M vs V vs P for corporate law Forum

[03121202698008]

It's also worth noting that your data says that Penn outplaces Yale as well...

[awesomepossum]

They're not as similar as you may think. From what I've seen, Michigan has perhaps half the placement power of Penn in New York.

As a current summer in NYC at a V15 firm, I think that's totally wrong. If you have any literature to support that it's twice as hard to get a job in NYC from Michigan as it is from Penn, I'd love to see it.

I also don't think this whole "for corporate" really makes a difference. GP firms usually do everything and they don't seem to distinguish based on what area you're looking to work in.

[como]

Really surprised by Penn winning by a landslide in the poll so far... In terms each school's placement into a regional market, my understanding is that it is precisely because Michigan has no primary market that gives it an advantage over a lot of other schools in terms of placing in many different locations. On a slightly different note, these are all 'national' schools, and in that regard regional bias should be somewhat alleviated. Also, I think that NLJ hiring stats show that of these three Michigan actually has a slight edge in terms of class percentages that typically place into corporate law (often beating schools in the T5 in this regard)- wondering if someone could confirm this though (and maybe link to stats).

As has been stated, I think these three schools are fairly similar in terms of corporate law placement, which is why it is funny that Penn wins by a landslide in the poll (USNews ranking bias maybe??). I guess it's a good reminder that popular opinion doesn't necessarily reflect reality, even given a group of people that do have some degree of general familiarity with the questions being polled.

I think a better explanation is that old data is not terribly valuable ITE. I think I heard numbers for Michigan offers last year in the Cornell range (~40%). Given Penn's proximity to two substantial biglaw markets, the trend toward regionalism (yes, even for top 10 schools) gives Penn an edge.

The only truly national schools ITE are the top 3. As you move down the rankings, regionalism becomes increasingly stronger.

[03121202698008]

Really surprised by Penn winning by a landslide in the poll so far... In terms each school's placement into a regional market, my understanding is that it is precisely because Michigan has no primary market that gives it an advantage over a lot of other schools in terms of placing in many different locations. On a slightly different note, these are all 'national' schools, and in that regard regional bias should be somewhat alleviated. Also, I think that NLJ hiring stats show that of these three Michigan actually has a slight edge in terms of class percentages that typically place into corporate law (often beating schools in the T5 in this regard)- wondering if someone could confirm this though (and maybe link to stats).

As has been stated, I think these three schools are fairly similar in terms of corporate law placement, which is why it is funny that Penn wins by a landslide in the poll (USNews ranking bias maybe??). I guess it's a good reminder that popular opinion doesn't necessarily reflect reality, even given a group of people that do have some degree of general familiarity with the questions being polled.

I think a better explanation is that old data is not terribly valuable ITE. I think I heard numbers for Michigan offers last year in the Cornell range (~40%). Given Penn's proximity to two substantial biglaw markets, the trend toward regionalism (yes, even for top 10 schools) gives Penn an edge.

The only truly national schools ITE are the top 3. As you move down the rankings, regionalism becomes increasingly stronger.

Blatant Cornell is as good as Michigan trolling...

[awesomepossum]

Really surprised by Penn winning by a landslide in the poll so far... In terms each school's placement into a regional market, my understanding is that it is precisely because Michigan has no primary market that gives it an advantage over a lot of other schools in terms of placing in many different locations. On a slightly different note, these are all 'national' schools, and in that regard regional bias should be somewhat alleviated. Also, I think that NLJ hiring stats show that of these three Michigan actually has a slight edge in terms of class percentages that typically place into corporate law (often beating schools in the T5 in this regard)- wondering if someone could confirm this though (and maybe link to stats).

As has been stated, I think these three schools are fairly similar in terms of corporate law placement, which is why it is funny that Penn wins by a landslide in the poll (USNews ranking bias maybe??). I guess it's a good reminder that popular opinion doesn't necessarily reflect reality, even given a group of people that do have some degree of general familiarity with the questions being polled.

I think a better explanation is that old data is not terribly valuable ITE. I think I heard numbers for Michigan offers last year in the Cornell range (~40%). Given Penn's proximity to two substantial biglaw markets, the trend toward regionalism (yes, even for top 10 schools) gives Penn an edge.

