[/quote]

http://static0.channels.com/thumbnails/ ... -Read--jpg

Can you Read? That topic confirms the argument for NU over NYU...lol

Clearly there is no reasoning with you.

To OP: If you choose to go to NYU/Columbia these will be your first 2 interview questions at every OCI interview:

1) Why Chicago?

2) Then why NYU/Columbia?

If you go to Northwestern your first question will likely be:

1) Why Chicago

Now think about how you will be analyzed answering in each situation.

Good Luck!

Just stop.

Y'all need to listen to me and traehkhat when it comes to transferring. Transferring is a totally different ballgame then going in as a 0L. *Michigan* transfers do better than NU transfers. Even in Chicago. NYU/CLS/Penn transfers kill it even more. Transferring is much more of a ranking game than standard admissions since employers look at your original school, and the higher your 1L grades/school, the better you do at OCI (for the most part).

No I read it....you are wrong...look up any Big Law employment data for the last 5 years....just look it up! Chicago ornationally, there is a clear ordering of NU > Columbia >>>NYU CLS>NYU>>>>>NU for *elite* big law placement[/quote]

ftfy, confused brah

2012 SAs at STB firm wide: NYU (12), CLS (6), NU (3). 2012 SAs at Skadden NY: CLS (14), NYU (10), NU (1). 2012 SAs at DPW NY: NYU(23), CLS(16), NU (2). 2012 SAs at Cravath: CLS (18), NYU (13), NU (3). Add in 2012 SAs at S&C: CLS (13), NYU (8) and Cleary 2012 SAs: CLS (20), NYU (17).

Now add in NYU's self selection into PI and consider NU students' WE (diminishing NU's placement power) and it isn't even close. Why does placement into elite firms matter? See: http://abovethelaw.com/2010/04/summer-o ... 5-are-hot/
Hint: it has to do with stability and lucrative in house exit options. But this is sooooo NY biased! Yes, yes it is. But that's just how it is mang.

ftfy, confused brah

2012 SAs at STB firm wide: NYU (12), CLS (6), NU (3). 2012 SAs at Skadden NY: CLS (14), NYU (10), NU (1). 2012 SAs at DPW NY: NYU(23), CLS(16), NU (2). 2012 SAs at Cravath: CLS (18), NYU (13), NU (3). Add in 2012 SAs at S&C: CLS (13), NYU (8) and Cleary 2012 SAs: CLS (20), NYU (17).

Now add in NYU's self selection into PI and consider NU students' WE (diminishing NU's placement power) and it isn't even close. Why does placement into elite firms matter? See: http://abovethelaw.com/2010/04/summer-o ... 5-are-hot/
Hint: it has to do with stability and lucrative in house exit options. But this is sooooo NY biased! Yes, yes it is. But that's just how it is mang.[/quote]

Read the whole thread kid...its about Chicago Big Law. Enjoy earning 160K in NY at any of those firms. Shmucks chasing Skadden NY. 160K in Chi is worth about 300K in NY. But anyways, your post had zero relevance to anything in this thread.

I agree with your overall sentiment but I'm scratching my head a little over the explanation.

Basically, if you get into a better school, it likely means your 1L grades were better. And your 1L grades will dictate which types of firms you end up getting and how good your chances of getting an SA will be. People who were more borderline in terms of 1L GPA/school had more trouble at OCI.

Although at NU, the difference may be the WE thing. Otherwise, it's really weird that NU overall would outperform NU transfers, but Mich transfers outperform Mich regularly. I'm just guessing overall that NU is less selective than Mich in terms of transfers (based on last years' transfer cycle). Totally different from regular admissions.

I think there's a lot of plausible explanations for why there's a difference in placement, but if Mich is more selective than NU for transfers, you may be on to something.

IMO, that was generally the impression I got from last year's transfer cycle.

I don't disagree that CLS/NYU do better at elite NYC firms, but the above comparison overstates the reality. People at NU really don't want to be in NYC. For example, I count 8 people at CSM/S&C/DPW/STB from NU in your summer 2012 data. In summer 2011, it was 20 people, and that was with somewhat smaller class sizes across the board that year. DPW's yield at NU this year was like 20%. The drop has been because Chicago has started to recover, and K&E/Sidley/Mayer/Jenner are hiring more people.

Also recall that NU is 60% the size of NYU. The 20 people working at CSM/S&C/DPW/STB in summer 2010 represent about 7% of the class, while the 56 people working at those four firms from NYU represent about 11% of the class.

Chicago summer classes are definitely recovering in terms of size. From what I have heard, this summer is basically:

K&E: 55
Sidley: 42
Mayer: 30
Winston: 20
Jenner: 20

Thosse are not huge gains but it is better than it was a year ago. Sidley and K&E are still the two strongest firms in Chicago with K&E much stronger than Sidley but Sidley is probably the better place to be an associate.

What are the differences between Sidley and K and E?

Kirkland pays associates more in aggregate, Sidley pays more hourly.

I meant as far as the quality of work. K and E seems to be clearly better for litigation, but I don't know if I want to do that yet. Granted I get into both, I just wanted a better feel for the differences in their corporate practices and personality.

That was a joke, though the differences are pretty dramatic and very well-documented. You can probably dig up a lot on this by searching TLS, though the best way to get a sense of this is to meet as many attorneys as you can at each firm. I don't think Kirkland is "clearly better" for lit, but I'm at Sidley this summer and blatantly prejudiced.

I've actually been searching through the threads, but seeing how the thread title applies to me, I figured I'd just ask here. The searches are actually how I got my impression. There's really no way I can meet attorneys from there while over here.

The Kirkland NYC attorneys are probably a good barometer of the firm generally. Not sure the same is true of Sidley. I'm planning on/hoping to do doing transactional work at Sidley so if you have specific Qs on their practice groups and culture, feel free to PM. Culture aside, if you hope to do corporate work, the biggest difference is the typical client: PE at Kirkland vs. Fortune 500 at Sidley.

Thanks. Sounds like I'd prefer Sidley's clients.