CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

(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: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 21, 2011 3:25 pm

mths wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I will add MoFo to the list and remove Debevoise, PW, K&E, Cleary, and Fitzpatrick.

I skipped Quinn because I heard a story about last year's EIP in which a Quinn attorney refused to interview someone because his/her GPA was below some hard cutoff. I don't think it's worth wasting a bid on a firm that won't hire me regardless of the interview.

Any suggestions on how to order the firms 1-30? I ranked them based on the ratio of interviews:bids (the lower the ratio, the higher it would be on my list), but I am not sure this is the best way to go about it.

check out their summer class size as well

Also I don't know if you need to remove Cleary

Debevoise gives me the creeps but K&E might not be totally out of your reach.


Hey, just curious what you've heard about Debevoise that makes them so scary. I'm in a similar position as OP and was planning on throwing a bid at Debevoise. According to our old EIP data they actually seem to hire a few non-stone scholars (stone at CLS is top ~29% aka ~3.41+ gpa), whereas some elite firms like SullCrom don't go near non-stones.

Are they extremely grade-sensitive at Cornell? Or did you hear from other sources that they tend to weigh grades more heavily compared to other v10s?

Thanks in advance!

User avatar
mths
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 11:24 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby mths » Tue Jun 21, 2011 3:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Hey, just curious what you've heard about Debevoise that makes them so scary. I'm in a similar position as OP and was planning on throwing a bid at Debevoise. According to our old EIP data they actually seem to hire a few non-stone scholars (stone at CLS is top ~29% aka ~3.41+ gpa), whereas some elite firms like SullCrom don't go near non-stones.

Are they extremely grade-sensitive at Cornell? Or did you hear from other sources that they tend to weigh grades more heavily compared to other v10s?

Thanks in advance!

They came to my school for a panel and reception. Most off-putting people I've ever met.

Nothing to do with grades. They said about top quarter for Cornell had a good shot.

seriouslyinformative
Posts: 285
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby seriouslyinformative » Tue Jun 21, 2011 6:05 pm

Every firm has some bad apples. If you rule out a firm based on the characteristics of the few people you meet, you might as well rule out all firms. And in this economy, 90% of you all are in no position to rule out anyone. Have some offers in hand first, and then start trashtalking.

huckabees
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby huckabees » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:14 pm

irie wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:This is a great bidlist for CLS median. I only have a few suggestions.

Do you have an IP degree? You'll probably need one for Fitzpatrick. Consider bidding Kaye Scholer too, they have a strong IP practice. And Kirkland is a good reach but you can probably bid them lower, around 10. Bid Schulte higher- they love CLS students. You may want to double check the class sizes, idk if Freshfields had a very large summer class.


I don't have an IP degree unfortunately, so I'll take Fitzpatrick off.

The reason Kirkland is so high is that last year 169 people bid on them but only 60 got interviews, so I thought I needed to bid them high. You think #10 would be high enough? What should go at the very top then?

According to NALP, Freshfields summer class was 19, which was within the top 30 largest class sizes.

Helmholtz wrote:Am I missing something or is Freshfields at #2 kind of weird?


I used an algorithm, and that's what it spit out, so some of the stuff might not make sense.



ETA: Thanks for the help. I am not expecting to get much useful guidance from career services.


would love to see that algorithm :o)


Yes, I would love to see the algorithm as well, if you wouldn't mind PMing. Scrambling to put together a list just now, as grades were turned in late (and some are still missing). Thanks!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:42 pm

How drastically should this list be adjusted for someone between 3.13 and 3.17? Will just be out of bottom quarter with the former GPA, and just out of bottom third with the latter. Or is most of the above list simply not feasible at all for someone in this range?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:46 pm

mths wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hey, just curious what you've heard about Debevoise that makes them so scary. I'm in a similar position as OP and was planning on throwing a bid at Debevoise. According to our old EIP data they actually seem to hire a few non-stone scholars (stone at CLS is top ~29% aka ~3.41+ gpa), whereas some elite firms like SullCrom don't go near non-stones.

Are they extremely grade-sensitive at Cornell? Or did you hear from other sources that they tend to weigh grades more heavily compared to other v10s?