The only truly national schools ITE are the top 3. As you move down the rankings, regionalism becomes increasingly stronger.

I don't know how you'd know Michigan's numbers for this year. I have a guess as to what it is, but I don't think it's published anywhere.

[03121202698008]

Quaker...if you get a chance through this into your spreadsheet. http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/factsa ... stats.aspx For 2009, 20% of all M grads went to public service and another 2% to clerkships. Try narrowing your class sizes at all of those schools to the percentage of students looking for firm jobs all together.

Edit: Link fail.

This is still inaccurate as it's 2L placement and not everyone ended up at the same place but it's a start. It will also fix your HYS placement problems where your data shows state schools beating them...

[holydonkey]

Looking at placement at V8 firms in NYC based on class size as anything other than placement at V8 firms in NYC based on class size is not looking "facts", but making poorly informed guesses.

Happy to admit that from the limited sample, it does look like DVP placed slightly better at V8 firms in NYC based on class size. That hardly says anything about M vs V vs P for corporate law as a whole, but graphs are fun, so there's that. Gold star!

[Reedie]

It's also worth noting that your data says that Penn outplaces Yale as well...

Ummm, no it doesn't. Yale handily outplaces Penn in NYC in his data.

I think the bigger issue with the data is self-selection into biglaw itself rather than regional self-selection.

[03121202698008]

It's also worth noting that your data says that Penn outplaces Yale as well...

Ummm, no it doesn't. Yale handily outplaces Penn in NYC in his data.

I think the bigger issue with the data is self-selection into biglaw itself rather than regional self-selection.

Look at the percent of students working in NYC. I didn't dig into his forumla but his data is flawed right there.

[quakeroats]

It's also worth noting that your data says that Penn outplaces Yale as well...

Ummm, no it doesn't. Yale handily outplaces Penn in NYC in his data.

I think the bigger issue with the data is self-selection into biglaw itself rather than regional self-selection.

If there's any school that is impervious to all attempts at valid comparison, it's Yale.

My favorite stat this year is SCOTUS placements by class size:

Yale: 4%
Harvard and Duke 1-1.5%ish
Everyone else: < 1%

[Reedie]

Look at the percent of students working in NYC. I didn't dig into his forumla but his data is flawed right there.

The point of the data isn't to measure the percent of students working in NYC. The point is to compare the number of students working in NYC to the number of students employed in NYC offices of the most "elite" law firms.

[03121202698008]

It's also worth noting that your data says that Penn outplaces Yale as well...

Look at the percent of students working in NYC. I didn't dig into his forumla but his data is flawed right there.

The point of the data isn't to measure the percent of students working in NYC. The point is to compare the number of students working in NYC to the number of students employed in NYC offices of the most "elite" law firms.

But the conclusion he drew was that M had a quarter the placement TOTAL as P does in NYC.

[como]

Really surprised by Penn winning by a landslide in the poll so far... In terms each school's placement into a regional market, my understanding is that it is precisely because Michigan has no primary market that gives it an advantage over a lot of other schools in terms of placing in many different locations. On a slightly different note, these are all 'national' schools, and in that regard regional bias should be somewhat alleviated. Also, I think that NLJ hiring stats show that of these three Michigan actually has a slight edge in terms of class percentages that typically place into corporate law (often beating schools in the T5 in this regard)- wondering if someone could confirm this though (and maybe link to stats).

As has been stated, I think these three schools are fairly similar in terms of corporate law placement, which is why it is funny that Penn wins by a landslide in the poll (USNews ranking bias maybe??). I guess it's a good reminder that popular opinion doesn't necessarily reflect reality, even given a group of people that do have some degree of general familiarity with the questions being polled.

I think a better explanation is that old data is not terribly valuable ITE. I think I heard numbers for Michigan offers last year in the Cornell range (~40%). Given Penn's proximity to two substantial biglaw markets, the trend toward regionalism (yes, even for top 10 schools) gives Penn an edge.

The only truly national schools ITE are the top 3. As you move down the rankings, regionalism becomes increasingly stronger.

I don't know how you'd know Michigan's numbers for this year. I have a guess as to what it is, but I don't think it's published anywhere.

