Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

(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: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:44 am

Helmholtz wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:T2 ---> T10 transfer. Absolutely no idea what I am doing. Pure lottery system. Top 10 choices have smaller SA classes and are strong in my desired practice area, after that its kind of hodgepodge guesswork at best. ANY advice is very appreciated.

Drinker Biddle DC
King and Spalding DC
Duane Morris Philly
Reed Smith Philly
Pepper Hamilton Philly
Patton Boggs DC
Crowell DC
DLA Piper NY
Arnold & Porter DC
Cadwalader NY
Sidley Austin NY
Ropes DC
Davis Polk NY
Debevois NY
Paul Weiss NY
Cleary NY
Milbank NY
Latham NY
Skadden NY
Simpson Thatcher NY
Cravath NY
Sull/Crom NY
Gibson NY
Fried NY
Wilmerhale DC

-->assuming this order isnt terrible, what do I do with the rest of the list? targets? safeties?


Generally speaking, I would be scared to death to try to split three different markets, especially if one of them is DC. It also seems like your choice of NYC firms is kind of weird.



Yeah, like I said. I have no idea what I am doing. Perhaps I should get rid of DC altogether and focus on the Philly/NYC. As for the NY firms, can you give some advice as to how I should be ordering my list? More interested in transactional work than lit, terrified of striking out. Hard to predict due to transfer status. Thanks in advance.


Yeah, I would drop DC, especially if you want transactional instead of lit.

I would either not bother with DLA Piper or put them really low. Some firms you should probably think about bidding on: Weil, Shearman, Kirkland, White & Case, Dewey, Jones Day, Dechert, Proskauer, Willkie Farr, Kramer Levin, Paul Hastings, Ropes NY. Fried Frank, Simpson Thacher, and Latham should be higher -- large summer classes, good corporate departments, and not nearly as grade selective as the SullCroms or Cravaths.



Thank you very much. Will revamp and post again. P.S. I have ties to the west coast and wouldnt mind being there, but I am not IP and I am a transfer, seems like a waste applying to SF. Correct?

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Helmholtz » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:47 am

Anonymous User wrote:Top 33% at GULC. I have family in Chicago and Seattle but beyond that I don't care much where I end up. Interested in litigation. I've included the ratio of interviews to bids from last year. Basically every firm gets overbid. I'm tempted to just punt on the really low ratio firms and stack the better ratios up top. Would that make sense? I have no idea what I'm doing.

[list=]
[*]Mayer Brown - Chicago - 0.13
[*]Sidley - Chicago - 0.51
[*]Skadden - Chicago
[*]Baker & McKenzie - Chicago
[*]Perkins Coie - Seattle - 0.28
[*]K&L Gates - Seattle - 0.12
[*]Davis Wright Tremaine - Seattle - 0.51
[*]Gibson Dunn - LA - 0.44
[*]Gibson Dunn - NY - 0.44
[*]Skadden - NY - 0.47
[*]Paul Weiss - NY - 0.45
[*]Weil - NY - 0.42
[*]Jones Day - DC - 0.21
[*]Skadden - DC - 0.29
[*]Morrison & Foerster - SF - 0.51
[*]Latham - NY - 0.22
[*]O'Melveny - LA - 0.65
[*]Akin Gump - DC - 0.19
[*]Jones Day - LA - 0.43
[*]Patton Boggs - DC - 0.09
[*]Ropes & Gray - DC - 0.12
[*]Dewey & LeBoeuf - NY - 0.23
[*]Kirkland & Ellis - DC - 0.31
[*]Wiley Rein - DC - 0.26
[*]Milbank Tweed - NY - 0.32
[*]Latham - DC - 0.52
[*]White & Case - NY - 0.46
[*]Kirkland & Ellis - NY - 0.17
[*]Fried Frank - NY - 0.43
[*]Latham - SF - 0.63
[*]Proskauer - NY - 0.31
[*]Wilson Sonsini - Palo Alto - 0.30
[*]Cahill - NY - 0.34
[*]Shearman - NY - 0.54
[*]Cooley - Palo Alto - 0.17
[*]White & Case - DC - 0.12
[*]Sidley - DC - 0.14
[*]Sidley - NY - 0.17
[*]Wilkie - NY - 0.46
[*]Kirkland & Ellis - LA - 1.43
[*]Paul Hastings - LA - 0.26
[*]Steptoe - DC - 0.30
[*]Winston & Strawn - DC - 0.12
[*]Pillsbury - SF - 0.21
[*]Clifford Chance - NY - 0.26
[*]Crowell & Moring - DC - 0.29
[*]McDermott - DC - 0.16
[/list]


