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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jun 21, 2015 11:48 pm

3.43 from above, I replaced Hogan Lovells at 6 yeah Fried Frank at 19 and moved everything else up 1 accordingly. Hogan gave 10 offers and Fried gave like 20. Even if Hogan is a better fit, I prefer the breathing room it gives the larger class size firms below. Not married to the change, however, because Hogan would be preferable and the Fried Frank reception was kinda sucky FWIW.

-Captain Fire

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

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby TheoO » Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:04 am

Anonymous User wrote:3.43 from above, I replaced Hogan Lovells at 6 yeah Fried Frank at 19 and moved everything else up 1 accordingly. Hogan gave 10 offers and Fried gave like 20. Even if Hogan is a better fit, I prefer the breathing room it gives the larger class size firms below. Not married to the change, however, because Hogan would be preferable and the Fried Frank reception was kinda sucky FWIW.

-Captain Fire


Where did you see that Fried gave 20 offers? I see 11, just one more than Hogan. Both gave about 20 callbacks.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 22, 2015 1:13 pm

I haven't checked again, but I may have just misremembered and conflated their bid number with how many offers they gave. Good catch! I'm not sure if it changes my calculus if I want to be safer. I would prefer Hogan Lovells to Fried Frank, esp for litigation but I am still concerned that adding them makes my list too 'tight'

-Captain Fire

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 22, 2015 10:25 pm

Right below Stone :(
Is there a huge difference between 3.39 and 3.42 just because of the Stone designation?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jun 22, 2015 10:38 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Right below Stone :(
Is there a huge difference between 3.39 and 3.42 just because of the Stone designation?


Right below Kent and would like to know as well.

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

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Tiago Splitter » Mon Jun 22, 2015 10:42 pm

No and seriously no.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 23, 2015 7:49 am

Tiago, I disagree. My year there was a big delta in outcomes between low-Stone and no-Stone. It may be irrational but it does matter.

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

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby TheoO » Tue Jun 23, 2015 7:58 am

Law firms reach for that "Stone Scholar" on the associate bio? Although I imagine that by the time associates begin at the firm, many will have snatched it at least once between 2L and graduation.

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

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby jbagelboy » Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:01 am

TheoO wrote:Law firms reach for that "Stone Scholar" on the associate bio.


Sure but it's incredibly easy to pick that up as a 2L or 3L with seminars and fluff classes. Someone who barely misses stone as a 1L could hit that exact same position in the class and roll out a 3.5. So they'll have Stone for their firm bio anyway, who cares what year it was in.

ETA: scooped by your own add on

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

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Tiago Splitter » Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:26 am

Anonymous User wrote:Tiago, I disagree. My year there was a big delta in outcomes between low-Stone and no-Stone. It may be irrational but it does matter.

Maybe it just depends on the people we know. I know some low-Stone people who just squeaked by and some people who just missed Stone who seemed to kill it. In those cases it might have been that the non-Stone people had more realistic expectations and didn't overreach.

ProfBono
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 2:59 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby ProfBono » Tue Jun 23, 2015 3:00 pm

The transcript that you hand employers indicates Stone or not Stone. For employers who do not pull out calculators (I presume most of them), this is probably a measuring point that they use.

User avatar
MCFC
Posts: 8518
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:46 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby MCFC » Tue Jun 23, 2015 7:31 pm

ProfBono wrote:The transcript that you hand employers indicates Stone or not Stone. For employers who do not pull out calculators (I presume most of them), this is probably a measuring point that they use.

Sure, but your resume does this too.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:37 pm

What's the deal with bidding multiple offices for a firm (DC + NY)? I've heard mixed things about whether it's OK or not.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:38 pm

Are any firms other than Wachtell and W&C (DC) totally unrealistic for a 3.56? Obviously Gibson DC, Covington DC, etc. are still long-shots, but are they complete wastes of bids?

User avatar
smaug
Posts: 12663
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby smaug » Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Are any firms other than Wachtell and W&C (DC) totally unrealistic for a 3.56? Obviously Gibson DC, Covington DC, etc. are still long-shots, but are they complete wastes of bids?

I wouldn't bid them; I expect younger posters might disagree about Cov.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 23, 2015 8:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Are any firms other than Wachtell and W&C (DC) totally unrealistic for a 3.56? Obviously Gibson DC, Covington DC, etc. are still long-shots, but are they complete wastes of bids?


those firms, in addition to WilmerHale, are certainly long-shots, but no, probably not a complete waste as long as your list has some safe choices. Do not fill up your bid list with DC firms, even as Stone. Have some large class NYC like Simpson, Debevoise, Cravath, Davis Polk, Kirkland, Skadden and maybe a few unselective firms as well.

I think it's also fair to say Munger Tolles and Irell Manella in CA are totally unrealistic with that GPA, but it doesn't sound like you're interested in that coast anyway

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:03 pm

Hey guys, how's this bidlist look for a 3.5-3.6. Targeting NY almost exclusively. Interested in litigation, but haven't totally ruled out corporate. All firms are NY unless designated otherwise.

1. Skadden (4)
2. Gibson Dunn (4)
3. Debevoise (6)
4. Weil Goshel (8)
5. White & Case (7)
6. JonesDay (9)
7. Milbank Tweed (11)
8. Paul Weiss (14)
9. Sullivan Cromwell (14)
10. Ropes & Gray (14)
11. Shulte (15)
12. Cahill (16)
13. Cleary (17)
14. Cadwalader (17)
15. Akin Gump (17)
16. Davis Polk (19)
17. Freshfields (19)
18. Fried Frank (19)
19. Latham (20)
20. K&L Gates (21)
21. Cooley (22)
22. Covington & Burling (25) (DC)
23. Cravath (26)
24. Wachtell (28)
25. Simpson Thacher (30)
26. Steptoe & Johnson (29) (DC)
27 .O’Melveny Meyers (29) (LA)
28. Paul Hastings (29) (SF)
29. Latham Watkins (*) (SF)
30. Morrison Foerster (*) (SF)


Jon Snow

User avatar
smaug
Posts: 12663
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby smaug » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:10 pm

i'd try to grab Boies or KE at one, move everything else down, and nix Fried Frank

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:14 pm

agreed
Last edited by Anonymous User on Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:18 pm

to Muppet -- first thought, what's the point of bidding Wilkie at 20 when its FFB is likely to go around 13-15? No way you'll hit it.

User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Monochromatic Oeuvre » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:19 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Are any firms other than Wachtell and W&C (DC) totally unrealistic for a 3.56? Obviously Gibson DC, Covington DC, etc. are still long-shots, but are they complete wastes of bids?


As has been said, Munger and Irell. And though this debate has already been had, I would call Covington DC a wasted bid there. Then there's another half-dozen that could be called long shots.

User avatar
smaug
Posts: 12663
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby smaug » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:20 pm

it's aggressive and you should move willkie to a spot where you can actually get it

not sure i have many suggestions though

try to fill up the 30 as well

Anonymous User
Posts: 273509
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:21 pm

Muppet, what's the deal with Blank that low? They're first failed bid is usually around 9.

Tela1283
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:44 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby Tela1283 » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:22 pm

:D
Last edited by Tela1283 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
smaug
Posts: 12663
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2015

Postby smaug » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:25 pm

you should bid Willkie—they give a lot of offers




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.