Columbia EIP 2015

(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.
User avatar
papercut
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:48 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby papercut » Wed Jun 17, 2015 1:11 am

Anonymous User wrote:Also: should one's URM status influence their bidding strategy? Does it have a measurable effect on interview/callback/offer chances? Don't mean to fan the flames of debate on this subject, but I genuinely don't know and the answer might influence my bidding strategy.


Have you tried asking someone in your affinity group? I bet they'd know a helluva lot about this.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 1:35 am

Anonymous User wrote:Thoughts? Is this too aggressive? GPA = 3.63.

First number = position; second number = last failed bid.

1. NY Shearman & Sterling 2
2. SV Cooley 4
3. NY Debevoise 6
4. NY White & Case 7
5. NY Weil 8
6. NY Jones Day 9
7. NY Willkie Farr 14
8. LA Paul Hastings 13
9. NY S&C 14
10. NY Paul Weiss 14
11. NY Cleary 17
12. NY Cadwalader 17
13. LA Skadden 18
14. NY Davis Polk 19
15. NY Fried Frank 19
16. LA Sheppard Mullin 21
17. SV Wilson Sonsini 22
18. NY Cravath 26
19. LA Sidley 27
20. LA Proskauer 28
21. LA Kirkland 29
22. LA Latham *
23. NY Simpson Thacher 30
24. LA Gibson Dunn *
25. LA O'Melveny 29
26. NY Wachtell 28
27. LA Akin Gump *
28. LA Manatt 29
29. SV Fenwick N/A
30. LA Irell *

Thanks!

- Original Toaster.

Bumping for comments. Thanks in advance to anyone who shares their thoughts. :)

- Original Toaster

TheoO
Posts: 537
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 1:28 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby TheoO » Wed Jun 17, 2015 1:37 am

papercut wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Also: should one's URM status influence their bidding strategy? Does it have a measurable effect on interview/callback/offer chances? Don't mean to fan the flames of debate on this subject, but I genuinely don't know and the answer might influence my bidding strategy.


Have you tried asking someone in your affinity group? I bet they'd know a helluva lot about this.


I think previous SEOs might get a bit of a boost from what I've heard. but I don't know to what extent.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 1:48 am

Anonymous User wrote:3.62 Revised bidlist from before. No city means NY. Bold are firms of high interest:

1. Boies
2. Paul Hastings
3. Gibson Dunn
4. Debevoise
5. White & Case
6. Weil
7. Arnold & Porter
8. Jenner & Block
9. Paul Weiss
10. Sullivan & Cromwell
11. Ropes & Gray
12. Cleary
13. Akin Gump
14. Skadden (LA)
15. Davis Polk
16. Covington (NY)
17. Akin Gump (DC)
18. Cravath
19. Sidley Austin (LA)
20. Kirkland & Ellis (SF)
21. Kirkland & Ellis (LA)
22. Proskauer Rose (LA)
23. O'Melveny & [deleted] (LA)
24. Simpson Thacher
25. Weil (Redwood)
26. MoFo (SanFran)
27. Akin Gump (LA)
28. K&L Gates (LA)
29. Cleary (DC)
30. Latham (LA)

Outside looking in:
Sheppard Mullin (LA)
Wilson Sonsini (Palo Alto)
Perkins Coie (SF)
Arent Fox
Williams and Connolly (DC)
Sullivan & Cromwell (LA)
Ropes & Gray (Palo Alto)
Munger Tolles (LA)
Gibson Dunn (LA) - can only interview for one office and they only made 4 LA offers last year.

Can I mail for Gibson in LA even if I bid NY at EIP? Should I just go for the Cali office anyway?

Also I plan to mail Quinn Emanuel (LA & NY)

As someone who is also targeting non-NY markets (and with basically the same GPA as you), I feel like it would be wise to focus your bidding more. You're targeting NY, DC, LA, SF, and SV. Even with a 3.6+, that seems kind of gutsy. For one, it seems like you don't know where you want to live. That might come across during EIP, unless you a master bullshitter.

