Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

(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: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 17, 2012 6:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Were the Kirkland dings callback dings or offer dings?


Anon from before. Mine was a CB ding.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:38 pm

failed miserably. transfer strike out. sigh.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:50 pm

Anonymous User wrote:failed miserably. transfer strike out. sigh.


Really sorry to hear that. Where did you xfer from? How did you bid? What do you think happened? I'd start mailing ASAP if you haven't already. There's still some time. The Columbia name will help in mailing secondary markets where you have ties.

Good luck sir/ma'am.

/fellow transfer

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:10 pm

After taking a nap, I wake up to an email ding from Winston and Strawn... :cry:

I still believe that we'll all be fine though.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 17, 2012 11:05 pm

Cleary offer! Callbacked Wed. and offer this evening.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:45 am

Gibson snail mail ding... :(

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:02 am

The idea of transfers' effect on EIP really annoys me. Without 50 extra people in our class, there would likely be more callbacks given to the original 2L class. It's true, let's make some room for those 'burgers who wouldn't get a job regardless. But even then, there are a lot of people with average grades and mediocre interview skills that are going to get cut for some guy who just got here and stole spots that he could've taken up at his old school. I doubt if CLS refused transfers employers would reduce the number of callbacks they typically extend to CLS students.

But ultimately, if 85% of people have an offer, doesn't the math suggest that this number would be higher if we just got rid of transfers? Don't transfers do better most of the time? Why won't they just stay at their old schools

AppsAbound
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 12:04 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby AppsAbound » Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:10 am

As a non-transfer, I get irritated when people complain that transfers took their jobs. Firms aren't charities and EIP isn't the soup line. In the absence of transfers (who firms typically view as desirable because they are successful law students) there wouldn't necessarily be more callbacks for CLS students who are "less desirable" (because of grades or whatever other factors). If CLS didn't have transfers, firms could just offer fewer callbacks at CLS and pick up more transfer-esque students from other schools. Or you could just find more of the top students at CLS with more callbacks---I'm not seeing how there is much trickle down possibility here.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 8:16 am

AppsAbound wrote:As a non-transfer, I get irritated when people complain that transfers took their jobs. Firms aren't charities and EIP isn't the soup line. In the absence of transfers (who firms typically view as desirable because they are successful law students) there wouldn't necessarily be more callbacks for CLS students who are "less desirable" (because of grades or whatever other factors). If CLS didn't have transfers, firms could just offer fewer callbacks at CLS and pick up more transfer-esque students from other schools. Or you could just find more of the top students at CLS with more callbacks---I'm not seeing how there is much trickle down possibility here.


I like to lament the transfers occasionally, but this analysis is correct.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 8:28 am

Anonymous User wrote:Anyone hear from Latham San Diego?


I know a guy with a CB there, fwiw

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:14 am

I saw more than a few of the rising 3Ls who transferred in a year ago doing EIP again, and from what I heard in suites, it's not like they got offers from their SAs and were just trying to "trade up."

BUT... I agree that 50 transfers is too goddamn many, especially when people already can't get into Evidence, Corps, Tax, Admin, and other really really basic classes.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:20 pm

Am I the only one who hasn't heard from certain places whatsoever?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:21 pm

Anonymous User wrote:The idea of transfers' effect on EIP really annoys me. Without 50 extra people in our class, there would likely be more callbacks given to the original 2L class. It's true, let's make some room for those 'burgers who wouldn't get a job regardless. But even then, there are a lot of people with average grades and mediocre interview skills that are going to get cut for some guy who just got here and stole spots that he could've taken up at his old school. I doubt if CLS refused transfers employers would reduce the number of callbacks they typically extend to CLS students.

But ultimately, if 85% of people have an offer, doesn't the math suggest that this number would be higher if we just got rid of transfers? Don't transfers do better most of the time? Why won't they just stay at their old schools



Fun fact: Going to Columbia doesn't entitle you to a job. If a person transferred in and got a CB where you didn't I suspect they did something better. Also most transfers didn't have the same opportunities that he/she would've had at CLS EIP, why blame them for trading up? That's like blaming people who retook the LSAT, got a better score the second time, and beat out someone who got a good score the first time.

You're (at least in part) responsible for your own success or failure. It's fine to blame macro factors (the economy, excessive debt among some firms, etc.) but when you start blaming individuals who are just trying to improve their prospects you just sound entitled.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:35 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:The idea of transfers' effect on EIP really annoys me. Without 50 extra people in our class, there would likely be more callbacks given to the original 2L class. It's true, let's make some room for those 'burgers who wouldn't get a job regardless. But even then, there are a lot of people with average grades and mediocre interview skills that are going to get cut for some guy who just got here and stole spots that he could've taken up at his old school. I doubt if CLS refused transfers employers would reduce the number of callbacks they typically extend to CLS students.

