(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.
-
kaiser
- Posts: 3018
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 11:34 pm
Post
by kaiser » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:38 pm
TaipeiMort wrote:ConfidenceMan2 wrote:TaipeiMort wrote:Problem is that unlike HYSCC, which looks good at Biglaw as well as in academia, PI, Big GOV, Small Gov, and midlaw pretty much anywhere, NYU really doesn't leverage well outside of New York, and maybe Boston and DC to a smaller extent. If you go to CA, employers will see NYU roughly the same at UVA, Georgetown, and Northwestern. Transfers drinking TLS koolaide don't realize this.
ITE I believe that applying outside your school's market you are basically going to see Big firms hiring: 1) Top 1% dogs from the local T1s, 2) HYSCC kids, 3) Nepotism hires. Only occasionally do you see a non-HYSCC T14 student, and they usually have a combination of great grades, charisma, and local ties.
If I were OP I would work do an LLM in tax, or get the one-year patent bar graduate courses waiver the ABA will approve to sit for the patent bar. Either one of these paths should get you biglaw next cycle.
Peer-reviewed journal citation or it didn't happen
...No, but seriously, I think you're exaggerating just a whee bit. What data are you possibly basing this off of? More pointedly, what markets are you referring to? I have a suspicion that you're referring to Chicago. I mean, almost any T14's market conceivably includes NYC, so that market excludes your definition. But what else besides Chicago (/DC) could you be referring to? No way that, for instance, in Texas only the top 1% of UT grads are getting jobs at big firms, or in Boston only the top 1% of BU/BC grads, or in STL/KC only the top 1% of WUSTL, etc.... Not to even bring the rest of the T14 into the discussion.
Maybe you intended to include only Chicago, DC, in which case I still think you're exaggerating quite a bit but maybe you're making a point.
I'm stating that NYU isn't more relevant than the rest of the T14 outside of New York (and to a lesser degree Boston and DC-- I've heard this anecdotally but don't know if it is true).
There are only 5 real national schools (schools that provide a uniformly significant advantage anywhere): HYSCC. Stanford could be debated as not being a national as well based upon their placement hugely on the West Coast, but I don't think anyone would argue that this is because of self-selection more than not having a national reach.
NYU is included in the "T6" because they are the local T14 in the largest market. If the center of the legal world switched from New York to Chicago we'd be saying "HYSCCN(orthestern), holding all else constant.
I'm pretty sure this is something we just say on TLS (i.e. the echo-chamber), and it gets passed around until we believe it. I've never met an employer who viewed the CCN schools as anything but peers. I know a bunch of NYU & Columbia people working in cities across the country, whether it be in CA, Chicago, Boston ,etc. I think its pretty safe to say that all CCN are national schools, and i've had employer after employer echo that sentiment.
Schools become national when they theoretically
could place their students anywhere. With regard to Columbia and NYU, they just happen to be in the biggest and most healthy legal market in the country, so of course self-selection leads to most just staying here. But aside from the most ties-based localities, no one is going to look at any of CCN and say "hmm, not to familiar with its grads, so I'd be iffy". They may not follow the rankings from year to year like we do, but they know damn well what the top few schools are.
-
Flanker1067
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:47 pm
Post
by Flanker1067 » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:40 pm
^^^^ We call OP a whiney baby for taking ths position, and we /thread.
Goddamnit Kaiser, your timing jammed me up.
-
luthersloan
- Posts: 342
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 6:43 pm
Post
by luthersloan » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:43 pm
Flanker1067 wrote:^^^^ We call OP a whiney baby for taking ths position, and we /thread.
Goddamnit Kaiser, your timing jammed me up.
I don't understand how anything I have said can be characterized as whining.
-
Flanker1067
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:47 pm
Post
by Flanker1067 » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:50 pm
luthersloan wrote:Flanker1067 wrote:^^^^ We call OP a whiney baby for taking ths position, and we /thread.
Goddamnit Kaiser, your timing jammed me up.
I don't understand how anything I have said can be characterized as whining.
OK, now I think you are just eff'in with me? Did you read c3pO4's last post? WE DON'T AGREE ON THINGS AND YOU SEEM WHINEY TO US! PLEASE STOP!
-
Flanker1067
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:47 pm
Post
by Flanker1067 » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:51 pm
luthersloan wrote:Flanker1067 wrote:^^^^ We call OP a whiney baby for taking ths position, and we /thread.
Goddamnit Kaiser, your timing jammed me up.
I don't understand how anything I have said can be characterized as whining.
