in this field. I would have gone to either Harvard or Stanford Law School, I have pretty advanced proficiency in two European languages (although neither is French), and I have worked and studied in Europe. I don't say this to imply that I think that I'm entitled to get anything, but is it really almost impossible to get a spot in the international arbitration practice of a place like Freshfields or Cleary or White & Case in London or in NYC with the potential to transfer?TaipeiMort wrote:My only point is that the OP wont be doing international arbitration anyway, so it wont matter, and Harvard will offer him more Magic Circle firms to try to practice any cross-border deals work, but also more and competition-- the OP is probably not getting Magics Circle anyway, and Stanford offers him a better chance at getting a biglaw job and less competition for any job (except for maybe Keker, Quinn, or another very selective CA shop).
Columbia and Harvard have a huge gap in international alumni networks of schools: (Columbia>Harvard>>>NYU,Chicago>>>>Stanford>> Berkeley, Yale, Penn, others).
You are rolling the dice though. Harvard will give you a chance at a backdoor into int'l arbitration. Stanford is the safer option if you want a job. However, if you do decide on Harvard I give you props for having the moxie to fight the odds and try for something you care about (and it seems your background may qualify you for). My comments earlier were based upon the assumption you were generic "international law 0L" who lacks the background to make it. If it means anything, I am doing the same thing in another international field and am pretty happy with the results so far-- if you are qualified for the position you have a punchers chance coming from the right school to get into these rarer fields.
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:44 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
I guess I just wonder how much of a roll of the dice Harvard is. Considering the (admittedly modest) economic recovery, I have a tough time believing that students at Harvard in any kind of danger. Aren't job prospects at the two schools pretty similar for everyone but the bottom 10-15% of the classes?TaipeiMort wrote:You are rolling the dice though. Harvard will give you a chance at a backdoor into int'l arbitration. Stanford is the safer option if you want a job.
I do think that Stanford students can be more picky with which firm they decide to work at, but if I can't work in my top choice practice area and end up doing just plain old litigation for 3-4 years anyway, why would it matter which firm I'm at?
- hung jury
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:52 am
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
I doubt the placement differences are meaningful enough to differentiate the schools given what else is at play.
If you have 50k to spare, just pick the school you'd prefer to attend.
If you have 50k to spare, just pick the school you'd prefer to attend.
-
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:44 am
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
What did you decide, and why?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:29 am
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
Interesting to see UT in the top 30.Rotor wrote:LOL at the thought of Stanford not having any reputation in Europe. Here is a link to the reputational rankings by an actual European publication instead of TLS anecdote. It is not LS specific, but that seems to be the general thrust of this thread.
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/w ... p-400.html
-
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 3:24 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
You can't beat the weather in Palo Alto
- unc0mm0n1
- Posts: 1713
- Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
What T5 school is close to Inglewood? Did UCLA or USC make the T5?TaipeiMort wrote:Well, I actually was talking about Harlem, Inglewood, and half of New Haven.acrossthelake wrote:What "ghetto", exactly, is Cambridge encumbered by?TaipeiMort wrote:True, but Stanford is practically as close to that as Santa Cruz and Monterey.TaipeiMort wrote:go to the only T5 law school that isn't near a ghetto, go to Stanford.
- unc0mm0n1
- Posts: 1713
- Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm
- Cobretti
- Posts: 2593
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
I'm sure he meant Englewood, which is by Columbia
-
- Posts: 6244
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:09 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
TL;DR
Last edited by Borhas on Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Yukos
- Posts: 1774
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
Stanford is near East Palo Alto, which is actually pretty ghetto. Not nearly as dangerous as parts of Harlem, but you have no doubt driving through there that you're in a poorer neighborhood.
WTF this has to do with anything I don't know.
WTF this has to do with anything I don't know.
- dingbat
- Posts: 4974
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
Lol at Harlem being dangerousYukos wrote:Stanford is near East Palo Alto, which is actually pretty ghetto. Not nearly as dangerous as parts of Harlem, but you have no doubt driving through there that you're in a poorer neighborhood.
WTF this has to do with anything I don't know.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:11 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
Have you seen the rankings on this website lately. SLS is one ahead of HLS. Plus $/weather/location. Unless, you really want to relive the legally blond movies or any other stereotype about Ivies, its a no-brainer.
- Yukos
- Posts: 1774
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
There's still parts that are dangerous, though it's more block to block than whole swathes now. Still, the gentrification of Harlem is way overblow: go east of Malcolm X and it's clear you're not in Morningside Heights.
Source: I live in Harlem (the gentrified part obvi).
Source: I live in Harlem (the gentrified part obvi).
- dingbat
- Posts: 4974
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
I've spent time in harlem. I've also spent time in dangerous areas. There's a noticeable differenceYukos wrote:There's still parts that are dangerous, though it's more block to block than whole swathes now. Still, the gentrification of Harlem is way overblow: go east of Malcolm X and it's clear you're not in Morningside Heights.
Source: I live in Harlem (the gentrified part obvi).
- Yukos
- Posts: 1774
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
Lol ok well if you "spent time there" you're obviously an expert. I just live here, what do I know?dingbat wrote:I've spent time in harlem. I've also spent time in dangerous areas. There's a noticeable differenceYukos wrote:There's still parts that are dangerous, though it's more block to block than whole swathes now. Still, the gentrification of Harlem is way overblow: go east of Malcolm X and it's clear you're not in Morningside Heights.