Splitting between DC, NY, Seattle, Chicago, and three different California cities does not seem like a good idea.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Helmholtz » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:49 am

Anonymous User wrote:Thank you very much. Will revamp and post again. P.S. I have ties to the west coast and wouldnt mind being there, but I am not IP and I am a transfer, seems like a waste applying to SF. Correct?


If you have the ties, and want to be in California, it probably wouldn't hurt to dump your Philly firms and replace them with SF firms. It's a tough market but there is a chance you'll get something out of it, but I wouldn't split SF/Philly/NYC.

User avatar
ndirish2010
Posts: 2951
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:41 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby ndirish2010 » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:51 am

What's really the problem with splitting markets? If you have ties to all of them, why not?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:54 am

Helmholtz wrote:Splitting between DC, NY, Seattle, Chicago, and three different California cities does not seem like a good idea.

How so?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:54 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hey gang, top 3% at Georgetown. Need to get this mother done soon. Here's what I've got so far, of fifty. If no city mentioned, it's NY. I'm interested in SF, DC, NY litigation. I think I should add some safeties - ideas? I really want to at least interview at W&C and Cravath, so I have them up top. Boies might be too high - I couldn't tell how heavily they are bid, as it was aggregate for whole firm, which is quite heavily-bid:


1. W&C DC
2. Cravath NY
3. MoFo SF
4. Boies - Oakland
5. Cleary - NY
6. SulCrom NY
7. Cov&B DC
8. Quinn - SF
9. Gibson - SF
10. Paul Weiss NY
11. DPW NY
12. Skadden - NY
13. Latham - SF
14. Morgan Lewis SF
15. SimpThatch NY
16. Kirkland SF. NY
17. OMM - SF
18. paul hastings
19. irell & Manella (low)
20. Boies - NY
21. Debevoise -NY
22. Weil - NY
23. Jones Day - NY
24. Latham - NY
25. Baker Botts - DC
26. Arnold and Porter - DC
27. K & L Gates
28. Sidley Austin
29. Quinn - NY


Thanks for comments!


Congrats on doing so well. This is just a thought from someone who didn't do quite as well, but who has been talking to a lot of people about cali biglaw ... SF is pretty insular, and will want you to have some strong ties or good reason to work there, besides the fact that you like the city.

If you don't have ties, then your top bids basically consist of incredibly risky firms like cravath and Wachtell and a market (SF) which you may be at a disadvantage for.

Just a thought. It might be that your grades are so high that no one really cares... so there's that too. Does anyone else with more experience have an opinion?


Thanks for your comments.

I think you're right that SF is pretty tough without ties, but fortunately I have very strong ties there. Born, raised, undergrad, prestigious law firm work, summer work. I realize it's still pretty risky to have just these firms. I added Kramer and 2-3 other firms I have a great chance at to the top twenty so even if I don't get an interview, they'll have my resume and I can (hopefully) pester an interview out of them.

Anyone have any other suggestions? I'll comment on a couple fellow GULCers to PIF now.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Helmholtz » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:57 am

ndirish2010 wrote:What's really the problem with splitting markets? If you have ties to all of them, why not?