Thanks in advance!

They came to my school for a panel and reception. Most off-putting people I've ever met.

Nothing to do with grades. They said about top quarter for Cornell had a good shot.


To give another perspective, I'm SAing at Debevoise and pretty much all the attorneys I've met here are nice and great. The firm has a really interesting mix of work (lots of int'l arb, copyright/TM and white collar or the lit side, lots of private equity on the corporate side) and I'm loving it so far. I don't mean this to contradict the above poster - I just think it's a matter of personal preference rather than any specific objective feature about the firm.

As a general matter, Debevoise tends to have a reputation as being the "nice" firm, but relatively low key socially. The partners are very accessible and there are no screamers, but the attorneys tend to hang out together way less than, say, a skadden or a weil.

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Renzo » Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:41 pm

seriouslyinformative wrote:Every firm has some bad apples. If you rule out a firm based on the characteristics of the few people you meet, you might as well rule out all firms. And in this economy, 90% of you all are in no position to rule out anyone. Have some offers in hand first, and then start trashtalking.


True, but some firms are just unpleasant. There was one firm in particular that, in several receptions/panels/networking events/interviews I never met anyone I liked. I would have been miserable there, and I was glad I had figured it out.

seriouslyinformative
Posts: 285
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby seriouslyinformative » Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:56 pm

Renzo wrote:
seriouslyinformative wrote:Every firm has some bad apples. If you rule out a firm based on the characteristics of the few people you meet, you might as well rule out all firms. And in this economy, 90% of you all are in no position to rule out anyone. Have some offers in hand first, and then start trashtalking.


True, but some firms are just unpleasant. There was one firm in particular that, in several receptions/panels/networking events/interviews I never met anyone I liked. I would have been miserable there, and I was glad I had figured it out.



At that point it's just a question of "fit." If, after visiting the firm and meeting as many people as you can possibly meet, you realize that there's no way you can get along with them, you're right to follow your gut. You're especially right to follow your gut in that situation since recruiting tends to put the most sociable people at the front lines.

jlxbos
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:53 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby jlxbos » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:40 am

Anonymous User wrote:
mths wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hey, just curious what you've heard about Debevoise that makes them so scary. I'm in a similar position as OP and was planning on throwing a bid at Debevoise. According to our old EIP data they actually seem to hire a few non-stone scholars (stone at CLS is top ~29% aka ~3.41+ gpa), whereas some elite firms like SullCrom don't go near non-stones.

Are they extremely grade-sensitive at Cornell? Or did you hear from other sources that they tend to weigh grades more heavily compared to other v10s?

Thanks in advance!

They came to my school for a panel and reception. Most off-putting people I've ever met.

Nothing to do with grades. They said about top quarter for Cornell had a good shot.


To give another perspective, I'm SAing at Debevoise and pretty much all the attorneys I've met here are nice and great. The firm has a really interesting mix of work (lots of int'l arb, copyright/TM and white collar or the lit side, lots of private equity on the corporate side) and I'm loving it so far. I don't mean this to contradict the above poster - I just think it's a matter of personal preference rather than any specific objective feature about the firm.

As a general matter, Debevoise tends to have a reputation as being the "nice" firm, but relatively low key socially. The partners are very accessible and there are no screamers, but the attorneys tend to hang out together way less than, say, a skadden or a weil.



not a SA, but i second this perspective. i did a series of small-group seminars with debevoise attorneys and all of them were super nice and supportive and seemed passionate about their work.

User avatar
mths
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 11:24 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby mths » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:21 am

jlxbos wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
mths wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hey, just curious what you've heard about Debevoise that makes them so scary. I'm in a similar position as OP and was planning on throwing a bid at Debevoise. According to our old EIP data they actually seem to hire a few non-stone scholars (stone at CLS is top ~29% aka ~3.41+ gpa), whereas some elite firms like SullCrom don't go near non-stones.

Are they extremely grade-sensitive at Cornell? Or did you hear from other sources that they tend to weigh grades more heavily compared to other v10s?

Thanks in advance!

They came to my school for a panel and reception. Most off-putting people I've ever met.