Source: I live in Harlem (the gentrified part obvi).
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- dingbat
- Posts: 4974
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
And have you ever spent time in a truly dangerous area? Seriously, there's a noticeable difference.Yukos wrote:Lol ok well if you "spent time there" you're obviously an expert. I just live here, what do I know?dingbat wrote:I've spent time in harlem. I've also spent time in dangerous areas. There's a noticeable differenceYukos wrote:There's still parts that are dangerous, though it's more block to block than whole swathes now. Still, the gentrification of Harlem is way overblow: go east of Malcolm X and it's clear you're not in Morningside Heights.
Source: I live in Harlem (the gentrified part obvi).
I don't claim to be an expert on Harlem, but I've lived in areas that are far, far more dangerous than Harlem is today.http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2010/0 ... own-harlemhttp://www.wpix.com/news/local/wpix-eas ... 2244.story
In 1981, 6,500 robberies were reported in Harlem. The number dropped to 4,800 in 1990, perhaps due to an increase in the number of police assigned to the neighborhood. With the end of the "crack wars" in the mid 90s and with the initiation of aggressive policing under mayor Rudolph Giuliani, crime in Harlem plummeted. In 2000, 1,700 robberies were reported. There have been similar changes in all categories of crimes tracked by the New York City Police Department In the 32nd Precinct, which services Central Harlem above 127th Street, for example, between 1990 and 2008, the murder rate dropped 80%, the rape rate dropped 58%, the robbery rate dropped 73%, burglary dropped 86%, and the total number of crime complaints dropped 73%.
- echamberlin8
- Posts: 264
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 5:28 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
Why is everyone always arguing on TLS?
- Cobretti
- Posts: 2593
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
Why shouldn't we argue?echamberlin8 wrote:Why is everyone always arguing on TLS?
- dingbat
- Posts: 4974
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
There are a fairly large number of people on TLS discussing a very large number of topics. Invariably, people have differences of opinion.echamberlin8 wrote:Why is everyone always arguing on TLS?
Also, quite a lot of people spout off shit that's just wrong, and those who know try and set the facts straight
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Blessedassurance
- Posts: 2091
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:42 pm
- unc0mm0n1
- Posts: 1713
- Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
I thought he meant Englewood which is close to Chicago.mrizza wrote:I'm sure he meant Englewood, which is by Columbia
- unc0mm0n1
- Posts: 1713
- Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
I think Dingbat's point is someone who is a sheltered Columbia student may think any place with multiple dark people is dangerous. While many people who have lived in places exponentially more dangerous in this country, would not consider Harlem a particularly dangerous neighborhood by comparison. You may have a different idea of what dangerous is. According to some Harlem is actually much safer than many other NYC neighborhoods:Yukos wrote:Lol ok well if you "spent time there" you're obviously an expert. I just live here, what do I know?dingbat wrote:I've spent time in harlem. I've also spent time in dangerous areas. There's a noticeable differenceYukos wrote:There's still parts that are dangerous, though it's more block to block than whole swathes now. Still, the gentrification of Harlem is way overblow: go east of Malcolm X and it's clear you're not in Morningside Heights.
Source: I live in Harlem (the gentrified part obvi).
DNAinfo.com released their New York City Crime and Safety Report yesterday, which featured surprising results from around the five boroughs.
All 69 New York City neighborhoods were scored on total per capita crime as well as types of crime: violent, rape, robbery, grand larceny, felony assault, burglary and auto theft.
Contrary to what you might expect, areas like Midtown Manhattan and Greenwich Village were rated as more dangerous than Harlem and Washington Heights.
http://www.businessinsider.com/most-dan ... z28pST7VMK
- dingbat
- Posts: 4974
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm
Re: Stanford $ vs. Harvard for East Coast and International Work
You said this far more eloquently than I did.unc0mm0n1 wrote:I think Dingbat's point is someone who is a sheltered Columbia student may think any place with multiple dark people is dangerous. While many people who have lived in places exponentially more dangerous in this country, would not consider Harlem a particularly dangerous neighborhood by comparison. You may have a different idea of what dangerous is. According to some Harlem is actually much safer than many other NYC neighborhoods:Yukos wrote:Lol ok well if you "spent time there" you're obviously an expert. I just live here, what do I know?dingbat wrote:I've spent time in harlem. I've also spent time in dangerous areas. There's a noticeable differenceYukos wrote:There's still parts that are dangerous, though it's more block to block than whole swathes now. Still, the gentrification of Harlem is way overblow: go east of Malcolm X and it's clear you're not in Morningside Heights.
Source: I live in Harlem (the gentrified part obvi).
DNAinfo.com released their New York City Crime and Safety Report yesterday, which featured surprising results from around the five boroughs.
All 69 New York City neighborhoods were scored on total per capita crime as well as types of crime: violent, rape, robbery, grand larceny, felony assault, burglary and auto theft.
Contrary to what you might expect, areas like Midtown Manhattan and Greenwich Village were rated as more dangerous than Harlem and Washington Heights.
http://www.businessinsider.com/most-dan ... z28pST7VMK
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login