I'm fairly certain that "What other market(s) are you bidding on?" is a legitimate interview question. Would you want to be the guy whose answer to that is, "Well, let me think. San Francisco, New York, Washington D.C., Los Angeles, Chicago, Palo Alto, and Seattle.....but I have ties to all of them!"

Also it starts to make a lot more sense when you're actually putting a bidlist together and realize how many firms you'll be missing out on when splitting. Typically, you miss out on less-selective firms that you would otherwise bid on (and be happy to work for it's that's all that's available to you) and you miss out on "dream firms" that you would otherwise bid on. I don't think splitting two markets is a bad idea (indeed I know many people who had a lot of success with this), and it could end up being better than bidding on one market that isn't doing so hot right now. But once you start hitting up three or more markets? ehhhhhhhh

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:58 am

Around top 40% at DCNG. Would like to be in NY, sorta have no idea what I'm doing with this. Tried to balance large class sizes with firms that take lower GPAs. Would appreciate any advice people have.

Allen & Overy NY
Bryan Cave NY
Cadwalder
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle, LLP (New York, NY)
Davis Polk
Dewey & LeBoeuf, LLP (New York, NY)
Jones Day
Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP (New York, NY)
McDermott Will & Emery (New York)
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP (New York, NY);
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP (New York, NY)
Proskauer Rose LLP:
Seward & Kissel LLP:
Shearman & Sterling LLP:
Simpson Thatcher:
White & Case LLP:
Drinker Biddle & Reath, LLP (Philadelphia)
Fried Frank
Proskauer Rose LLP
Perkins Coie
Linklaters
Cahill NY
K&L Gates NY
K&E NY
Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Thanks!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:04 am

Anonymous User wrote:Top 33% at GULC. I have family in Chicago and Seattle but beyond that I don't care much where I end up. Interested in litigation. I've included the ratio of interviews to bids from last year. Basically every firm gets overbid. I'm tempted to just punt on the really low ratio firms and stack the better ratios up top. Would that make sense? I have no idea what I'm doing.

[list=]
[*]Mayer Brown - Chicago - 0.13
[*]Sidley - Chicago - 0.51
[*]Skadden - Chicago
[*]Baker & McKenzie - Chicago
[*]Perkins Coie - Seattle - 0.28
[*]K&L Gates - Seattle - 0.12
[*]Davis Wright Tremaine - Seattle - 0.51
[*]Gibson Dunn - LA - 0.44
[*]Gibson Dunn - NY - 0.44
[*]Skadden - NY - 0.47
[*]Paul Weiss - NY - 0.45
[*]Weil - NY - 0.42
[*]Jones Day - DC - 0.21
[*]Skadden - DC - 0.29
[*]Morrison & Foerster - SF - 0.51
[*]Latham - NY - 0.22
[*]O'Melveny - LA - 0.65
[*]Akin Gump - DC - 0.19
[*]Jones Day - LA - 0.43
[*]Patton Boggs - DC - 0.09
[*]Ropes & Gray - DC - 0.12
[*]Dewey & LeBoeuf - NY - 0.23
[*]Kirkland & Ellis - DC - 0.31
[*]Wiley Rein - DC - 0.26
[*]Milbank Tweed - NY - 0.32
[*]Latham - DC - 0.52
[*]White & Case - NY - 0.46
[*]Kirkland & Ellis - NY - 0.17
[*]Fried Frank - NY - 0.43
[*]Latham - SF - 0.63
[*]Proskauer - NY - 0.31
[*]Wilson Sonsini - Palo Alto - 0.30
[*]Cahill - NY - 0.34
[*]Shearman - NY - 0.54
[*]Cooley - Palo Alto - 0.17
[*]White & Case - DC - 0.12
[*]Sidley - DC - 0.14
[*]Sidley - NY - 0.17
[*]Wilkie - NY - 0.46
[*]Kirkland & Ellis - LA - 1.43
[*]Paul Hastings - LA - 0.26
[*]Steptoe - DC - 0.30
[*]Winston & Strawn - DC - 0.12
[*]Pillsbury - SF - 0.21
[*]Clifford Chance - NY - 0.26
[*]Crowell & Moring - DC - 0.29
[*]McDermott - DC - 0.16
[/list]


