3.9 MVP - Help with Bids Forum

[Anonymous User]

3.9 from MVP. Originally planned on focusing entirely on one market (Chicago) to maximize chances of getting an offer. Did much better 1L year than I expected, and now am rethinking my OCI plans. I have approx. 8 Chicago firms I really like and don't plan to bid beyond those in Chicago. Trying to determine what and how many other markets to look at and how to use the rest of my bids. My interests:

*QOL and COL are big concerns.
*Not interested in NY (see above).
*Not completely sure if I want to do litigation or transactional, but leaning towards transactional.

Any advice on markets/firms to look at? Kind of also looking at LA at the moment and deciding whether I want to bid on more than two markets.

[GeePee]

You're in great position. If you're interested in high profile transactional work, I don't think there's much harm in blanketing the V10 in NY -- however, you said you don't really want NY. Unfortunately that's not particularly compatible with your preference for corporate; the best transactional work is going to be in NY.

[yngblkgifted]

Really have no advice as I am a 0l, but I'd like to say congratulations on a great year!

[XxSpyKEx]

Almost exclusively bid on the most selective and top firms. Those firms care about grades a lot more than less prestigious firms. With a 3.9 at MVP, it makes little sense to bid conservatively, regardless of what career services will tell you.

[rayiner]

Unless you're and aspie douche you can bid aggressively. If you are it's not your bidding that will kill you.

If you want to do transactional in Chicago just bid Kirkland. Then send your resume to Wachtell for the lulz.

[Anonymous User]

I was in this position. My big piece of advice would be not to overdo it. You'll get a callback offer and an SA offer from almost everywhere you interview so long as you can make a good case for why you want to live in that city and work for that firm. So, unless as someone above noted you are an "aspie douche," don't overkill the callbacks. Figure out what you want and go for it. Keep the fallback interviews down to two for each market.

OCI advice doesn't apply to you--you'll get what you want--the important thing is figuring out what you want, then asking for it. Yes, you can use callbacks to get a feel for a city you're interested in living in (here, LA vs Chicago) but no need to blitz the whole market or do resume bombs, etc.

[Anonymous User]

I was in this position. My big piece of advice would be not to overdo it. You'll get a callback offer and an SA offer from almost everywhere you interview so long as you can make a good case for why you want to live in that city and work for that firm. So, unless as someone above noted you are an "aspie douche," don't overkill the callbacks. Figure out what you want and go for it. Keep the fallback interviews down to two for each market.

OCI advice doesn't apply to you--you'll get what you want--the important thing is figuring out what you want, then asking for it. Yes, you can use callbacks to get a feel for a city you're interested in living in (here, LA vs Chicago) but no need to blitz the whole market or do resume bombs, etc.

OP Here. Thanks for the advice. Very helpful.

In terms of overdoing it, do you think 3 markets is manageable? For example, could I focus on ~5 Chicago firms, ~5 N.Y. firms, and ~5 L.A. firms? I really am interested more in getting a feel for different firms in different markets and am not set on one market in particular.

[MC Southstar]

According to my data, you da man now dawg.

[Anonymous User]

I was in this position. My big piece of advice would be not to overdo it. You'll get a callback offer and an SA offer from almost everywhere you interview so long as you can make a good case for why you want to live in that city and work for that firm. So, unless as someone above noted you are an "aspie douche," don't overkill the callbacks. Figure out what you want and go for it. Keep the fallback interviews down to two for each market.

OCI advice doesn't apply to you--you'll get what you want--the important thing is figuring out what you want, then asking for it. Yes, you can use callbacks to get a feel for a city you're interested in living in (here, LA vs Chicago) but no need to blitz the whole market or do resume bombs, etc.

This isn't true. There's absolutely no reason to limit yourself artificially to two callbacks per market. Plenty of people struggled with those credentials last year.

3.9 at MVP is in a good position, there's no doubt about it. But if you aren't supplanting that with at least passable: work experience, collegiate experiences, personality, maturity, and regional ties then you could still have trouble. That's different from saying you have to be an "aspie douche" to have trouble, but it's a mistake to tell somebody 3.9 will equate to "callback and offer from almost everywhere you interview." I know of a a dozen or so people who had credentials like this, including myself. SOME people with those credentials had nearly 100% conversion rates from interview to callback to offer, but it was absolutely not universal, and some people struggled.

I know more than one person with credentials like this who finished OCI with only 1 or 2 offers. Most people did much 'better' and nobody I know in that range struck out - but don't give unrealistic expectations, especially when a major differentiating factor will likely be enthusiasm and research.

A sense of entitlement or a lazy attitude towards the interview season can undo everything your efforts + intelligence did for your 1L transcript.

In terms of overdoing it, do you think 3 markets is manageable? For example, could I focus on ~5 Chicago firms, ~5 N.Y. firms, and ~5 L.A. firms? I really am interested more in getting a feel for different firms in different markets and am not set on one market in particular.

3 markets is bordering on overdoing it, especially with only 5 interviews per market. There's a lot of randomness to deal with, and you should know that many people felt (who knows if it's true) that they had to fight against a "yield protect" mentality when interviewing with high credentials like this. Since you're probably not from Chicago and LA and NYC, at least one of those markets is going to be suspicious. You'll get asked where you're interviewing, and you might survive that question at the interview phase, but it could blow up in your face come callback time. If you're on your first callback to Chicago, and a friendly associate asks you where else you're doing callbacks, and you only have NYC ones at that point (NB: markets often move with different haste in providing callbacks) then you wind up in the enviable position of lying to the firm or outing your indecisive job search.

