Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

(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: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:14 pm

This is probably a question with an easy answer, but I was wondering if the CB-to-offer ration at any firms is published somewhere, or if it's just based on anecdotal evidence?

This board has a number of past posts about Dechert calling back tons of people and only giving offers to 30% or less. Where do these numbers come from?

User avatar
gyarados
Posts: 84
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 1:40 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby gyarados » Sat Aug 04, 2012 12:31 am

Anonymous User wrote:This is probably a question with an easy answer, but I was wondering if the CB-to-offer ration at any firms is published somewhere, or if it's just based on anecdotal evidence?

This board has a number of past posts about Dechert calling back tons of people and only giving offers to 30% or less. Where do these numbers come from?

You shouldn't even be worrying about this. Just go kill the callback and let the offers sort themselves out.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 12:36 am

Here are the %s for Fordham's OCI

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP 20%
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP 83%
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP 50%
Davis, Polk & Wardwell LLP 23%
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP 86%
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 50%
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP 33%
Kirkland & Ellis LLP 83%
Latham & Watkins LLP 73%
Latham & Watkins LLP
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP 50%
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP 54%
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 43%
Sidley Austin LLP 71%
White & Case LLP 25%
Jones Day 50%
Arnold & Porter LLP 0%
WilmerHale LLP 20%
Morrison & Foerster LLP
Shearman & Sterling LLP 78%
O'Melveny & [deleted] LLP 57%
Ropes & Gray LLP 82%
Ropes & Gray LLP
Clifford Chance US LLP 83%
Paul Hastings LLP
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
Linklaters 44%
Mayer Brown LLP 88%
Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP 29%
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP 32%
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP 45%
Allen & Overy LLP 100%
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 43%
Baker Botts LLP 29%
Proskauer Rose LLP 25%
Proskauer Rose LLP 18%
Goodwin Procter LLP 83%
Winston & Strawn LLP 0%
Willkie, Farr & Gallagher LLP 33%
King & Spalding LLP 33%
Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP 79%
Bingham McCutchen LLP 33%
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati 40%
Hogan Lovells LLP 100%
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 60%
Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. 100%
Alston & Bird LLP 40%
Dechert LLP 78%
Vinson & Elkins LLP 0%
McDermott Will & Emery LLP - CORPORATE 0%
McDermott Will & Emery LLP - LITIGATION
K&L Gates LLP 50%
Pillsbury Winthrop LLP 100%
Greenberg Traurig LLP 100%
Cooley LLP 25%
Nixon Peabody LLP 29%
Holland & Knight LLP 100%
Fish & Richardson P.C.
Kaye Scholer LLP 71%
Bryan Cave LLP 17%
Crowell & Moring LLP 100%
Patton Boggs LLP 50%
Patton Boggs LLP
Arent Fox PLLC 67%
Chadbourne & Parke LLP 20%
Hunton & Williams LLP 0%
Venable LLP
Baker & Hostetler LLP 100%
Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP 53%
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP 56%
Dickstein, Shapiro, Morin & Oshinsky LLP 50%
Blank Rome LLP 33%
Bracewell & Giuliani LLP
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP 20%
Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel LLP 40%
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP 57%
Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP 17%
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP 100%
Troutman Sanders LLP
Drinker, Biddle & Reath LLP
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP 17%
Olshan Grundman Frome Rosenzweig & Wolosky LLP 67%
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP 40%
Duane Morris & Hecksher LLP 25%
Seward & Kissel LLP 17%
Fox Rothschild LLP 43%
Riker, Danzig, Scherer, Hyland & Perretti LLP 67%
Vedder, Price, Kauffman & Kammholz P.C. 50%
Herrick, Feinstein LLP 50%
Cullen and Dykman LLP 50%
Mound, Cotton, Wollan & Greengrass 0%
Pryor Cashman LLP 43%
Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP 80%
Wiggin and Dana LLP 0%
Cole, Schotz, Meisel, Forman & Leonard, P.A. 17%
Brown Rudnick LLP 25%
Hahn & Hessen LLP 0%
Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP 20%
Haynes and Boone, LLP 100%
Schiff Hardin LLP 50%
Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C. 0%
Day Pitney LLP
Otterbourg, Steindler, Houston & Rosen P.C. 0%
Lowenstein Sandler PC 0%
Porzio, Bromberg & Newman, P.C. 0%
Shipman & Goodwin LLP 0%
Last edited by Anonymous User on Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Perseus_I
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Perseus_I » Sat Aug 04, 2012 12:42 am