But ultimately, if 85% of people have an offer, doesn't the math suggest that this number would be higher if we just got rid of transfers? Don't transfers do better most of the time? Why won't they just stay at their old schools



Fun fact: Going to Columbia doesn't entitle you to a job. If a person transferred in and got a CB where you didn't I suspect they did something better. Also most transfers didn't have the same opportunities that he/she would've had at CLS EIP, why blame them for trading up? That's like blaming people who retook the LSAT, got a better score the second time, and beat out someone who got a good score the first time.

You're (at least in part) responsible for your own success or failure. It's fine to blame macro factors (the economy, excessive debt among some firms, etc.) but when you start blaming individuals who are just trying to improve their prospects you just sound entitled.


Not that I necessarily disagree with you, but the LSAT thing is a bad example. The more there are transferring in, the less spots there are for the current students to interview. There's less spots to be picked up and thus less of an opportunity to get yourself out there. I also don't think that the poster is blaming them, they're blaming the administration for allowing that many transfers in, in the first place. With that said, I doubt transfers are the reason any individual will fail or succeed during this process.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:The idea of transfers' effect on EIP really annoys me. Without 50 extra people in our class, there would likely be more callbacks given to the original 2L class. It's true, let's make some room for those 'burgers who wouldn't get a job regardless. But even then, there are a lot of people with average grades and mediocre interview skills that are going to get cut for some guy who just got here and stole spots that he could've taken up at his old school. I doubt if CLS refused transfers employers would reduce the number of callbacks they typically extend to CLS students.

But ultimately, if 85% of people have an offer, doesn't the math suggest that this number would be higher if we just got rid of transfers? Don't transfers do better most of the time? Why won't they just stay at their old schools



Fun fact: Going to Columbia doesn't entitle you to a job. If a person transferred in and got a CB where you didn't I suspect they did something better. Also most transfers didn't have the same opportunities that he/she would've had at CLS EIP, why blame them for trading up? That's like blaming people who retook the LSAT, got a better score the second time, and beat out someone who got a good score the first time.

You're (at least in part) responsible for your own success or failure. It's fine to blame macro factors (the economy, excessive debt among some firms, etc.) but when you start blaming individuals who are just trying to improve their prospects you just sound entitled.


Not that I necessarily disagree with you, but the LSAT thing is a bad example. The more there are transferring in, the less spots there are for the current students to interview. There's less spots to be picked up and thus less of an opportunity to get yourself out there. I also don't think that the poster is blaming them, they're blaming the administration for allowing that many transfers in, in the first place. With that said, I doubt transfers are the reason any individual will fail or succeed during this process.


Fair enough. The LSAT might be a different case. However you could make the same argument that T14 schools should reduce class sizes in general so that higher percentage of students get a biglaw jerb.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:07 pm

so what if I haven't heard back from a bunch of places? should I contact them and ask them what is up?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:36 pm

THE TRANSFERS TOOK MAH JERBS!

But in all seriousness, I'm more irked about the difficulty in getting key classes more than the transfer effect on EIP.

User avatar
Loose Seal
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Loose Seal » Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:41 pm

AppsAbound wrote:As a non-transfer, I get irritated when people complain that transfers took their jobs. Firms aren't charities and EIP isn't the soup line. In the absence of transfers (who firms typically view as desirable because they are successful law students) there wouldn't necessarily be more callbacks for CLS students who are "less desirable" (because of grades or whatever other factors). If CLS didn't have transfers, firms could just offer fewer callbacks at CLS and pick up more transfer-esque students from other schools. Or you could just find more of the top students at CLS with more callbacks---I'm not seeing how there is much trickle down possibility here.


This is credited. Having fewer people in the interview pool does not change the fact that you still may fall below a firm's grade cutoff. Having fewer qualified people on our interview schedule does not mean we call back more unqualified people, it just means we issue fewer callbacks than we otherwise would.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:04 pm

Loose Seal wrote:
AppsAbound wrote:As a non-transfer, I get irritated when people complain that transfers took their jobs. Firms aren't charities and EIP isn't the soup line. In the absence of transfers (who firms typically view as desirable because they are successful law students) there wouldn't necessarily be more callbacks for CLS students who are "less desirable" (because of grades or whatever other factors). If CLS didn't have transfers, firms could just offer fewer callbacks at CLS and pick up more transfer-esque students from other schools. Or you could just find more of the top students at CLS with more callbacks---I'm not seeing how there is much trickle down possibility here.


This is credited. Having fewer people in the interview pool does not change the fact that you still may fall below a firm's grade cutoff. Having fewer qualified people on our interview schedule does not mean we call back more unqualified people, it just means we issue fewer callbacks than we otherwise would.