Of course, I'm in the same boat as all the other rising 2Ls, so take this with a grain of salt, and 3Ls feel free to correct me.

- Original Toaster

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 3:13 am

I have bid #29 and #30 left over, and was wondering what my best strategy was. Options that I am considering are:

1. Bid NYC firms that did not have failed bids (would probably be safeties).
2. Bid firms I already have listed, but in other offices (like London) that did not have failed bids.
3. Bid firms that I will not get (like Proskauer, which had FFB at #1), just to be able to e-mail them and say that my bid was unsuccessful but I would still love to schedule an interview if possible (how successful is this anyway?).


Wondering the same thing. Anyone?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 7:56 am

3.62 Revised bidlist from before. No city means NY. Bold are firms of high interest:

1. Boies
2. Paul Hastings
3. Gibson Dunn
4. Debevoise
5. White & Case
6. Weil
7. Arnold & Porter
8. Jenner & Block
9. Paul Weiss
10. Sullivan & Cromwell
11. Ropes & Gray
12. Cleary
13. Akin Gump
14. Skadden (LA)
15. Davis Polk
16. Covington (NY)
17. Akin Gump (DC)
18. Cravath
19. Sidley Austin (LA)
20. Kirkland & Ellis (SF)
21. Kirkland & Ellis (LA)
22. Proskauer Rose (LA)
23. O'Melveny & [deleted] (LA)
24. Simpson Thacher
25. Weil (Redwood)
26. MoFo (SanFran)
27. Akin Gump (LA)
28. K&L Gates (LA)
29. Cleary (DC)
30. Latham (LA)

Outside looking in:
Sheppard Mullin (LA)
Wilson Sonsini (Palo Alto)
Perkins Coie (SF)
Arent Fox
Williams and Connolly (DC)
Sullivan & Cromwell (LA)
Ropes & Gray (Palo Alto)
Munger Tolles (LA)
Gibson Dunn (LA) - can only interview for one office and they only made 4 LA offers last year.

Can I mail for Gibson in LA even if I bid NY at EIP? Should I just go for the Cali office anyway?

Also I plan to mail Quinn Emanuel (LA & NY)

As someone who is also targeting non-NY markets (and with basically the same GPA as you), I feel like it would be wise to focus your bidding more. You're targeting NY, DC, LA, SF, and SV. Even with a 3.6+, that seems kind of gutsy. For one, it seems like you don't know where you want to live. That might come across during EIP, unless you a master bullshitter.

Of course, I'm in the same boat as all the other rising 2Ls, so take this with a grain of salt, and 3Ls feel free to correct me.

- Original Toaster



As far as I know, firms have no idea if you bid multiple markets unless you tell them. I am only concerned with Akin, Cleary, and Kirkland. For Akin and Cleary I can say I am just really interested in the firm and that's why I am bidding multiple locations, because I would happily work for them in whatever city. But I also wonder if this is convincing because I have heard that most firms make offers by office independently of one another, and therefore Akin LA might be concerned that I am bidding Akin NY and maybe I am not really interested in Akin LA. Can anyone shed light on this?

Kirkland also might be a problem, since I am bidding both CA locations but not NYC, I cant' give them the same story. So I might have to choose my market in CA.

Also, is it really a thing to consider SV and SF separate markets?

PS - I don't really care about DC per se, but Akin has a practice group there I am specifically interested in, and Cleary is just a firm I am very interested in so I wouldn't mind the chance to interview twice.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9651
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby jbagelboy » Wed Jun 17, 2015 10:30 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Thoughts? Is this too aggressive? GPA = 3.63.

First number = position; second number = last failed bid.