I'm talking about 2011 SA gigs. That information, like Cornell's (although to a lesser extent, thanks to the awesome guy who leaked our data to ATL), has circulated this forum.

[DelDad]

Like awesomepossum said, this discussion and all the stats cited are all about firm placement in general, rather than in corporate law specifically.

My comment before regarding Penn's excellence in getting its grads into Chancery clerkships is aimed more at those who want a career specifically in corporate litigation (and to a lesser extent, corporate transactional work) at one of the top NYC firms. But that's just an edge, and the other schools being discussed may have different ones.

If you do very well in law school, you'll be in great shape no matter which of these schools you are going to. Conversely, if you don't do quite so well, you won't be at a V8 firm no matter which of the schools you go to. But, you will still probably be able to get a great job in a great NYC firm, if that's what you are after. If you do poorly, New York still offers you a better chance of employment than many other citis simply based on the number of jobs there.

[quakeroats]

Really surprised by Penn winning by a landslide in the poll so far... In terms each school's placement into a regional market, my understanding is that it is precisely because Michigan has no primary market that gives it an advantage over a lot of other schools in terms of placing in many different locations. On a slightly different note, these are all 'national' schools, and in that regard regional bias should be somewhat alleviated. Also, I think that NLJ hiring stats show that of these three Michigan actually has a slight edge in terms of class percentages that typically place into corporate law (often beating schools in the T5 in this regard)- wondering if someone could confirm this though (and maybe link to stats).

As has been stated, I think these three schools are fairly similar in terms of corporate law placement, which is why it is funny that Penn wins by a landslide in the poll (USNews ranking bias maybe??). I guess it's a good reminder that popular opinion doesn't necessarily reflect reality, even given a group of people that do have some degree of general familiarity with the questions being polled.

I think a better explanation is that old data is not terribly valuable ITE. I think I heard numbers for Michigan offers last year in the Cornell range (~40%). Given Penn's proximity to two substantial biglaw markets, the trend toward regionalism (yes, even for top 10 schools) gives Penn an edge.

The only truly national schools ITE are the top 3. As you move down the rankings, regionalism becomes increasingly stronger.

I don't know how you'd know Michigan's numbers for this year. I have a guess as to what it is, but I don't think it's published anywhere.

I'm talking about 2011 SA gigs. That information, like Cornell's (although to a lesser extent, thanks to the awesome guy who leaked our data to ATL), has circulated this forum.

Duke and Chicago (and Vandy) release their data, so leaking isn't really required.

[270910]

Sigh. So I keep trying to quit TLS, and I keep failing miserably. Most of this is in response to Quaker's charts. I'm a data person, and I appreciate the effort. To the extent I am critical it is largely in the spirit of elucidation rather than altercation (I'm a fan of the phrase 'throwing off light, not heat). It's also largely a result of having access to more, broader, and more relevant data - the hiring trends and required credentials out of law OCI rather than just the end results of where associates work.

The biggest problem in your data is the function of the NYC legal market. It's actually the EASIEST to break into from the T14. By an enormous margin. Anybody with ~median grades at any T14 school would be a fool not to bid hard on NYC law firms.

At schools like, oh hell I don't know, let's say Columbia, a lot of students seem to want to work in NYC for some reason. Hell if I know why. As a result, the top of their class trickles into prestigious NYC firms - in huge numbers.

At schools like Virginia, Michigan, and Berkeley the TOP of the class (broadly speaking here - top third maybe?) tend to be the ones who have the opportunity to elect to go to some extremely prestigious law firms that aren't in NYC. Even if many do take their ticket and punch it at the V5 (or V5 less Wachtell) you see much broader dispersion amongst those with options. As a result, you see the 'elite' student disproportionately choosing their 'elite' opportunities. Clerkships, corporate firms, firms in home markets, elite small law firms that can't be aggregated into this data (I'm looking at you, tiny DC appellate law firms and IP boutiques).

But most importantly, NYC is often seen as a valid location to fall back to if aspirations to a truly desired legal market look more difficult. NYC class sizes are so huge up and down the vault rankings, and NYC firms so happy to dig deeply from top schools instead of recruiting more widely, that you see a lot of the 'middle third' of T14 classes flocking to new york city big law. Where the top students PREFER NYC, the data become distorted.