Somebody give this guy a hand.

User avatar
Loose Seal
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Loose Seal » Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:02 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Loose Seal wrote:
AppsAbound wrote:As a non-transfer, I get irritated when people complain that transfers took their jobs. Firms aren't charities and EIP isn't the soup line. In the absence of transfers (who firms typically view as desirable because they are successful law students) there wouldn't necessarily be more callbacks for CLS students who are "less desirable" (because of grades or whatever other factors). If CLS didn't have transfers, firms could just offer fewer callbacks at CLS and pick up more transfer-esque students from other schools. Or you could just find more of the top students at CLS with more callbacks---I'm not seeing how there is much trickle down possibility here.


This is credited. Having fewer people in the interview pool does not change the fact that you still may fall below a firm's grade cutoff. Having fewer qualified people on our interview schedule does not mean we call back more unqualified people, it just means we issue fewer callbacks than we otherwise would.


Somebody give this guy a hand.


Image

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:56 pm

Loose Seal wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Somebody give this guy a hand.


Image


Super 180.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:59 pm

I think we just need to ask the administration to stop allowing so many people in that coudln't get in the way we all did.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 10:17 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I think we just need to ask the administration to stop allowing so many people in that coudln't get in the way we all did.


It's getting pretty hard for me to tell when people are trolling on the topic of transfer students. This comment, for instance, I assume is troll bait because a) I like to think that all CLS students are smart enough to realize that actually fighting your way to the top of the class at a lower law school > LSAT and undergrad GPA, and b) no one would seriously suggest talking to the administration, because they are incompetent across the board.

If any CLS transfers are reading this, please know that we are happy to have you. You obviously performed amazingly at your previous school, and I for one look forward to meeting you. Chalk up any stupid anti-transfer posts on this thread to the stress of EIP, and realize that we are all brothers-in-arms since surviving the hell that is the Doubletree Hotel elevator system.

As already mentioned in this thread, it is annoying that core 2L classes are so hard to get, but this has far more to do with the dearth of professors teaching these classes than it does with another ~50 transfers. When people are #240 on the waitlist for evidence, then it is absurd to think having fewer transfers would make any substantive difference.

Everyone who is doing callbacks this week, good luck! Everyone who is waiting for callbacks, keep the hope alive!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273166
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 18, 2012 10:22 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I think we just need to ask the administration to stop allowing so many people in that coudln't get in the way we all did.


It's getting pretty hard for me to tell when people are trolling on the topic of transfer students. This comment, for instance, I assume is troll bait because a) I like to think that all CLS students are smart enough to realize that actually fighting your way to the top of the class at a lower law school > LSAT and undergrad GPA, and b) no one would seriously suggest talking to the administration, because they are incompetent across the board.

If any CLS transfers are reading this, please know that we are happy to have you. You obviously performed amazingly at your previous school, and I for one look forward to meeting you. Chalk up any stupid anti-transfer posts on this thread to the stress of EIP, and realize that we are all brothers-in-arms since surviving the hell that is the Doubletree Hotel elevator system.

As already mentioned in this thread, it is annoying that core 2L classes are so hard to get, but this has far more to do with the dearth of professors teaching these classes than it does with another ~50 transfers. When people are #240 on the waitlist for evidence, then it is absurd to think having fewer transfers would make any substantive difference.

Everyone who is doing callbacks this week, good luck! Everyone who is waiting for callbacks, keep the hope alive!


+1

User avatar
GertieTheDinosaur
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:56 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2012 Superthread

Postby GertieTheDinosaur » Sat Aug 18, 2012 10:24 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I think we just need to ask the administration to stop allowing so many people in that coudln't get in the way we all did.


It's getting pretty hard for me to tell when people are trolling on the topic of transfer students. This comment, for instance, I assume is troll bait because a) I like to think that all CLS students are smart enough to realize that actually fighting your way to the top of the class at a lower law school > LSAT and undergrad GPA, and b) no one would seriously suggest talking to the administration, because they are incompetent across the board.

If any CLS transfers are reading this, please know that we are happy to have you. You obviously performed amazingly at your previous school, and I for one look forward to meeting you. Chalk up any stupid anti-transfer posts on this thread to the stress of EIP, and realize that we are all brothers-in-arms since surviving the hell that is the Doubletree Hotel elevator system.

As already mentioned in this thread, it is annoying that core 2L classes are so hard to get, but this has far more to do with the dearth of professors teaching these classes than it does with another ~50 transfers. When people are #240 on the waitlist for evidence, then it is absurd to think having fewer transfers would make any substantive difference.

Everyone who is doing callbacks this week, good luck! Everyone who is waiting for callbacks, keep the hope alive!


I can tell who authored this post just based on the caring and supportive language.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.