1. NY Shearman & Sterling 2
2. SV Cooley 4
3. NY Debevoise 6
4. NY White & Case 7
5. NY Weil 8
6. NY Jones Day 9
7. NY Willkie Farr 14
8. LA Paul Hastings 13
9. NY S&C 14
10. NY Paul Weiss 14
11. NY Cleary 17
12. NY Cadwalader 17
13. LA Skadden 18
14. NY Davis Polk 19
15. NY Fried Frank 19
16. LA Sheppard Mullin 21
17. SV Wilson Sonsini 22
18. NY Cravath 26
19. LA Sidley 27
20. LA Proskauer 28
21. LA Kirkland 29
22. LA Latham *
23. NY Simpson Thacher 30
24. LA Gibson Dunn *
25. LA O'Melveny 29
26. NY Wachtell 28
27. LA Akin Gump *
28. LA Manatt 29
29. SV Fenwick N/A
30. LA Irell *

Thanks!

- Original Toaster.

Bumping for comments. Thanks in advance to anyone who shares their thoughts. :)

- Original Toaster


what practice areas are you interested in? and would you rather end up in LA or NY? this looks like a good list, and I'd say you're good to go grade wise for every firm except WLRK and maybe Irell, but if what you really want is e.g. new york litigation, you should have gibson, kirkland, skadden ny. So think about coast/practice preference in your selection of NY vs. LA office.

also, a PSA generally regarding the conversation above: assume ignorance on the part of the firms of your motives/actions at your own peril. If you're bidding multiple offices of the same firm, they will know. If you interview with or mass mail multiple offices of the same firm outside of EIP, they will know. If a firm wants to investigate the strength of your ties or commitment to their market, they can find out. A lot of EIP screeners are conducted by important partners. Important partners know each other and talk, especially amongst peer firms in the same city. I know it might feel like you have or should have some confidentiality protection or privilege as a student/interviewee, but this game isn't played that way; anything you do or say is fair game for that interviewer to tell anyone else. I'm not saying don't tell stories to craft your narrative, but be smart about it.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 12:07 pm

Low stone, 2 years relevant WE, shooting for transactional. All firms NY. Will also have pre-EIP callbacks at Freshfields and Weil, FWIW.

Thoughts?

1) Kirkland
2) Skadden
3) Shearman
4) Gibson
5) Debevoise
6) White & Case
7) Jones Day
8 ) Arnold & Porter
9) Milbank
10) S&C
11) Paul Weiss
12) Ropes
13) Schulte
14) Cleary
15) DPW
16) Cahill
17) Cadwalader
18) Covington (NY)
19) Latham
20) Fried Frank
21) K&L Gates
22) O'Melveny
23) Cravath
24) Boies Corp
25) Dechert
26) Wachtell
27) Simpson

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:05 pm

At low stone, you're probably below the hard cutoff for SullCrom. I think Wachtell is also likely a waste of a bid, but could be wrong.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:21 pm

Jason Taverner wrote:i was going to put this in another post and i should really stop posting in this thread because there are better people to give you all advice, but the idea of "reach" firms is misleading in many ways

some firms are grade selective—they care a lot about your grades and don't really have exceptions to that rule. you need high grades to get a CB/offer. (S&C is a good example)

some firms are fit selective—the MTO explanation above was very good. MTO is obviously also grade selective, but having good grades isn't enough to get an offer there. Some firms aren't particularly grade selective but are very fit selective. You have to be a good interviewer for those firms.

building on that i think bid selective is way of thinking about some firms even if they're not doing any selecting—you need to bid them high to secure an interview there. it's a form of opportunity cost, i guess. as you'd expect, firms that are less grade selective are the ones you have to bid higher

so, by "bid selective firms" i mean the firms that take up the valuable top portion of your bidlist. hard for me to say which firms you should swap out—that's totally on you. Mayer Brown seemed like an odd inclusion to me. Same with Clifford Chance. I'd try to get some of the larger, less grade selective firms in some how


Alright I revised/am revising my list based on this feedback. Not sure if I should dump Debevoise to give me a better shot at Hogan (DC), WilmerHale (NY), Weil (NY), and Sidley (DC). Not attached to it, but they have a big class and are NY, and since I'm splitting with DC, I want to maximize my NY bids/offer potential.