Hi fellow GULC student,

It sucks the Seattle firms have such poor ratios - I think it's because most firms with Seattle offices are interviewing for multiple cities. Anyways, I think it would be in your interest to put at least 2 conservative-chances NYC firms in your top 10. Remember NYC is the biggest market and most likely to give you a job; it would be nice to have the relative safety of those firms to fall back on in the case you get shafted in Chicago and Seattle. Shearman might be a good one on the reachie range, and Proskauer on the conservativer range. Finally, having done a lot of SF research, toss replace Pillsbury with another SF firm of similar standing; I've heard things aren't incense & peppermints over there.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:06 am

Helmholtz wrote:
ndirish2010 wrote:What's really the problem with splitting markets? If you have ties to all of them, why not?


I'm fairly certain that "What other market(s) are you bidding on?" is a legitimate interview question. Would you want to be the guy whose answer to that is, "Well, let me think. San Francisco, New York, Washington D.C., Los Angeles, Chicago, Palo Alto, and Seattle.....but I have ties to all of them!"

Also it starts to make a lot more sense when you're actually putting a bidlist together and realize how many firms you'll be missing out on when splitting. Typically, you miss out on less-selective firms that you would otherwise bid on (and be happy to work for it's that's all that's available to you) and you miss out on "dream firms" that you would otherwise bid on. I don't think splitting two markets is a bad idea (indeed I know many people who had a lot of success with this), and it could end up being better than bidding on one market that isn't doing so hot right now. But once you start hitting up three or more markets? ehhhhhhhh

I get what you're saying but it's not like anyone cares if you have ties to DC or NY. As for the California firms, I was hoping I could extend my Seattle ties into "West Coast" ties, since the Seattle market's not that big. But I take your point that it's probably worth digging deeper into Seattle.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:06 am

Helmholtz wrote:
ndirish2010 wrote:What's really the problem with splitting markets? If you have ties to all of them, why not?


I'm fairly certain that "What other market are you bidding on?" is a legitimate interview question. Would you want to be the guy whose answer to that is, "Well, let me think. San Francisco, New York, Washington D.C., Los Angeles, Chicago, Palo Alto, and Seattle.....but I have ties to all of them!"

Also it starts to make a lot more sense when you're actually putting a bidlist together and realize how many firms you'll be missing out on when splitting. Typically, you miss out on less-selective firms that you would otherwise bid on (and be happy to work for it's that's all that's available to you) and you miss out on "dream firms" that you would otherwise bid on. I don't think splitting two markets is disastrous, and it could end up being better than bidding on one market that isn't doing so hot right now. But once you start hitting up three or more markets? ehhhhhhhh


Just anecdotally, at a T10 east coast school most of my friends who didn't split or focused primarily on NYC with maybe a few bids to their home markets averaged 25 screening interviews. I did LA and NYC, got 18. Like Helmholtz said, the real issue in terms of bidding is that LA firms had maybe 12-20 spots at my OCI, so I had to put them at the top of my list to get any shot at them (and didn't even get my #6 LA firm..) then you have ranked lower all the NYC firms that everyone is already bidding, so you have less of a shot at them (didn't get my #10/14/18). Since establishing ties is vital in secondary markets, it can be a little risky not to have as many fallback options in NYC. You can always add yourself to waitlists and email firms directly, but having 25 screening interviews off the bat would have made me feel a little more comfortable.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:09 am

Anonymous User wrote:Hi fellow GULC student,

It sucks the Seattle firms have such poor ratios - I think it's because most firms with Seattle offices are interviewing for multiple cities. Anyways, I think it would be in your interest to put at least 2 conservative-chances NYC firms in your top 10. Remember NYC is the biggest market and most likely to give you a job; it would be nice to have the relative safety of those firms to fall back on in the case you get shafted in Chicago and Seattle. Shearman might be a good one on the reachie range, and Proskauer on the conservativer range. Finally, having done a lot of SF research, toss replace Pillsbury with another SF firm of similar standing; I've heard things aren't incense & peppermints over there.