OK, now I think you are just eff'in with me? Did you read c3pO4's post? WE DON'T AGREE ON THINGS AND YOU SEEM WHINEY TO US! PLEASE STOP!
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
Flanker1067
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:47 pm
Post
by Flanker1067 » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:51 pm
luthersloan wrote:Flanker1067 wrote:^^^^ We call OP a whiney baby for taking ths position, and we /thread.
Goddamnit Kaiser, your timing jammed me up.
I don't understand how anything I have said can be characterized as whining.
OK, now I think you are just eff'in with me? Did you read c3pO4's post? WE DON'T AGREE ON THINGS AND YOU SEEM WHINEY TO US! PLEASE STOP!
-
luthersloan
- Posts: 342
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 6:43 pm
Post
by luthersloan » Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:54 pm
Shit, sorry. Nice triple post to make sure I got the message.
-
DoubleChecks
- Posts: 2328
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm
Post
by DoubleChecks » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:35 pm
luthersloan wrote:Flanker1067 wrote:^^^^ We call OP a whiney baby for taking ths position, and we /thread.
Goddamnit Kaiser, your timing jammed me up.
I don't understand how anything I have said can be characterized as whining.
That might be the problem
And I hate to get into this, but the whole splitting on terminology is like a red herring...
Here's an extreme example: 5% chance of winning on a $50,000 bet when X is not independently wealthy -- most would deem that bet (95% chance of losing) "irrational" -- even if the gambler is fully aware of the odds, is not particularly risk averse, etc. It may make sense to him, but it wouldn't to the vast majority of others. For simplicity's sake, we just call that "irrational" without getting into a whole argument about how is normal defined versus abnormal, etc. etc.
-
luthersloan
- Posts: 342
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 6:43 pm
Post
by luthersloan » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:41 pm
DoubleChecks wrote:luthersloan wrote:Flanker1067 wrote:^^^^ We call OP a whiney baby for taking ths position, and we /thread.
Goddamnit Kaiser, your timing jammed me up.
I don't understand how anything I have said can be characterized as whining.
That might be the problem
Either that, or as a previous poster suggested, I am a creepster.
Want to continue reading?
Register for access!
Did I mention it was FREE ?
Already a member? Login
-
BeenDidThat
- Posts: 695
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:18 am
Post
by BeenDidThat » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:42 pm
luthersloan wrote:DoubleChecks wrote:luthersloan wrote:Flanker1067 wrote:^^^^ We call OP a whiney baby for taking ths position, and we /thread.
Goddamnit Kaiser, your timing jammed me up.
I don't understand how anything I have said can be characterized as whining.
That might be the problem
Either that, or as a previous poster suggested, I am a creepster.
Or both!!!
-
luthersloan
- Posts: 342
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 6:43 pm
Post
by luthersloan » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:43 pm
Well, if it is both I really should get that LLM. You should see the social retards who do tax law, I would fit in perfectly.
-
BeenDidThat
- Posts: 695
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:18 am
Post
by BeenDidThat » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:44 pm
luthersloan wrote:Well, if it is both I really should get that LLM. You should see the social retards who do tax law, I would fit in perfectly.
Ahh, but they aren't whiners.
-
luthersloan
- Posts: 342
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 6:43 pm
Post
by luthersloan » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:45 pm
BeenDidThat wrote:luthersloan wrote:Well, if it is both I really should get that LLM. You should see the social retards who do tax law, I would fit in perfectly.
Ahh, but they aren't whiners.
Well, I can just confine my whining to online message boards.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
BeenDidThat
- Posts: 695
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:18 am
Post
by BeenDidThat » Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:50 pm
luthersloan wrote:BeenDidThat wrote:luthersloan wrote:Well, if it is both I really should get that LLM. You should see the social retards who do tax law, I would fit in perfectly.
Ahh, but they aren't whiners.
Well, I can just confine my whining to online message boards.
Godspeed.
-
Julio_El_Chavo
- Posts: 803
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:09 pm
Post
by Julio_El_Chavo » Tue Dec 06, 2011 11:15 am
Renzo wrote:ITT: everything I cannot fucking stand about law students.
-
mrloblaw
- Posts: 534
- Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 3:00 pm
Post
by mrloblaw » Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:45 pm
And I thought I was the only NYU transfer with a law degree about as valuable as one from this place:
--ImageRemoved--
Actually, at least that degree would prepare me for my future career.