3.66 GPA (A, A, A-, A-, A-, B+, B+), regulatory litigation focused, would prefer DC over NY.

1. Kirkland and Ellis (NY) (2)
2. Gibson Dunn (NY) (4)
3. Skadden (NY) (4)
4. Debevoise (NY) (6)
5. Hogan Lovells (DC) (6)
6. WilmerHale (NY) (8)
7. Weil (NY) (8)
8. Sidley Austin (DC) (9)
9. Jenner and Block (NY) (12)
10. Paul Weiss (NY) (14)
11. Cahill (NY) (16)
12. Davis Polk (NY) (19)
13. Akin Gump (NY) (17)
14. Arnold and Porter (DC) (21)
15. Williams and Connolly (DC) (21)
16. Covington and Burling (NY) (20)
17. Covington and Burling (DC) (25)
18. Akin Gump (DC) (25)
19. Crowell and Moring (DC) (25)
20. Cravath (NY) (26)
21. Jones Day (DC) (28)
22. Wachtell (NY) (28)
23. Paul Weiss (DC) (*)
24. Winston and Strawn (DC) (*)
25. Kirkland and Ellis (DC) (30)
26. WilmerHale (DC) (*)
27. Bracewell and Giuliani (NY) (30)
28. Simpson Tacher (NY) (30)
29. Hunton and Williams (NY + DC) (*)
30. O'Melveny and [deleted] (DC) (*)

In addition to this list I will be mass mailing Quinn Emmanuel- NY and DC, Cahill- DC, Jenner and Block- DC, Boeis Schiller- NY and DC, Gibson-DC, and Skadden-DC.

-Crutcher

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Low stone, 2 years relevant WE, shooting for transactional. All firms NY. Will also have pre-EIP callbacks at Freshfields and Weil, FWIW.

Thoughts?

1) Kirkland
2) Skadden
3) Shearman
4) Gibson
5) Debevoise
6) White & Case
7) Jones Day
8 ) Arnold & Porter
9) Milbank
10) S&C
11) Paul Weiss
12) Ropes
13) Schulte
14) Cleary
15) DPW
16) Cahill
17) Cadwalader
18) Covington (NY)
19) Latham
20) Fried Frank
21) K&L Gates
22) O'Melveny
23) Cravath
24) Boies Corp
25) Dechert
26) Wachtell
27) Simpson

Anonymous User wrote:At low stone, you're probably below the hard cutoff for SullCrom. I think Wachtell is also likely a waste of a bid, but could be wrong.


Agreed- but since Wachtell is so low of a bid it can't really hurt. I do think this is a bit aggressive for low stone, and would recommend using your remaining 3 spots to add more firms that are less grade selective and have large classes. There was an earlier post about what firms people with median grades should apply for, and I would pull firms from there to complete your list, to act as safeties.

User avatar
smaug
Posts: 12659
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby smaug » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:38 pm

for the low stone poster, i think you also want to look at the first failed bid report/bidding data. shearman at 3 seems optimistic to me.

@Crutcher

I think it makes some sense, but you should keep in mind that DC is a tough market. You're in a pretty good place, but I don't know whether WLRK makes sense, whether WilmerHale or KE DC make sense (KE DC is very difficult to get, right?) I don't have my thumb on DC things, but I expect that some of these DC offices are hard for Columbia students to land, period. Look into how many offers were offered to people in those offices. Maybe try to network with students who are in DC now.

Like, some of them are massmail so I don't think it matters, but GDC DC has to be very hard to get, right? I'd view many of those DC offices as closer to lit boutiques in terms of how difficult they are to land. You have a number of good NY firms there (KE, Skadden, Weil, PW, Cahill, DPW, Cravath) I just want to make sure you're really hitting the firms that give out a number of offers just in case.

