Fordham bidlist critique! Forum
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 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.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Fordham bidlist critique!
bidding closed, thanks everyone!
Last edited by Anonymous User on Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
MoFo is a bit of a reach.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Yeah I figured--they're super selective but they're ranked a "2" (aka they usually go for top 33%) so I thought I'd give them a try, even if they are at 35. Any suggestions on what may replace MoFo?Anonymous User wrote:MoFo is a bit of a reach.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
I have slightly higher numbers, different journal/board factors, very strong WE.
I think Fried is a reach, MoFo is on my list but it's kind of a dream bid.
Also, Proskauer Newark?
ETA: otherwise, looks good
I think Fried is a reach, MoFo is on my list but it's kind of a dream bid.
Also, Proskauer Newark?
ETA: otherwise, looks good
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Kaye Dechert and Stroock should definitely be lower. Use your first few spots for firms with 21 interview spots that give callbacks/offers to lottery interviews, since putting these firms outside of the top 4 or so makes it almost impossible to get an interview through lottery. Those three firms should be lower in ur top ten (think 7, 8, 9) since you will still have a great chance at a lottery interview even at that level of your bid list. Its all about maximizing interviews. By putting 21 interview firms at the very top, and those lower in the top 10, you have a good chance at all of them with lottery.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Move shearman and seward higher. I totally agree with the kaye strook dechert advice, move them down. Clifford might be good as a first pick, although I tend to agree with the 21 interview slots at the top advice. Clifford is just really non-selective with grades and takes a lot of people... you should do what you can to guarantee urself an interview. Keep white and case/cadwalader, etc toward the top as well, you're very likely to get an interview with those firms if they stay at that point in ur bid list
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Keep mofo, its not bad to have one or two reaches on ur list. I'd put sheppard mullin lower, and take out curtis mallet unless you have international experience.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Top 3 should be Clifford, Shearman and Seward IMO
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Thanks for the advice. My concern is that my resume/grades aren't good enough to get preselected interviews at most of these firms, so I put the firms I was REALLY interested at the top (Kaye, Clifford, Dechert) to ensure that I did get at least 1 interview with 1 of them.Anonymous User wrote:Kaye Dechert and Stroock should definitely be lower. Use your first few spots for firms with 21 interview spots that give callbacks/offers to lottery interviews, since putting these firms outside of the top 4 or so makes it almost impossible to get an interview through lottery. Those three firms should be lower in ur top ten (think 7, 8, 9) since you will still have a great chance at a lottery interview even at that level of your bid list. Its all about maximizing interviews. By putting 21 interview firms at the very top, and those lower in the top 10, you have a good chance at all of them with lottery.
What would you suggest being 1-5?
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
.Anonymous User wrote:I have slightly higher numbers, different journal/board factors, very strong WE.
I think Fried is a reach, MoFo is on my list but it's kind of a dream bid.
Also, Proskauer Newark?
ETA: otherwise, looks good
Last edited by Anonymous User on Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
are you on a journal? moot?
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
You'll get interviews if you bid well.... Clifford, Shearman, Proskauer Newark and Seward in the top 5, keep cadwalader, white & case, chadbourne, brown in the top 10, and perhaps then round it out with kaye, strook and dechert. That would maximize the number of lottery interviews you get. For the rest of your list, use a few more "3" firms
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
So you're telling him to bid on Proskauer Newark when he has no ties to jersey, and the summer class was 3 people last year after like 40 got callbacks? I also don't agree that Seward should be in his top 10, he can certainly place firms with more grade selectivity in order not to waste a bid. He has a decent shot of getting Seward on a preselect. Cadwalader gives 84 interview slots, he can put them a bit lower as well.Anonymous User wrote:You'll get interviews if you bid well.... Clifford, Shearman, Proskauer Newark and Seward in the top 5, keep cadwalader, white & case, chadbourne, brown in the top 10, and perhaps then round it out with kaye, strook and dechert. That would maximize the number of lottery interviews you get. For the rest of your list, use a few more "3" firms
OP, you should focus on the highest gpa rank firms up top, and any other ones you want that are only 21 slots that you want to prioritize. Otherwise, your list looks pretty solid. However, letting you know that Mayer Brown is a wasted bid unless you put them in your top 5, everybody and their mother is going to go after them because they gave out a few offers last year. I also heard the Proskauer office in NY doesn't care about kids that are not on Law Review and were very rude last year during screeners, there's a thread on here that recently discussed this so take a look around.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Mayer Brown is definitely a waste of a bid
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Just wondering- is Seward a good bid for someone with around a 3.5 from Fordham? I heard rumors that if you bid on a firm that typically gets slightly lower gpas they might nix you as protection...
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Its a good bid. its true that you can overbid... if u were top 10% then i'd say don't bid on Seward, but a 3.5 isn't high enough to prevent them from giving u a callback/offer
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
.Anonymous User wrote:So you're telling him to bid on Proskauer Newark when he has no ties to jersey, and the summer class was 3 people last year after like 40 got callbacks? I also don't agree that Seward should be in his top 10, he can certainly place firms with more grade selectivity in order not to waste a bid. He has a decent shot of getting Seward on a preselect. Cadwalader gives 84 interview slots, he can put them a bit lower as well.Anonymous User wrote:You'll get interviews if you bid well.... Clifford, Shearman, Proskauer Newark and Seward in the top 5, keep cadwalader, white & case, chadbourne, brown in the top 10, and perhaps then round it out with kaye, strook and dechert. That would maximize the number of lottery interviews you get. For the rest of your list, use a few more "3" firms
OP, you should focus on the highest gpa rank firms up top, and any other ones you want that are only 21 slots that you want to prioritize. Otherwise, your list looks pretty solid. However, letting you know that Mayer Brown is a wasted bid unless you put them in your top 5, everybody and their mother is going to go after them because they gave out a few offers last year. I also heard the Proskauer office in NY doesn't care about kids that are not on Law Review and were very rude last year during screeners, there's a thread on here that recently discussed this so take a look around.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Nah, I'm not on either.Anonymous User wrote:are you on a journal? moot?
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Good thing OP is nowhere close to a 3.5Anonymous User wrote:Its a good bid. its true that you can overbid... if u were top 10% then i'd say don't bid on Seward, but a 3.5 isn't high enough to prevent them from giving u a callback/offer
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Anonymous User wrote:Good thing OP is nowhere close to a 3.5Anonymous User wrote:Its a good bid. its true that you can overbid... if u were top 10% then i'd say don't bid on Seward, but a 3.5 isn't high enough to prevent them from giving u a callback/offer
I'm not, but I think that person was responding to this post (not me):
Anonymous User wrote:Just wondering- is Seward a good bid for someone with around a 3.5 from Fordham? I heard rumors that if you bid on a firm that typically gets slightly lower gpas they might nix you as protection...
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!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Fordham bidlist critique!
Anonymous User wrote:Nah, I'm not on either.Anonymous User wrote:are you on a journal? moot?
just wondering why? by choice? in an interview you should be prepared to answer to employers why you arent on a journal
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login