Thanks for the reply, very helpful.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Helmholtz » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:15 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
ndirish2010 wrote:What's really the problem with splitting markets? If you have ties to all of them, why not?


I'm fairly certain that "What other market are you bidding on?" is a legitimate interview question. Would you want to be the guy whose answer to that is, "Well, let me think. San Francisco, New York, Washington D.C., Los Angeles, Chicago, Palo Alto, and Seattle.....but I have ties to all of them!"

Also it starts to make a lot more sense when you're actually putting a bidlist together and realize how many firms you'll be missing out on when splitting. Typically, you miss out on less-selective firms that you would otherwise bid on (and be happy to work for it's that's all that's available to you) and you miss out on "dream firms" that you would otherwise bid on. I don't think splitting two markets is disastrous, and it could end up being better than bidding on one market that isn't doing so hot right now. But once you start hitting up three or more markets? ehhhhhhhh


Just anectodally, at a T10 east coast school most of my friends who didn't split or focused primarily on NYC with maybe a few bids to their home markets averaged 25 screening interviews. I did LA and NYC, got 18. Like Helmholtz said, the real issue in terms of bidding is that LA firms had maybe 12-20 spots at my OCI, so I had to put them at the top of my list to get any shot at them (and didn't even get my #6 LA firm..) then you have ranked lower all the NYC firms that everyone is already bidding, so you have less of a shot at them (didn't get my #10/14/18). Since establishing ties is vital in secondary markets, it can be a little risky not to have as many fallback options in NYC. You can always add yourself to waitlists and email firms directly, but having 25 screening interviews off the bat would have made me feel a little more comfortable.


Yeah, this backs up everything that I've heard. It makes sense if you think about it. If you're bidding one market, the top five firms that hit the summer-class-size + grade-selectivity sweet spot can go in your top five spots. Chances are, those firms are also going to be in a number of other people's top five spots, but you have a good shot -- they are in your top five after all.

Now think about bidding on two markets and you have five firms from each market that hits the sweet spot and they can go in your top ten. But some of those same firms that I mentioned would be in a lot of other people's top five spots? Yeah, now some of those are going to be down at 8 or 9 or 10 for you. Not disastrous -- you might still get them.

Now think about bidding on three different markets. You have five firms from each market that hits the sweet spot, and they can make out your top fifteen. But this could mean that firms that traditionally are included in the top five for people bidding only one market are now at #14 or #15 on yours! Not a good spot to be in.

I realize this is an over-simplistic example, but hopefully the moral of the story stays intact.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:19 am

To recap. T2-->T10 transfer. No real ties anywhere, not interested in litigation. Top 5 are strong in my particular area of interest. Ranked by SA size. I dont know where to find GPA selectivity info....help? Also, whats the strategy after my top 20-25 picks?

Duane Morris Philly
Reed Smith Philly
Pepper Hamilton Philly
Cadwalader NY
Wilkie Farr NY
Kramer Levin NY
Dechert NY
Proskauer NY
Dewey NY
Jones Day NY
Paul Hastings NY
Ropes NY
Fried Frank NY
Weil NY
Shearman NY
Kirkland NY
White & Case NY
Latham NY
Simpson Thatcher NY
Davis Polk NY
Debevois NY
Paul Weiss NY

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 am

Helmholtz wrote:Yeah, this backs up everything that I've heard. It makes sense if you think about it. If you're bidding one market, the top five firms that hit the summer-class-size + grade-selectivity sweet spot can go in your top five spots. Chances are, those firms are also going to be in a number of other people's top five spots, but you have a good shot -- they are in your top five after all.