[Anonymous User]

Honestly, I would use your safety bids on NY. You're extremely likely to land at one of those eight firms, but OCI can be unpredictable. If you strike out at all of those firms, you're probably doing something wrong such that you can't expect to do much better in similarly competitive markets. Even if you have to spend a summer in NY, you can just clerk and then go to Chicago.

[Anonymous User]

This isn't true. There's absolutely no reason to limit yourself artificially to two callbacks per market. Plenty of people struggled with those credentials last year.

This is the "similar situation" person you replied to. I ended up doing ~15 callbacks, and that's after I cut it short by cancelling some. Almost every request I made for a callback was given, and almost every callback I did turned into an offer. And you know what? It sucked. It was totally unnecessary. You don't really gain anything by doing your third day of back-to-back double callbacks or returning to the same city to stay in a disgustingly nice hotel, burning your class schedule, for a second time. Thus, my advice.

I know of a a dozen or so people who had credentials like this, including myself. SOME people with those credentials had nearly 100% conversion rates from interview to callback to offer, but it was absolutely not universal, and some people struggled. ... don't give unrealistic expectations ...

This is where it's hard to differentiate between "aspie douche" and otherwise. Some background: I have an MA or MS; 3-5 years work experience showing an ability to write; and can fake confidence and maturity for the span of a screening interview, callback, or summer associate program. But I don't know how far ahead of the "average 3.9 at MVP" that puts me. I think 90% of people going to law school are fucking idiots who shouldn't go, but this is a guy with a 3.9 at MVP, so I thought I'd try to give him some directed advice giving him all the benefits of the doubt. In my experience, most OCI advice and common wisdom was directed at <3.9 mouthbreathers and aspie douches. If TLS can't at least come through for truly top students at truly top schools, what good is it?

A sense of entitlement or a lazy attitude towards the interview season can undo everything your efforts + intelligence did for your 1L transcript.

Yeah, true enough. Guess I was giving him the benefit of the doubt. Hey, OP: don't be a fucking asshole.

you should know that many people felt (who knows if it's true) that they had to fight against a "yield protect" mentality when interviewing with high credentials like this

THERE IS NO YIELD PROTECT AT THE CAREER LEVEL. Law firms aren't schools. If you can make a case for that firm and that city, they think they're plenty special enough for you. I gathered several offers from shitty firms in secondary markets.

Since you're probably not from Chicago and LA and NYC, at least one of those markets is going to be suspicious. You'll get asked where you're interviewing, and you might survive that question at the interview phase, but it could blow up in your face come callback time.

Or you could not be a retard and not turn your interview into a fucking confessional. Here's the credited response: "Well, I'm also looking at market X, but that's as a fallback. I really want your market because [reason]. I really want your firm because [reason]." The fact that you're also looking at markets X, Y, Z, etc. doesn't matter and doesn't need to come up. I targeted 4 markets and had callback offers in 3 of them. I was an idiot and didn't come up with a good reason why I wanted to be in DC, so I struck out there.

Someone with a 3.9 at MVP can do as many markets as they want. The question is, why the fuck are they targeting so many markets? The answer is, it's because (1) they haven't thought enough about where they want to end up or (2) people keep playing scare tactics and convince even 3.9 MVP people to overkill. The path ahead is for OP to narrow down what he wants and remember that most firms really, truly only do care about your grades--the rest is just an aspie douche + interest test.

[Anonymous User]

The credited place to do corporate in Chicago is K&E. Otherwise, corporate is dead in that market. At that point, I'd rather just bite the bullet and work at prestigious NYC firm, which you'll surely get with those grades. Don't get me wrong; Skadden and Sidley are great firms, but from what I know their corporate groups aren't exactly booming in Chicago.

[Anonymous User]

I know more than one person with credentials like this who finished OCI with only 1 or 2 offers.

People with a 3.9 at MVP who ended up with only 1 or 2 offers? Why do you think this happened to them? Was it personal to them? It seems there might be something to learn here, if you could share more details.

[XxSpyKEx]

I know more than one person with credentials like this who finished OCI with only 1 or 2 offers.

People with a 3.9 at MVP who ended up with only 1 or 2 offers? Why do you think this happened to them? Was it personal to them? It seems there might be something to learn here, if you could share more details.

Eh, there were people in my class with 3.8x GPAs that completely struck out (class of 2011 - although we did have it the worst). Wasn't a common occurrence, but grades don't necessarily correlate with a job offer. As law students, we liked to think that great grades guarantees great offers, but law firms look at more than just grades. Pretty much firms want a certain GPA or higher, after you make that cut-off (although, I don't think it's a hard cut-off for many firms), it's pretty much all about interviewing, "fit," etc. Having a high GPA increases your chances of getting an offer because you will meet the minimum GPA threshold for a lot more firms, but it definetely doesn't mean you're going to get an offer soley based on grades (e.g. all the firms you interview with might not see you as a "fit" for their firm, which doesn't mean you are awkward, a bad interviewer, or anything like that, but merely that your personality isn't quite what they are looking for). Although it does seem like the tipity top firms (e.g. v10) really care about grades more than anything else, so with a 3.9, it makes sense to bid on those to maximize your chances of getting an offer.