Bidding strategy

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273472
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Bidding strategy

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:04 pm

Top 10-15% at Notre Dame, maybe a 60% chance to make law review- what range of firms should I be looking at in Chicago? I'm also aiming at some secondary midwest markets but I just wanted to see what firms would be wasting a bid in Chicago. I'm also slightly considering NYC but we obviously don't have too many NYC firms at our OCI.

ToTransferOrNot
Posts: 1928
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:45 am

Re: Bidding strategy

Postby ToTransferOrNot » Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:23 pm

I don't think any of the real Chicago firms are entirely out of reach, though Kirkland would be a serious stretch (not even sure they do OCI at ND anymore). Be aware that Mayer has been a UChi/Northwestern/Harvard/Michigan firm for the past two years - but that could be a product of the very small summer classes they've had lately.

I probably wouldn't bother applying to Skadden-Chicago or Latham-Chicago, though.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273472
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Bidding strategy

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:25 pm

I figured Skadden, Kirkland (they are coming this year), etc... were too high...what about Jones Day, any possibility there?

ToTransferOrNot
Posts: 1928
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:45 am

Re: Bidding strategy

Postby ToTransferOrNot » Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:33 pm

Honestly, that 60% chance of Law Review thing makes it tough to tell. Pretty big difference between top 10%/LR and Top 15%/No LR. 15% is a good ranking, to be sure, and it would give you a reasonable shot at the second level Chicago firms (though certainly no guarantee). To be clear, though - nothing is ever a guarantee with this game. If you end up with LR and closer to the 10% than the 15%, I wouldn't hesitate to spend my higher bids on the Winston/Sidley/Jenner/JD level of things.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273472
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Bidding strategy

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:36 pm

We don't rank...my GPA is ~3.65 and after last semester thet top 15% was 3.6 ish (27 people out of ~175 were 3.6). Based on previous LR cutoffs I would be fine, but the thinking is it may be a little higher this year...I estimated conservatively with the 60%.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273472
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Bidding strategy

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:57 pm

OP again, thanks for your quick replies!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273472
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Bidding strategy

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:24 pm

Bumping this up...the grading calculator has me as top 12-13% and right on the bubble for LR, so there will be some news coming up. Given that we have a complete lottery system, I'm a little worried about how to structure my bids for Chicago (I'm also aiming at a couple of secondary markets that I have ties in, particularly Indianapolis). Here's my list for Chicago

Kirkland
Sidley
Jones Day
Jenner
Winston
McDermott Will & Emory
McGuireWoods
Dykema
K&L Gates?

I know Kirkland is a real long shot but their large class size means I should probably throw a bid out there...how high should I have the V15-50ish range of firms on there? Should I go conservative and bid some secondary markets higher?

Also going to target NYC but mostly through mass mailing (plus our OSIP)...would the best way to go be to basically mass mail everything outside the V10?

Thanks!




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.