-
johansantana21
- Posts: 855
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:11 pm
Post
by johansantana21 » Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:49 pm
mrloblaw wrote:And I thought I was the only NYU transfer with a law degree about as valuable as one from this place:
--ImageRemoved--
Actually, at least that degree would prepare me for my future career.
Do you think being a transfer mattered? What school range did you xfer from?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
mrloblaw
- Posts: 534
- Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 3:00 pm
Post
by mrloblaw » Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:54 pm
johansantana21 wrote:
Do you think being a transfer mattered? What school range did you xfer from?
I think it was a combination of: (1) having absolutely no ties outside the South; (2) coming from a lower T1 that interviewer after interviewer had no idea what the school's range was ("Is that a decent school?" Literally.); (3) Having a resume that screams medical school and PI; and (4) average to slightly below average interviewing skills.
As a transfer, nobody is going to give you the benefit of the doubt. You have to convince firms that you're a safer bet than the legions of median T14 kids they're interviewing. I certainly didn't do that, and looking back, I'm not sure if it would have been remotely possible, given my situation.
-
mrloblaw
- Posts: 534
- Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 3:00 pm
Post
by mrloblaw » Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:59 pm
johansantana21 wrote:Firms in NYC care about ties?
The echo chamber here is that ties aren't at all important in NYC. I think they want at least some indication that you're going to stick around until they decide to lay you off, however. Given the firm's investment in training and paying useless junior associates, it'd be insane for them not to.
I honestly think that firms were convinced that I'd either hate NYC (edit: and) go home to the South or hate biglaw and go to medical school. Ironically, I might now be forced to do both.
Last edited by
mrloblaw on Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Grizz
- Posts: 10564
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm
Post
by Grizz » Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:24 pm
mrloblaw wrote:johansantana21 wrote:Firms in NYC care about ties?
The echo chamber here is that ties aren't at all important in NYC. I think they want at least some indication that you're going to stick around until they decide to lay you off, however. Given the firm's investment in training and paying useless junior associates, it'd be insane for them not to.
I honestly think that firms were convinced that I'd either hate NYC or go home to the South or hate biglaw and go to medical school. Ironically, I might now be forced to do both.
As a Southerner, I was viewed by NYC firms with suspicion.
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!
-
JollyGreenGiant
- Posts: 995
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:12 pm
Post
by JollyGreenGiant » Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:39 pm
mrloblaw wrote:johansantana21 wrote:
Do you think being a transfer mattered? What school range did you xfer from?
I think it was a combination of: (1) having absolutely no ties outside the South; (2) coming from a lower T1 that interviewer after interviewer had no idea what the school's range was ("Is that a decent school?" Literally.); (3) Having a resume that screams medical school and PI; and (4) average to slightly below average interviewing skills.
As a transfer, nobody is going to give you the benefit of the doubt. You have to convince firms that you're a safer bet than the legions of median T14 kids they're interviewing. I certainly didn't do that, and looking back, I'm not sure if it would have been remotely possible, given my situation.
NYU degree isn't a good enough degree to get a NLJ250 job in the South?
-
09042014
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Post
by 09042014 » Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:43 pm
Grizz wrote:mrloblaw wrote:johansantana21 wrote:Firms in NYC care about ties?
The echo chamber here is that ties aren't at all important in NYC. I think they want at least some indication that you're going to stick around until they decide to lay you off, however. Given the firm's investment in training and paying useless junior associates, it'd be insane for them not to.
I honestly think that firms were convinced that I'd either hate NYC or go home to the South or hate biglaw and go to medical school. Ironically, I might now be forced to do both.
As a Southerner, I was viewed by NYC firms with suspicion.
I was definitely viewed by NYC firms with suspicion for being a midwesterner. And other friends from the south and midwest had similar problems.
-
c3pO4
- Posts: 835
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 1:34 pm
Post
by c3pO4 » Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:50 pm
Desert Fox wrote:Grizz wrote:mrloblaw wrote:johansantana21 wrote:Firms in NYC care about ties?
The echo chamber here is that ties aren't at all important in NYC. I think they want at least some indication that you're going to stick around until they decide to lay you off, however. Given the firm's investment in training and paying useless junior associates, it'd be insane for them not to.
I honestly think that firms were convinced that I'd either hate NYC or go home to the South or hate biglaw and go to medical school. Ironically, I might now be forced to do both.
As a Southerner, I was viewed by NYC firms with suspicion.
protip: don't raise your kids in the souttth.
-
DoubleChecks
- Posts: 2328
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm
Post
by DoubleChecks » Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:00 pm
c3pO4 wrote:
protip: don't raise your kids in the souttth.
You're funny.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login