Nothing to do with grades. They said about top quarter for Cornell had a good shot.


To give another perspective, I'm SAing at Debevoise and pretty much all the attorneys I've met here are nice and great. The firm has a really interesting mix of work (lots of int'l arb, copyright/TM and white collar or the lit side, lots of private equity on the corporate side) and I'm loving it so far. I don't mean this to contradict the above poster - I just think it's a matter of personal preference rather than any specific objective feature about the firm.

As a general matter, Debevoise tends to have a reputation as being the "nice" firm, but relatively low key socially. The partners are very accessible and there are no screamers, but the attorneys tend to hang out together way less than, say, a skadden or a weil.



not a SA, but i second this perspective. i did a series of small-group seminars with debevoise attorneys and all of them were super nice and supportive and seemed passionate about their work.

It's definitely a matter of personal preference. I am not claiming to know anything about the firm or culture :)

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby timbs4339 » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:34 am

Anonymous User wrote:How drastically should this list be adjusted for someone between 3.13 and 3.17? Will just be out of bottom quarter with the former GPA, and just out of bottom third with the latter. Or is most of the above list simply not feasible at all for someone in this range?


These firms are the default list for people in your grade range, although the list is ordered wrong (I think the OP used SA numbers from 2 years ago instead of this year). Most of them probably hired down below median. You still want to go to OCS and get the Stone Scholar binder and take out any firms that gave 80% of their offers to Stone Scholars, and you'll definitely want to check the 2011 SA class sizes (I know Cahill, Milbank, and Schulte should be much higher on the list if you are going off 2011 SA class size). You also want to remove Cleary, Debevoise and Paul Weiss from the list unless you have an IP degree or great work experience.

Also check out the NYU 3.25 bid list thread on the first page. His NY choices are pretty good.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:42 am

Anonymous User wrote:How drastically should this list be adjusted for someone between 3.13 and 3.17? Will just be out of bottom quarter with the former GPA, and just out of bottom third with the latter. Or is most of the above list simply not feasible at all for someone in this range?


Any thoughts on this?
Or should someone in a similar position only be focusing on, say, V50-100 firms/ less competitive NLJ250 firms, in addition to mass mailing?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:49 am

timbs4339 wrote:These firms are the default list for people in your grade range, although the list is ordered wrong (I think the OP used SA numbers from 2 years ago instead of this year). Most of them probably hired down below median. You still want to go to OCS and get the Stone Scholar binder and take out any firms that gave 80% of their offers to Stone Scholars, and you'll definitely want to check the 2011 SA class sizes (I know Cahill, Milbank, and Schulte should be much higher on the list if you are going off 2011 SA class size). You also want to remove Cleary, Debevoise and Paul Weiss from the list unless you have an IP degree or great work experience.

Also check out the NYU 3.25 bid list thread on the first page. His NY choices are pretty good.


Great, thanks for weighing in. I do have a few years of work experience, but it's not business or law related--it would only help in terms of, say, professional maturity.

Any thoughts on using bids for Southern California? Or should I only plan on soliciting CA firms via mass mail, and save all my bids for large New York shops?

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby timbs4339 » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:50 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:How drastically should this list be adjusted for someone between 3.13 and 3.17? Will just be out of bottom quarter with the former GPA, and just out of bottom third with the latter. Or is most of the above list simply not feasible at all for someone in this range?


Any thoughts on this?
Or should someone in a similar position only be focusing on, say, V50-100 firms/ less competitive NLJ250 firms, in addition to mass mailing?


Do not use the Vault ranking as an indicator of selectivity. Firms like Akin, Dewey, Fried Frank, Ropes, Paul Hastings, White and Case, Shearman, all hire down to median or below and have bigger summer classes than V75s. I would bid on a V20 with a class size of 30 over a V90 with a class size of 5. Mass mail, definitely.

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby timbs4339 » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:52 am

Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:These firms are the default list for people in your grade range, although the list is ordered wrong (I think the OP used SA numbers from 2 years ago instead of this year). Most of them probably hired down below median. You still want to go to OCS and get the Stone Scholar binder and take out any firms that gave 80% of their offers to Stone Scholars, and you'll definitely want to check the 2011 SA class sizes (I know Cahill, Milbank, and Schulte should be much higher on the list if you are going off 2011 SA class size). You also want to remove Cleary, Debevoise and Paul Weiss from the list unless you have an IP degree or great work experience.