Now think about bidding on two markets and you have five firms from each market that hits the sweet spot and they can go in your top ten. But some of those same firms that I mentioned would be in a lot of other people's top five spots? Yeah, now some of those are going to be down at 8 or 9 or 10 for you. Not disastrous -- you might still get them.

Now think about bidding on three different markets. You have five firms from each market that hits the sweet spot, and they can make out your top fifteen. But this could mean that firms that traditionally are included in the top five for people bidding only one market are now at #14 or #15 on yours! Not a good spot to be in.

I realize this is an over-simplistic example, but hopefully the moral of the story stays intact.

Hmm, that makes sense. Not sure how to resolve the top of my list then. Maybe stagger it, alternating Seattle and Chicago? As for the rest of the list, maybe I should punt DC to shift other markets up, the bid ratios for DC seem to be really low.

stormy
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 12:06 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby stormy » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:30 am

bidlist for top 25% at lower tier 1? any firms on the east coast I have a shot at (NY,DC,Philly,Boston)?

User avatar
ndirish2010
Posts: 2951
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:41 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby ndirish2010 » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:38 am

stormy wrote:bidlist for top 25% at lower tier 1? any firms on the east coast I have a shot at (NY,DC,Philly,Boston)?


Should be preselect right? Just bid everywhere you meet the grade requirements.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8448
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby thesealocust » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:49 am

If you bid on more than 2 markets and have strong stats, may God have mercy on your soul as you flail around desperately trying to schedule callbacks. You have no idea how cramped the schedule can be and how much it matters to get to a firm early in ITS process of reviewing candidates.

If you're seriously bidding on 5+ going into OCI you're just dumb. It's indefensible and will hurt you in the job hunt.

One or two firms in a weird market is different, maybe you have a compelling reason and can jetison the cb if it interferes with your main hunt. But if you're seriously spreading yourself between multiple markets you're misunderstanding the mechanics of the process. In the ideal world, or if applying by mail, it could be great. With NALP's 28 day rule and crowded calendars at firms and airports, it's suicide.

stormy
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 12:06 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby stormy » Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:04 pm

ndirish2010 wrote:
stormy wrote:bidlist for top 25% at lower tier 1? any firms on the east coast I have a shot at (NY,DC,Philly,Boston)?


Should be preselect right? Just bid everywhere you meet the grade requirements.


there's like nobody coming to oci--it's all going to be unsolicited resumes. where should i start applying?

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Helmholtz » Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:33 pm

Not to be annoying, but it's Simpson Thacher, not Thatcher.

Marley
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:41 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Marley » Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:40 pm

Helmholtz wrote:Not to be annoying, but it's Simpson Thacher, not Thatcher.


If we are doing that, then it's DebevoisE, not Debevois (few posts up). Someone else had Kramer Leven, instead of Levin. Misspelled firm names really bother me; not sure why.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Helmholtz » Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:46 pm

Marley wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:Not to be annoying, but it's Simpson Thacher, not Thatcher.


If we are doing that, then it's DebevoisE, not Debevois (few posts up). Someone else had Kramer Leven, instead of Levin. Misspelled firm names really bother me; not sure why.


If it's annoying to you, think of the people who work at STB and get things from students wanting to interview with Simpson Thatcher.

Marley
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 10:41 am

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Marley » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:29 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
Marley wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:Not to be annoying, but it's Simpson Thacher, not Thatcher.


If we are doing that, then it's DebevoisE, not Debevois (few posts up). Someone else had Kramer Leven, instead of Levin. Misspelled firm names really bother me; not sure why.


If it's annoying to you, think of the people who work at STB and get things from students wanting to interview with Simpson Thatcher.


I will totally be that person who tosses it aside. Minor typos are forgiveable, but actually spelling the firm wrong? Screams "I don't give a shit."

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Grizz » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:34 pm

I'm gonna spell names wrong around here in an attempt to sabotage the competition.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Post Your Bidlists Here for Critique, Consolation & Caveats

Postby Grizz » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:35 pm

Anyone received a CB from Sqadden via mass mail?




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.