Anonymous User wrote:Here are the %s for Fordham's OCI

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP 20%
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP 83%
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP 50%
Davis, Polk & Wardwell LLP 100%
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP 86%
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 50%
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP 33%
Kirkland & Ellis LLP 83%
Latham & Watkins LLP 73%
Latham & Watkins LLP
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP 50%
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP 54%
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 43%
Sidley Austin LLP 71%
White & Case LLP 25%
Jones Day 50%
Arnold & Porter LLP 0%
WilmerHale LLP 20%
Morrison & Foerster LLP
Shearman & Sterling LLP 78%
O'Melveny & [deleted] LLP 57%
Ropes & Gray LLP 82%
Ropes & Gray LLP
Clifford Chance US LLP 83%
Paul Hastings LLP
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
Linklaters 44%
Mayer Brown LLP 88%
Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP 29%
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP 32%
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP 45%
Allen & Overy LLP 100%
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 43%
Baker Botts LLP 29%
Proskauer Rose LLP 25%
Proskauer Rose LLP 18%
Goodwin Procter LLP 83%
Winston & Strawn LLP 0%
Willkie, Farr & Gallagher LLP 33%
King & Spalding LLP 33%
Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP 79%
Bingham McCutchen LLP 33%
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati 40%
Hogan Lovells LLP 100%
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 60%
Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. 100%
Alston & Bird LLP 40%
Dechert LLP 78%
Vinson & Elkins LLP 0%
McDermott Will & Emery LLP - CORPORATE 0%
McDermott Will & Emery LLP - LITIGATION
K&L Gates LLP 50%
Pillsbury Winthrop LLP 100%
Greenberg Traurig LLP 100%
Cooley LLP 25%
Nixon Peabody LLP 29%
Holland & Knight LLP 100%
Fish & Richardson P.C.
Kaye Scholer LLP 71%
Bryan Cave LLP 17%
Crowell & Moring LLP 100%
Patton Boggs LLP 50%
Patton Boggs LLP
Arent Fox PLLC 67%
Chadbourne & Parke LLP 20%
Hunton & Williams LLP 0%
Venable LLP
Baker & Hostetler LLP 100%
Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP 53%
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP 56%
Dickstein, Shapiro, Morin & Oshinsky LLP 50%
Blank Rome LLP 33%
Bracewell & Giuliani LLP
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP 20%
Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel LLP 40%
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP 57%
Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP 17%
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP 100%
Troutman Sanders LLP
Drinker, Biddle & Reath LLP
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP 17%
Olshan Grundman Frome Rosenzweig & Wolosky LLP 67%
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP 40%
Duane Morris & Hecksher LLP 25%
Seward & Kissel LLP 17%
Fox Rothschild LLP 43%
Riker, Danzig, Scherer, Hyland & Perretti LLP 67%
Vedder, Price, Kauffman & Kammholz P.C. 50%
Herrick, Feinstein LLP 50%
Cullen and Dykman LLP 50%
Mound, Cotton, Wollan & Greengrass 0%
Pryor Cashman LLP 43%
Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP 80%
Wiggin and Dana LLP 0%
Cole, Schotz, Meisel, Forman & Leonard, P.A. 17%
Brown Rudnick LLP 25%
Hahn & Hessen LLP 0%
Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP 20%
Haynes and Boone, LLP 100%
Schiff Hardin LLP 50%
Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C. 0%
Day Pitney LLP
Otterbourg, Steindler, Houston & Rosen P.C. 0%
Lowenstein Sandler PC 0%
Porzio, Bromberg & Newman, P.C. 0%
Shipman & Goodwin LLP 0%


Dechert at 78%? Something sounds off about that. I wonder if it makes a difference if the [original] interview was secured through mass mailing. Probably not at the CB stage, right? I have a CB with one of Milbank, Cleary, or Shearman coming up where the interview was secured that way.