Also check out the NYU 3.25 bid list thread on the first page. His NY choices are pretty good.


Great, thanks for weighing in. I do have a few years of work experience, but it's not business or law related--it would only help in terms of, say, professional maturity.

Any thoughts on using bids for Southern California? Or should I only plan on soliciting CA firms via mass mail, and save all my bids for large New York shops?


Do not waste a valuable bid on California. Mass mailing would be the best bet (you can also target firms not coming to EIP this way). You will also probably be able to pick up atleast half a dozen interviews in this region during add/drop because regional firms are almost always underbid first time around.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:42 am

timbs4339 wrote: Firms like Akin, Dewey, Fried Frank, Ropes, Paul Hastings, White and Case, Shearman, all hire down to median or below and have bigger summer classes than V75s. Mass mail, definitely.


OP here. Regarding Akin, I didn't include them because i noticed that they gave out 19 offers last year but only one person accepted, which made me think that they only gave offers to people with really high GPAs who then turned them down for better firms. Do you think it's still worth including them?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:57 am

timbs4339 wrote:Do not waste a valuable bid on California. Mass mailing would be the best bet (you can also target firms not coming to EIP this way). You will also probably be able to pick up atleast half a dozen interviews in this region during add/drop because regional firms are almost always underbid first time around.


Again, thanks. Seems like solid, reasoned advice (though if others disagree/differ, please weigh in as I know there are many rising 2L's in this predicament.) Are you a 3L--or someone who has otherwise gone through this process? Just curious.

Also, I have a meeting with an OCS counselor during the first week of July, but should I already be mass-mailing to California (and maybe Chicago) firms immediately?

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby timbs4339 » Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:42 am

Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote: Firms like Akin, Dewey, Fried Frank, Ropes, Paul Hastings, White and Case, Shearman, all hire down to median or below and have bigger summer classes than V75s. Mass mail, definitely.


OP here. Regarding Akin, I didn't include them because i noticed that they gave out 19 offers last year but only one person accepted, which made me think that they only gave offers to people with really high GPAs who then turned them down for better firms. Do you think it's still worth including them?



Yes, those are the firms you should be on the lookout not to include or to bid low. But don't feel trapped by the Vault rankings, I know firms as high as V20-V10 gave callbacks and offers to non-Stone scholars.

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby timbs4339 » Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:47 am

Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:Do not waste a valuable bid on California. Mass mailing would be the best bet (you can also target firms not coming to EIP this way). You will also probably be able to pick up atleast half a dozen interviews in this region during add/drop because regional firms are almost always underbid first time around.


Again, thanks. Seems like solid, reasoned advice (though if others disagree/differ, please weigh in as I know there are many rising 2L's in this predicament.) Are you a 3L--or someone who has otherwise gone through this process? Just curious.

Also, I have a meeting with an OCS counselor during the first week of July, but should I already be mass-mailing to California (and maybe Chicago) firms immediately?


I am a CLS rising 3L who struck out at OCI after making some serious bidding mistakes (and other mistakes as well, including first-year grades). I can only give my opinion, which is mostly based on stuff I read here, advice from friends, and my own mistakes.

The best thing to do would be to call on any rising 3Ls you know and ask them for advice. Get more than one perspective on this process, and try to find people in your situation. Seek out as much information as possible. I was given some advice by someone that contributed to my poor bidding strategy and it seriously hurt me becuase I didn't ask more questions. A two months after OCI I received advice from a 3L telling me to mass mail- the first time I'd been given this advice and too late for it to matter. Career Services is largely useless, but do the obligatory meeting with them and the mock interview.

Don't mail immediately, you don't even have your interview schedule yet. Mail towards the end of July/beginning of August.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:27 pm

timbs4339 wrote:Don't mail immediately, you don't even have your interview schedule yet. Mail towards the end of July/beginning of August.