I also think that Deb is a great firm, so maybe I'm biased here, but I'd be reluctant to cut them. Don't know about their strength in your desired practice area. I think it would also depend on whether it matters more to you to be in DC or to be at (arguably, whatever) a better firm. (i.e., if it were me, I'd cut Hogan Lovells over Deb, but I get that you really want to be in DC)

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Jason Taverner wrote:
@Crutcher

I think it makes some sense, but you should keep in mind that DC is a tough market. You're in a pretty good place, but I don't know whether WLRK makes sense, whether WilmerHale or KE DC make sense (KE DC is very difficult to get, right?) I don't have my thumb on DC things, but I expect that some of these DC offices are hard for Columbia students to land, period. Look into how many offers were offered to people in those offices. Maybe try to network with students who are in DC now.

Like, some of them are massmail so I don't think it matters, but GDC DC has to be very hard to get, right? I'd view many of those DC offices as closer to lit boutiques in terms of how difficult they are to land. You have a number of good NY firms there (KE, Skadden, Weil, PW, Cahill, DPW, Cravath) I just want to make sure you're really hitting the firms that give out a number of offers just in case.

I also think that Deb is a great firm, so maybe I'm biased here, but I'd be reluctant to cut them. Don't know about their strength in your desired practice area. I think it would also depend on whether it matters more to you to be in DC or to be at (arguably, whatever) a better firm. (i.e., if it were me, I'd cut Hogan Lovells over Deb, but I get that you really want to be in DC)


I was actually thinking, soft-shopping Gibson DC to mass mail will most likely make them completely unavailable, whereas if you bid them at EIP at least you're going to get into the room.

I think all of the anons DC firms except Williams & Connolly are reasonable prospects from a 3.6+, although of course Wilmer, Gibson, KE, Arnold & Porter, Covington will be very competitive and no one should anticipate a callback. But people get offers to these places every year.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:48 pm

Jason Taverner wrote:
@Crutcher

I think it makes some sense, but you should keep in mind that DC is a tough market. You're in a pretty good place, but I don't know whether WLRK makes sense, whether WilmerHale or KE DC make sense (KE DC is very difficult to get, right?) I don't have my thumb on DC things, but I expect that some of these DC offices are hard for Columbia students to land, period. Look into how many offers were offered to people in those offices. Maybe try to network with students who are in DC now.

Like, some of them are massmail so I don't think it matters, but GDC DC has to be very hard to get, right? I'd view many of those DC offices as closer to lit boutiques in terms of how difficult they are to land. You have a number of good NY firms there (KE, Skadden, Weil, PW, Cahill, DPW, Cravath) I just want to make sure you're really hitting the firms that give out a number of offers just in case.

I also think that Deb is a great firm, so maybe I'm biased here, but I'd be reluctant to cut them. Don't know about their strength in your desired practice area. I think it would also depend on whether it matters more to you to be in DC or to be at (arguably, whatever) a better firm. (i.e., if it were me, I'd cut Hogan Lovells over Deb, but I get that you really want to be in DC)


Totally valid points. For the massmails, I really can't lose notwithstanding the slim chances. For the DC bids like KE, WH, C&B, etc., they're all relatively low bids, they're all my preferred choices, and I really don't know what else I would replace them with in NY that I would be happy in- same thing with WLRK. You're probably right that I should dump Hogan-DC to better increase my chances at NY firms in bids 7-10 and keep Deb who gives out a lot of offers in NY. I'm having a really hard time of finding the proper balance between playing it risk-averse and bidding mainly NY and giving up my dream of DC, and bidding DC at the expense of NY market security. I just know that for most NY firms that focus on financial and corporate matters, even in litigation, I would not be happy there.

Anonymous User wrote:I was actually thinking, soft-shopping Gibson DC to mass mail will most likely make them completely unavailable, whereas if you bid them at EIP at least you're going to get into the room.