EDITED for clarity
Last edited by Perseus_I on Sat Aug 04, 2012 12:49 am, edited 2 times in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 12:44 am

Perseus_I wrote:Dechert at 78%? Something sounds screwy about that.


9 accepted CBs and 7 got offers. It's one of the more Fordham-friendly firms.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:15 am

Those Fordham CB/Offer ratio seems absurdly high. Most firms are over 50%. Do they only CB superstars at Fordham?

User avatar
Perseus_I
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Perseus_I » Sat Aug 04, 2012 5:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Those Fordham CB/Offer ratio seems absurdly high. Most firms are over 50%. Do they only CB superstars at Fordham?


Another thing to find out would be if CB-to-offer ratio is inversely related to school rank generally or if lottery vs. Preselect screeners make a difference. In a lotto system, grades are a huge factor in whether someone gets a callback whereas in a preselect system, one would presume that personality/fit is the sole factor that determines whether or not someone gets a callback since gpa/resume have already passed muster. So could it be that students called back from of a preselect interview have better odds generally?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:20 pm

DPW at 100% seems wrong...unless they only CBed 1 person.

They are pretty open about the fact that they call back a ton and then only offer a few.

At my lower T-14, they CBed around 2/3, then only offered 1/3 of that 2/3 or so...

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:21 pm

Completely forgot Fordham was preselect. That would explain the high CB/Offer ratio.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:03 pm

No something is definitely off with some of those numbers. DPW for sure, as I had a CB with them and did not get an offer - and was at their CB reception with around 10 other Fordham students, only 2 of whom (maybe 3 max) got offers. As was already said, typically not super selective at the callback stage so they'll bring in a fair amount of people, but only ~1/3 or so translate to offers

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:08 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Completely forgot Fordham was preselect. That would explain the high CB/Offer ratio.


If this helps anyone put the data in better context, this is not entirely accurate - Fordham is 60% preselect, the rest is student lottery. The CPC actually breaks down the number of callbacks, accepted callbacks, and offers for each firm in terms of how many were preselect and how many were lottery so students can assess which firms are worthwhile as high bids for potential lottery spots. A lot of firms strictly call back preselects, and some don't have much difference between the 2 columns. Hard to make a general statement about your odds as a lottery vs. a preselect because it varies so much between firms

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:33 pm

Anonymous User wrote:No something is definitely off with some of those numbers. DPW for sure, as I had a CB with them and did not get an offer - and was at their CB reception with around 10 other Fordham students, only 2 of whom (maybe 3 max) got offers. As was already said, typically not super selective at the callback stage so they'll bring in a fair amount of people, but only ~1/3 or so translate to offers


Yeah DPW is off - I'm the anon who posted the data, that one used the wrong column. It's 13 CBs - 3 Offers (Making it 23%). I'll check the other high ones, but I think that was an isolated error

ETA: Went through the list and pretty sure it's the only time that happened.

And Re: Dechert - their data is correct. 9 accepted CBs and 7 got offers. But they only seem to make offers/CBs to the cream of the crop who are out of their league anyway, evidenced by the fact that only 1 person accepted the offer, and more than half of the people offered CBs (20 CB offers) didn't take them.

User avatar
Perseus_I
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Perseus_I » Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:10 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:No something is definitely off with some of those numbers. DPW for sure, as I had a CB with them and did not get an offer - and was at their CB reception with around 10 other Fordham students, only 2 of whom (maybe 3 max) got offers. As was already said, typically not super selective at the callback stage so they'll bring in a fair amount of people, but only ~1/3 or so translate to offers


Yeah DPW is off - I'm the anon who posted the data, that one used the wrong column. It's 13 CBs - 3 Offers (Making it 23%). I'll check the other high ones, but I think that was an isolated error

ETA: Went through the list and pretty sure it's the only time that happened.