As a result, the top of the class at the Columbias and Penns of the world will likely line up at WLRK/Crav/DPW/Skadden/STB/S&C/etc's door, resume in hand, future at their feet, entirely satisfied with their decision. They'll do it more often than the top of the class at the Michigans and Virginias of the world, but it will be distorted by the extent to which the V/M kids wanted to head elsewhere. And don't discount the extent to which this is a two-way street: firm hiring choices depend as much as their sense for desire from the student body as from ELITE PRESTIGNESS of the schools.
More data-fails:

1) The data looks at total associates at firms. As a result, there's an unaccountable "time spent at firm" bias. It wouldn't surprise me that Penn students, for example, are more dedicated to corporate law practice than Virginia students. As in, it might be plan A and long term plan for more penn students, which would inflate the #s currently working there.

2) Firms are NOTORIOUSLY picky with respect to schools, but it's idiosyncratic. Georgetown feeds to Williams & Connolly. Put that in your T13 pipe and smoke it. WLRK recruits at Penn but not at M or V. I doubt this is due to mustache twirling on their part.

3) School size. This, like most things in life, isn't as black and white as people make it out to be. Smaller schools do better at some elite firms - but they also tend to attract a combination of fewer employers and/or employers with lower expectations for # of students they will obtain. Bigger schools enjoy larger recruitment programs and cast students out more broadly, especially around median. The result is you can't just look at the number of students at elite firms, divide my class size, crack a beer, and call it a day. This shit is complex beyond the most broad generalizations.

4) Sample choice. The V8 are almost a good approximation of something, but only almost. And even before you leave Manhattan you're already being under inclusive - firms like Patterson Belknap, Boeis Schiller, Quinn Emanual, and a host of other firms with extremely prestigious NYC practices that are quite selective about who they hire are not included. My point isn't that you need to start over or that those are fatal flaws, just that the more instances where the conclusions attempted to be drawn from available data are based only on small and overt portions of total data, the more warped your outcomes are going to be.

As a disclaimer, Duke is clearly an extraordinarily prestigious and well regarded law school. It places well at W&C, for example. But to narrow in on the real question, a student starting at MVP with a desire to practice corporate law will not see a significant enough difference after accounting for 1L grades and desired practice for the employment power differences between MVP to be relevant. Taking classes at Penn with Wharton kids, closer location, profs from Delaware, whatever - are all fine reasons to go there if you are interested in NYC corporate law. For those reasons, I voted for Penn in the poll myself.

The only truly valid data point here is simple: What firms interview at what school and what credentials are required to get those jobs. I actually HAVE seen those pieces of data - or what fragments of them can be tracked down reasonably - from a smattering of schools ranging from George Washington up through Columbia. My two biggest take-aways are that 1) firm hiring is quite idiosyncratic and 2) all T14 schools place very well at large law firms. You would be astounded at the frequency with which top students from any T14 get offers from lots of these firms - meaning that all you really see is preference, corrected slightly for the fact that it's certain based on the number of offers that the V5 will dip proportionally deeper in extending offers at Columbia than, say, Cornell.

[FlightoftheEarls]

My favorite stat this year is SCOTUS placements by class size:

Yale: 4%
Harvard and Duke 1-1.5%ish
Everyone else: < 1%

First of all, it is rather silly to tout such an extremely rare hiring occurrence as an argument favoring your school. That disclaimer aside, do you really want to play this game based on one year where your school actually managed to get SCOTUS clerks? I think a ten year trend is a much more reliable metric for how well your school places, and you and I both know that's a game you probably shouldn't play.

[SuichiKurama]

I'm shocked at what Disco says in his/her post---mostly because it's right but when this type of thing is posted on here people usually start snapping and throwing out poorly thought out ad hominem comments to whoever posts it.

One of the most understated facets of firm hiring that Disco hits on (that most people on TLS completely gloss over) is that some firms simply have their own individual preferences within the top 14--this is particularly true at uber elite firms like Wachtell, Williams and Connolly, Munger, etc. For example, I honestly rather be top 5 percent at GULC and aiming for W&C than at NYU with a similar rank. But I'd much rather be top 10 percent at Penn if I was aiming for Wachtell than even top 5 percent at Berkeley.