Hopefully you will/have picked up something during 3L...this is exactly what I'm trying to avoid, and am soliciting advice from wherever I can find it. So thanks, and best of luck, I hope you land something solid. Meanwhile I'm hoping the 3.1-3.2 gpa range isn't the mark of death come August.

As to mailing, I was going to wait on those firms that are actually coming to EIP, but mail those that aren't in July. After EIP I would then email anyone I did not bid on or land an impromptu/open interview with, as well as those firms I didn't land a bid interview with (though this latter group may simply be passing twice at that point.)

I don't know if you have since mass-mailed, but if so (or if you've gleaned advice elsewhere since), do you suggest targeted letters or mail-merge or some combination in between?

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby timbs4339 » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:Don't mail immediately, you don't even have your interview schedule yet. Mail towards the end of July/beginning of August.


Hopefully you will/have picked up something during 3L...this is exactly what I'm trying to avoid, and am soliciting advice from wherever I can find it. So thanks, and best of luck, I hope you land something solid. Meanwhile I'm hoping the 3.1-3.2 gpa range isn't the mark of death come August.

As to mailing, I was going to wait on those firms that are actually coming to EIP, but mail those that aren't in July. After EIP I would then email anyone I did not bid on or land an impromptu/open interview with, as well as those firms I didn't land a bid interview with (though this latter group may simply be passing twice at that point.)

I don't know if you have since mass-mailed, but if so (or if you've gleaned advice elsewhere since), do you suggest targeted letters or mail-merge or some combination in between?


That sounds like a good plan. If you can get some interviews lined up or even an offer, it can really boost your confidence going into EIP.

I would write "semi-targeted" letters. If a firm is mostly litigation, you want to talk about litigation, if they are mostly coporate, talk about why you want corporate work. If both, talk about how their summer program would let you experience diverse practice areas and blah blah. If they are in a secondary market, talk about your ties to the secondary market. Basically, write a bunch of stock cover letters for each "type" of firm and use those.

And 3-1-3.2 is not the mark of death. It is not a lock like it was 4 years ago, but it is certainly not the mark of death.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:09 pm

timbs4339 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:Don't mail immediately, you don't even have your interview schedule yet. Mail towards the end of July/beginning of August.


Hopefully you will/have picked up something during 3L...this is exactly what I'm trying to avoid, and am soliciting advice from wherever I can find it. So thanks, and best of luck, I hope you land something solid. Meanwhile I'm hoping the 3.1-3.2 gpa range isn't the mark of death come August.

As to mailing, I was going to wait on those firms that are actually coming to EIP, but mail those that aren't in July. After EIP I would then email anyone I did not bid on or land an impromptu/open interview with, as well as those firms I didn't land a bid interview with (though this latter group may simply be passing twice at that point.)

I don't know if you have since mass-mailed, but if so (or if you've gleaned advice elsewhere since), do you suggest targeted letters or mail-merge or some combination in between?


That sounds like a good plan. If you can get some interviews lined up or even an offer, it can really boost your confidence going into EIP.

I would write "semi-targeted" letters. If a firm is mostly litigation, you want to talk about litigation, if they are mostly coporate, talk about why you want corporate work. If both, talk about how their summer program would let you experience diverse practice areas and blah blah. If they are in a secondary market, talk about your ties to the secondary market. Basically, write a bunch of stock cover letters for each "type" of firm and use those.

And 3-1-3.2 is not the mark of death. It is not a lock like it was 4 years ago, but it is certainly not the mark of death.


timbs: first, thank you so much for your amazing advice. i'm glad that there are people like you at columbia that are so willing to watch out for others.

i have two questions that have sort of popped up in reading your last few posts-

1. what should we do concerning the firms that we bid for but do not received a screening interview? should we immediately mail their recruiters (upon finding out our bidlist) and explain that we are interested in meeting them at eip?

2. do the firms that we don't bid for at eip *know* that we didn't bid for them? or do they only see the list of applicants who bid and were matched with them? i guess im having trouble seeing how we could go about explaining that we want an interview but weren't willing to rank them in our top 30...

thanks in advance!

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby timbs4339 » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:33 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:Don't mail immediately, you don't even have your interview schedule yet. Mail towards the end of July/beginning of August.