I think all of the anons DC firms except Williams & Connolly are reasonable prospects from a 3.6+, although of course Wilmer, Gibson, KE, Arnold & Porter, Covington will be very competitive and no one should anticipate a callback. But people get offers to these places every year.


I would love to bid Gibson-DC, but they don't allow multiple interviews, and Gibson-NY gives out 5x more offers and is the safer choice (I think?)

-Crutcher

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15515
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Tiago Splitter » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:53 pm

I think that low Stone bidlist is fine if you're actually going to land interviews at all those places. Might make sense to cut S&C and either replace it with a less grade conscious firm or just move everyone up a spot to ensure interviews at those less selective firms in the teens. If you can find other less selective firms with big classes that will be landable in the 20's you might want to take out Wachtell, etc. but I don't know if those firms exist.

@Original Toaster--I missed two firms in my top five because I decided to put Cooley's West Coast interview at the top. The interviewer each of the last two years was from their small satellite in Seattle and I'm not all that sure he called anyone back. Others can correct me if I'm wrong on this or if they are doing things differently this year. I know Cooley is all the rage right now, but that's a tough part of the list to be risking wasted bids.
Last edited by Tiago Splitter on Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 2:57 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I was actually thinking, soft-shopping Gibson DC to mass mail will most likely make them completely unavailable, whereas if you bid them at EIP at least you're going to get into the room.

I think all of the anons DC firms except Williams & Connolly are reasonable prospects from a 3.6+, although of course Wilmer, Gibson, KE, Arnold & Porter, Covington will be very competitive and no one should anticipate a callback. But people get offers to these places every year.


I would love to bid Gibson-DC, but they don't allow multiple interviews, and Gibson-NY gives out 5x more offers and is the safer choice (I think?)

-Crutcher


Eh, yea, but you have plenty of NY firms that do as good/better work in New York than Gibson on your list for litigation (Paul Weiss, Davis Polk, Cravath, Debevoise, Simpson, Skadden). So I'd swap it to DC, if you really want DC. It doesn't make sense to me to have a DC-focused strategy but forgo one of the top players there for their New York office. Maybe I'm not as conservative as some others but realistically, you should get an offer from one of the firms I listed with a 3.66 barring some interview flops. And of course you can always pick up extra NY interviews at EIP. But this can be argued either way and it's not a huge deal.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 4:30 pm

Low stone poster from above here. Thanks all for the comments. Re: S&C, is there a really hard GPA cutoff that is above Stone? I realize that may be hard to answer (absent inside knowledge of their recruiting approach). What about Cravath?

Thanks!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 4:34 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Low stone poster from above here. Thanks all for the comments. Re: S&C, is there a really hard GPA cutoff that is above Stone? I realize that may be hard to answer (absent inside knowledge of their recruiting approach). What about Cravath?

Thanks!


people say around 3.6, but of course they don't release a "hard" cutoff. Cravath will take from "low" stone. Cravath has also dipped to non-honors a couple times whereas S&C never does. However, once you meet the grade requirement, firms like Cravath and Davis Polk will be tougher nuts to crack at the CB stage than S&C.

User avatar
smaug
Posts: 12659
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby smaug » Wed Jun 17, 2015 4:35 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Low stone poster from above here. Thanks all for the comments. Re: S&C, is there a really hard GPA cutoff that is above Stone? I realize that may be hard to answer (absent inside knowledge of their recruiting approach). What about Cravath?

Thanks!


Hard to know how hard any of the lines are, but yes, there are a handful of firms that are generally seen as expecting grades that are above Stone. S&C likes high GPAs. Cravath does as well, but I'd guess the GPA line is a bit fuzzier, but they probably prefer students who are above Stone. I'd throw Boies in that bucket as well.

MTO and Irell are higher. Wachtell is higher still. That's just my impression and I could be wrong/people can share anecdotes indicating otherwise.