And Re: Dechert - their data is correct. 9 accepted CBs and 7 got offers. But they only seem to make offers/CBs to the cream of the crop who are out of their league anyway, evidenced by the fact that only 1 person accepted the offer, and more than half of the people offered CBs (20 CB offers) didn't take them.


Wait, how could Dechert be out of anyone's league at Fordham? Columbia, maybe. Doesn't Fordham require at least top 20% to be even considered by the crap NLJ 250 firms? Dechert is not Cravath, but it's definitely up there.

If anyone says differently, I am going to start kicking myself for taking a full ride to UT over a (probable, if they give them) full ride to Fordham since NYC is the only place I want to work.
Last edited by Perseus_I on Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:12 pm

Perseus_I wrote:
Wait, how could Dechert be out of anyone's league at Fordham? Columbia, maybe. Doesn't Fordham require at least top 20% to be even considered by the crap NLJ 250 firms? Dechert is not Cravath, but it's definitely up there.

If anyone says differently, I am going to start kicking myself for taking a full ride to UT over a full ride to Fordham since NYC is the only place I want to work.

Weirdest /humblebrag I've seen in a while

User avatar
Perseus_I
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Perseus_I » Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Perseus_I wrote:
Wait, how could Dechert be out of anyone's league at Fordham? Columbia, maybe. Doesn't Fordham require at least top 20% to be even considered by the crap NLJ 250 firms? Dechert is not Cravath, but it's definitely up there.

If anyone says differently, I am going to start kicking myself for taking a full ride to UT over a full ride to Fordham since NYC is the only place I want to work.

Weirdest /humblebrag I've seen in a while


Not really. I am actually seriously disappointed at the moment and do not consider myself a star by any means. Basically a terrible interviewer with ok grades. After being hammered nonstop about ties at 15 NYC interviews, I really do regret going to UT and would even have considered schools like Cardozo or Brooklyn (debt free - I do not believe in education debt) were I to do this process over again.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:18 pm

Perseus_I wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Perseus_I wrote:
Wait, how could Dechert be out of anyone's league at Fordham? Columbia, maybe. Doesn't Fordham require at least top 20% to be even considered by the crap NLJ 250 firms? Dechert is not Cravath, but it's definitely up there.

If anyone says differently, I am going to start kicking myself for taking a full ride to UT over a full ride to Fordham since NYC is the only place I want to work.

Weirdest /humblebrag I've seen in a while


Not really. I am actually seriously disappointed at the moment and do not consider myself a star by any means. Basically a terrible interviewer with ok grades. After being hammered nonstop about ties at 15 NYC interviews, I really do regret going to UT and would even have considered schools like Cardozo or Brooklyn (debt free - I do not believe in education debt) were I to do this process over again.

Grades?

User avatar
Perseus_I
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Perseus_I » Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:20 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Perseus_I wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Perseus_I wrote:
Wait, how could Dechert be out of anyone's league at Fordham? Columbia, maybe. Doesn't Fordham require at least top 20% to be even considered by the crap NLJ 250 firms? Dechert is not Cravath, but it's definitely up there.

If anyone says differently, I am going to start kicking myself for taking a full ride to UT over a full ride to Fordham since NYC is the only place I want to work.

Weirdest /humblebrag I've seen in a while


Not really. I am actually seriously disappointed at the moment and do not consider myself a star by any means. Basically a terrible interviewer with ok grades. After being hammered nonstop about ties at 15 NYC interviews, I really do regret going to UT and would even have considered schools like Cardozo or Brooklyn (debt free - I do not believe in education debt) were I to do this process over again.

Grades?


Top 25-15% + Law Review? I am not sure exactly since we don't rank.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273409
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Callback-to-Offer Ratio Resources

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:26 pm

Perseus_I wrote:
Top 25-15% + Law Review? I am not sure exactly since we don't rank.


With those grades you probably would have gotten better NY big law at fordham than from UT. But at least now you have a shot at Texas big law. There's a reason people tell you go to schools where you want to practice ...




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.