If by corporate law the OP means transactional work (which seems to be what most of TLS means when they say "corporate law") then Penn is the best choice of the 3. While MVP are equivalent when it comes to nationwide overall corporate law placement (ie not just transactional but business lit etc.) Penn's niche is NYC (which is the home of transactional corporate law). On top of that the elite NYC transactional firms have the sort of idiosyncratic preference for Penn that was mentioned earlier (look at how Penn does at Wachtell and Cravath compared to UVA and Michigan). Overall though you will see that each school has their strengths (look at how UVA does at Williams and Connolly, or Michigan at Kirkland Chicago and Bartlitt Beck compared to the other two).

Finally, having seen firm hiring charts (which are relatively the best way of comparing placement power) for 2 of the 3 schools, there the same.

[Reedie]

The only truly valid data point here is simple: What firms interview at what school and what credentials are required to get those jobs. I actually HAVE seen those pieces of data - or what fragments of them can be tracked down reasonably - from a smattering of schools ranging from George Washington up through Columbia. My two biggest take-aways are that 1) firm hiring is quite idiosyncratic and 2) all T14 schools place very well at large law firms. You would be astounded at the frequency with which top students from any T14 get offers from lots of these firms - meaning that all you really see is preference, corrected slightly for the fact that it's certain based on the number of offers that the V5 will dip proportionally deeper in extending offers at Columbia than, say, Cornell.

I agree completely. I think the OP should be making their choice primarily on factors besides which one of these 3 peer institutions posters here perceive to be "better."

With that said, I actually do think quakeroats' data here is pretty interesting. I think it would clearly be improved by analyzing more firms and more markets. Even then it might not be as good as the data that you say you have seen bits of pieces of, but it would have the advantage of using verifiable publicly available information. I find it very doubtful that such data would create what the OP is really looking for, however, which is a definitive ordinal ranking of three very comparable institutions.

[RVP11]

Penn might have a slight placement edge from the numbers I've seen (a V10 firm dipping down to calling back people in the top ~25% at P rather than only top ~20% for M or V) but I think that's balanced by the fact that NYC screening interviews are going to be much easier to get at M or V because of the lower levels of student interest in NYC firms.

Most Law Review folks at Virginia, at least, are not dreaming of the WLRKs, Cravaths, and S&Cs of NYC but of DC firms like W&C, Covington, Hogan, and A&P. And I'm sure the top students at Michigan are looking to spread all over the place. For these reasons I might actually prefer to be at Michigan/Virginia when trying to get NYC.

Decide among MVP using other factors, please.

edited to add: this 0L-brained theory that the T14s are being "regionalized" by ITE is baseless

[needdigitsnow]

Here at penn, most of my 3L friends fared rather well for corporate law

[edcrane]

In trying to get a sense of how well one school places students relative to others, I’ve read a lot of data others have compiled. Brian Leiter has his rankings, U.S. News puts out some statistics as do the ABA, the NLJ, etc. I think Professor Leiter comes closest to tracking down which schools have the strongest ability to place graduates with his, “The Top 15 Schools From Which the Most "Prestigious" Law Firms Hire New Lawyers.” I wanted to take this a bit further, so I added and removed a few things. First, since positions at the New York offices of New York firms at the top of the Vault rankings are widely regarded as the most difficult to obtain (there are notable exceptions, i.e., Munger, which I’m going to exclude for lack of time), I excluded all firms not based in New York. I took the rest of what amounts to the Vault 8 and totaled up all associates working at each firm; I excluded Berkeley and Georgetown for lack of time. I then came up with the total number of graduates sent to firms in New York from law school websites and promotional materials. I then compared the total number of graduates working in Vault 8 firms for each school with the total number of graduates each school sent to New York and came up with a ratio of one to the other with higher numbers showing a strong ability to place well than lower numbers.

The results were surprising:

Bizarre methodology. I appreciate that self selection makes raw division by class size a strange way to rank, but this idea of dividing by total number of associates in NY is equally suspect. The choice of firms is also quite odd, though I guess that's an artifact of Leiter's original methodology.