Stone is fine for most firms. This list above isn't exclusive, it's just what came to my mind right away.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15515
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Tiago Splitter » Wed Jun 17, 2015 4:40 pm

Cravath is less of a problem for low Stone because it's only at 23 on the bid list. Not much to lose down there. S&C is more of a cut target because it needs to be bid much higher.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 6:45 pm

papercut wrote:Have you tried asking someone in your affinity group? I bet they'd know a helluva lot about this.


I haven't. I don't belong to any student organizations related to my affinity group, and don't know many incoming 3Ls or recent grads who share my race. I'll probably reach out to some acquaintances though just because this is an important question for me. So excluding my question, do you have any comments or suggestions regarding my potential bid list? Any firms you think I should add/drop?

User avatar
Elston Gunn
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Elston Gunn » Wed Jun 17, 2015 6:51 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Totally valid points. For the massmails, I really can't lose notwithstanding the slim chances. For the DC bids like KE, WH, C&B, etc., they're all relatively low bids, they're all my preferred choices, and I really don't know what else I would replace them with in NY that I would be happy in- same thing with WLRK. You're probably right that I should dump Hogan-DC to better increase my chances at NY firms in bids 7-10 and keep Deb who gives out a lot of offers in NY. I'm having a really hard time of finding the proper balance between playing it risk-averse and bidding mainly NY and giving up my dream of DC, and bidding DC at the expense of NY market security. I just know that for most NY firms that focus on financial and corporate matters, even in litigation, I would not be happy there.

-Crutcher

I'm really sorry to be an interloper, since I didn't go to CLS and thus don't know anything about EIP strategy. But if you really want to be in DC, and have the grades to get in the door but not to make anything a lock, I think it'd be a pretty big mistake not to get an interview with Hogan. There are so few big classes in D.C. that you need to get pretty much all of the ones you meet the minimum qualifications for. Obviously you need to balance that with making sure you get a job anywhere, and I don't know how conservative someone in your position needs to be. Hopefully someone from CLS who tried for DC can confirm or deny that advice.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 7:24 pm

I was as low Stone as you could be, and I got an offer from S&C without any special softs. YMMV, of course, but I question the notion of any "hard" cutoff above the Stone line.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15515
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Tiago Splitter » Wed Jun 17, 2015 7:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
papercut wrote:Have you tried asking someone in your affinity group? I bet they'd know a helluva lot about this.


I haven't. I don't belong to any student organizations related to my affinity group, and don't know many incoming 3Ls or recent grads who share my race. I'll probably reach out to some acquaintances though just because this is an important question for me. So excluding my question, do you have any comments or suggestions regarding my potential bid list? Any firms you think I should add/drop?

I'd probably take out Debevoise and Cleary to ensure you get as many interviews as possible.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273479
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jun 17, 2015 10:54 pm

Updated bidlist:

3.73 (A, A, A-, A-, A-, A-, B+)
WE (paralegal) at V5 firm
NY, corporate preference

1 Kirkland 2
2 Shearman & Sterling 2
3 Skadden 4
4 Gibson Dunn 4
5 Debevoise 6
6 White & Case 7
7 Weil 8
8 Milbank 11
9 S&C 14
10 Paul Weiss 14
11 Ropes & Gray 14
12 Willkie 14
13 Schulte 15
14 Cahill Gordon 16
15 Cleary 17
16 Davis Polk 19
17 Freshfields 19
18 Latham 20
19 Covington 20
20 K&L Gates 21
21 Goodwin Proctor 21
22 Chadbourne 22
23 Cravath 26
24 Dechert 26
25 Wachtell 28
26 Simpson Thatcher 30
27 Sidley (LA) 27
28 Proskauer (LA) 28
29 Kirkland (LA) 29
30 O'Melveny (LA) 29

I know there is a congestion at #1-7, but I don't want to give up on any of those firms.

I am also probably risking it at #12-22 given how close I've ranked them to FFB, and was wondering if anyone had suggestions as to which firm I should cut out.

I filled out #27-30 with LA firms (ties), but do people have suggestions for these slots within NY?

Thanks!

-Fat Man Jungle




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.