Hopefully you will/have picked up something during 3L...this is exactly what I'm trying to avoid, and am soliciting advice from wherever I can find it. So thanks, and best of luck, I hope you land something solid. Meanwhile I'm hoping the 3.1-3.2 gpa range isn't the mark of death come August.

As to mailing, I was going to wait on those firms that are actually coming to EIP, but mail those that aren't in July. After EIP I would then email anyone I did not bid on or land an impromptu/open interview with, as well as those firms I didn't land a bid interview with (though this latter group may simply be passing twice at that point.)

I don't know if you have since mass-mailed, but if so (or if you've gleaned advice elsewhere since), do you suggest targeted letters or mail-merge or some combination in between?


That sounds like a good plan. If you can get some interviews lined up or even an offer, it can really boost your confidence going into EIP.

I would write "semi-targeted" letters. If a firm is mostly litigation, you want to talk about litigation, if they are mostly coporate, talk about why you want corporate work. If both, talk about how their summer program would let you experience diverse practice areas and blah blah. If they are in a secondary market, talk about your ties to the secondary market. Basically, write a bunch of stock cover letters for each "type" of firm and use those.

And 3-1-3.2 is not the mark of death. It is not a lock like it was 4 years ago, but it is certainly not the mark of death.


timbs: first, thank you so much for your amazing advice. i'm glad that there are people like you at columbia that are so willing to watch out for others.

i have two questions that have sort of popped up in reading your last few posts-

1. what should we do concerning the firms that we bid for but do not received a screening interview? should we immediately mail their recruiters (upon finding out our bidlist) and explain that we are interested in meeting them at eip?

2. do the firms that we don't bid for at eip *know* that we didn't bid for them? or do they only see the list of applicants who bid and were matched with them? i guess im having trouble seeing how we could go about explaining that we want an interview but weren't willing to rank them in our top 30...

thanks in advance!


1) I would email the recruiter with your resume attached and ask for an interview. If they don't get back to you after a few days you can call and they may try to slide you in. Or you can go to the hospitality suite in the morning of EIP and asked.

2) I'm not quite sure if they know or not. I would assume not. But the point of the mass mailing isn't necessarily to line up more interviews. The point is to get your resume to their attention so if they do not hit their hiring targets at OCI, your name will be in the pile. I know a few firms went back to OCS last year and asked to see more resumes. These firms may have overestimated their relative position given the bloodbath that was OCI 2009.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:05 pm

timbs4339 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
timbs4339 wrote: Firms like Akin, Dewey, Fried Frank, Ropes, Paul Hastings, White and Case, Shearman, all hire down to median or below and have bigger summer classes than V75s. Mass mail, definitely.


OP here. Regarding Akin, I didn't include them because i noticed that they gave out 19 offers last year but only one person accepted, which made me think that they only gave offers to people with really high GPAs who then turned them down for better firms. Do you think it's still worth including them?



Yes, those are the firms you should be on the lookout not to include or to bid low. But don't feel trapped by the Vault rankings, I know firms as high as V20-V10 gave callbacks and offers to non-Stone scholars.


Curious about this too. Like Akin, there is a number of firms that accepted a good/decent number of students w/ barely any, maybe no, takers, and low % of Honors (i.e. Kaye Scholer, Hughes NY, Shearman, Clifford, Baker, Pillsbury). Were they overreacting to a perceive upturn in the economy or thought that they could be more selective in the current market, and how do you think they will react at this year's EIP.

Somewhat side question, I am interested in Haynes and Boone, but the numbers provided are not specific for which office accepted students. Any info would be helpful, even though prolly won't bid them.

cls2013cls
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:03 am

Re: CLS 3.2-3.3 Potential Bid List

Postby cls2013cls » Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:14 am

Would anyone be able to PM me the honors offer list (doesn't have to be exact percentages, just for example, firms that give offers to >80% to stone, >50% stone, etc). I need to avoid these firms due to my GPA. There's no way to go to the office for those of us working outside of the city and Career Services won't post it or even hand us hardcopies, which is ridiculous. It's really hard to tell the selectivity of the firms past V10-V15.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.