[hithere]

I gotta go with Penn here. Proximity and ties to the Delaware Court of Chancery are priceless for corporate law.

[oscarthegrouch]

Really surprised by Penn winning by a landslide in the poll so far... In terms each school's placement into a regional market, my understanding is that it is precisely because Michigan has no primary market that gives it an advantage over a lot of other schools in terms of placing in many different locations. On a slightly different note, these are all 'national' schools, and in that regard regional bias should be somewhat alleviated. Also, I think that NLJ hiring stats show that of these three Michigan actually has a slight edge in terms of class percentages that typically place into corporate law (often beating schools in the T5 in this regard)- wondering if someone could confirm this though (and maybe link to stats).

As has been stated, I think these three schools are fairly similar in terms of corporate law placement, which is why it is funny that Penn wins by a landslide in the poll (USNews ranking bias maybe??). I guess it's a good reminder that popular opinion doesn't necessarily reflect reality, even given a group of people that do have some degree of general familiarity with the questions being polled.

I think a better explanation is that old data is not terribly valuable ITE. I think I heard numbers for Michigan offers last year in the Cornell range (~40%). Given Penn's proximity to two substantial biglaw markets, the trend toward regionalism (yes, even for top 10 schools) gives Penn an edge.

The only truly national schools ITE are the top 3. As you move down the rankings, regionalism becomes increasingly stronger.

Based on xoxo posts, Penn has around half the number of biglaw offices going to its OCI compared to M and V...Penn has a smaller class, but not that much smaller. I go to one of M or V, and we have a lot of NYC offices going to OCI. The cut-off is probably going to be around the same for these schools (aka lower than CCN's). Also, Philly biglaw is dead, so I don't know why you consider that a "fall back." And I agree with the previous poster. People on LR with good grades at my school dream of going to DC, not v10s in NYC.

I also find it amusing how we are comparing data from the most selective, almost impossible to get firms. You guys won't have the grades to get Cravath or K&E, from any school, so don't worry.

[como]

Really surprised by Penn winning by a landslide in the poll so far... In terms each school's placement into a regional market, my understanding is that it is precisely because Michigan has no primary market that gives it an advantage over a lot of other schools in terms of placing in many different locations. On a slightly different note, these are all 'national' schools, and in that regard regional bias should be somewhat alleviated. Also, I think that NLJ hiring stats show that of these three Michigan actually has a slight edge in terms of class percentages that typically place into corporate law (often beating schools in the T5 in this regard)- wondering if someone could confirm this though (and maybe link to stats).

As has been stated, I think these three schools are fairly similar in terms of corporate law placement, which is why it is funny that Penn wins by a landslide in the poll (USNews ranking bias maybe??). I guess it's a good reminder that popular opinion doesn't necessarily reflect reality, even given a group of people that do have some degree of general familiarity with the questions being polled.

I think a better explanation is that old data is not terribly valuable ITE. I think I heard numbers for Michigan offers last year in the Cornell range (~40%). Given Penn's proximity to two substantial biglaw markets, the trend toward regionalism (yes, even for top 10 schools) gives Penn an edge.

The only truly national schools ITE are the top 3. As you move down the rankings, regionalism becomes increasingly stronger.

Based on xoxo posts, Penn has around half the number of biglaw offices going to its OCI compared to M and V...Penn has a smaller class, but not that much smaller.

Interesting. I think the more important statistic to know is the total number of class sizes for the offices attending each OCI.

For instance:

150 offices x 13 average class sizes = 1950 spots
75 offices x 30 average class sizes = 2250 spots

I don't have a dog in this fight though. It very well could be the case that M and/or V place better than Penn. I am not arguing that firms go deeper into Penn's class. Instead, I am saying that Penn might have a regional edge on M/V because Penn is in the northeast and has slightly better representation in NYC/Philly/Boston. M and V's respective regional markets are smaller and quite competitive.

I know someone implied that I have a 0L understanding of regionalism being important ITE. I stand by my conclusion; however, I will add that this only really comes into play at the median and below. Top 10-25% at M/V/P has parity. As one goes deeper in the class, regionalism comes into play and Penn has an advantage at that point.