Top Law Schools

.

SF is out--it's the right call not to use bids on that. LA will be hard with your stats--your best shot at getting "teh 160k" is in NYC, so I would go more like 75-25 on your split, with the 25% in LA targeted at less prestigious firms.

Sounds like you basically have the right idea though, so good luck.

Didn't you apply ed to gw?

I wouldn't assume ending up in the top 1/3.

This is only an issue because he's specifying the LA market, right? If it were NYC or biglaw in general, shouldn't above median still be sufficient at MVP? Or has the market been hit that badly?

Frankie55 wrote:This is only an issue because he's specifying the LA market, right? If it were NYC or biglaw in general, shouldn't above median still be sufficient at MVP? Or has the market been hit that badly?

Median or even slightly below gives you biglaw chances from mvp

Rule11 wrote:SF is out--it's the right call not to use bids on that. LA will be hard with your stats--your best shot at getting "teh 160k" is in NYC, so I would go more like 75-25 on your split, with the 25% in LA targeted at less prestigious firms.

Sounds like you basically have the right idea though, so good luck.

This sounds like good advice.

I wouldn't waste bids on SF.

cornellbeez wrote:

Rule11 wrote:SF is out--it's the right call not to use bids on that. LA will be hard with your stats--your best shot at getting "teh 160k" is in NYC, so I would go more like 75-25 on your split, with the 25% in LA targeted at less prestigious firms.

Sounds like you basically have the right idea though, so good luck.

This sounds like good advice.

I wouldn't waste bids on SF.

lol, OP hasn't even applied to law school it.

cornellbeez wrote:

Rule11 wrote:SF is out--it's the right call not to use bids on that. LA will be hard with your stats--your best shot at getting "teh 160k" is in NYC, so I would go more like 75-25 on your split, with the 25% in LA targeted at less prestigious firms.

Sounds like you basically have the right idea though, so good luck.

This sounds like good advice.

I wouldn't waste bids on SF.

is this because both cal and sls are right there?

paulinaporizkova wrote:

cornellbeez wrote:

Rule11 wrote:SF is out--it's the right call not to use bids on that. LA will be hard with your stats--your best shot at getting "teh 160k" is in NYC, so I would go more like 75-25 on your split, with the 25% in LA targeted at less prestigious firms.

Sounds like you basically have the right idea though, so good luck.

This sounds like good advice.

I wouldn't waste bids on SF.

is this because both cal and sls are right there?

No, SF biglaw is almost non-existent ITE. Therefore, SF offices can afford to be super selective. Top 1/3 probably isn't good enough for SF biglaw from non-HYS T-14s, including Boalt. Grades >>> T-14 school outside of HYS. I know people from MVP with SF biglaw, but they were all within the top quarter.

cornellbeez wrote:

paulinaporizkova wrote:

cornellbeez wrote:

Rule11 wrote:SF is out--it's the right call not to use bids on that. LA will be hard with your stats--your best shot at getting "teh 160k" is in NYC, so I would go more like 75-25 on your split, with the 25% in LA targeted at less prestigious firms.

Sounds like you basically have the right idea though, so good luck.

This sounds like good advice.

I wouldn't waste bids on SF.

is this because both cal and sls are right there?

No, SF biglaw is almost non-existent ITE. SF offices can afford to be super selective. Top 1/3 probably isn't good enough for SF biglaw from non-HYS T-14s, including Boalt. I know people from MVP with SF biglaw, but they were all within the top quarter.

Not like I got a job yet, but I did get 3 callbacks in the Bay Area based on good-not-great grades at Duke. So I wouldn't say quite to the point of "almost non-existent." But VERY hard.

prezidentv8 wrote:

cornellbeez wrote:
No, SF biglaw is almost non-existent ITE. SF offices can afford to be super selective. Top 1/3 probably isn't good enough for SF biglaw from non-HYS T-14s, including Boalt. I know people from MVP with SF biglaw, but they were all within the top quarter.

Not like I got a job yet, but I did get 3 callbacks in the Bay Area based on good-not-great grades at Duke. So I wouldn't say quite to the point of "almost non-existent." But VERY hard.

edit: NVM read your profile. Firms frequently call back 4-5X+ people than they give offers to, especially if there's a super small class size, like in SF.

cornellbeez wrote:

prezidentv8 wrote:

cornellbeez wrote:
No, SF biglaw is almost non-existent ITE. SF offices can afford to be super selective. Top 1/3 probably isn't good enough for SF biglaw from non-HYS T-14s, including Boalt. I know people from MVP with SF biglaw, but they were all within the top quarter.

Not like I got a job yet, but I did get 3 callbacks in the Bay Area based on good-not-great grades at Duke. So I wouldn't say quite to the point of "almost non-existent." But VERY hard.

Are you IP? Or URM or something? Callbacks don't really mean anything. I got way more callbacks than I did offers.

Very average white dude with a social sciences background. I'm just saying, you can get in the door and make your case.

prezidentv8 wrote:

cornellbeez wrote:

prezidentv8 wrote:

cornellbeez wrote:
No, SF biglaw is almost non-existent ITE. SF offices can afford to be super selective. Top 1/3 probably isn't good enough for SF biglaw from non-HYS T-14s, including Boalt. I know people from MVP with SF biglaw, but they were all within the top quarter.

Not like I got a job yet, but I did get 3 callbacks in the Bay Area based on good-not-great grades at Duke. So I wouldn't say quite to the point of "almost non-existent." But VERY hard.

Are you IP? Or URM or something? Callbacks don't really mean anything. I got way more callbacks than I did offers.

Very average white dude with a social sciences background. I'm just saying, you can get in the door and make your case.

I guess, although keep in mind that at the callback-offer stage, most likely none of the hiring committee will meet you, and grades still matter. At the initial interview stage, it's possible to interview well, hit it off with an associate or a partner who is not on the hiring committee, get called back, but not really stand a decent shot at landing an offer due to other factors (resume, grades, lack of diversity etc.). The non-IP people I know who got offers were at least in the top quarter.

cornellbeez wrote:

prezidentv8 wrote:
Very average white dude with a social sciences background. I'm just saying, you can get in the door and make your case.

I guess, although keep in mind that at the callback-offer stage, most likely none of the hiring committee will meet you, and grades still matter. At the initial interview stage, it's possible to interview well, hit it off with an associate or a partner who is not on the hiring committee, get called back, but not really stand a decent shot at landing an offer due to other factors (resume, grades, lack of diversity etc.). The non-IP people I know who got offers were at least in the top quarter.

Interesting. Most of what I've seen and heard has indicated that the grade cutoffs were applied prior to the callback stage. Sounds like we've had some different experiences with this.

prezidentv8 wrote:

cornellbeez wrote:

prezidentv8 wrote:
Very average white dude with a social sciences background. I'm just saying, you can get in the door and make your case.

I guess, although keep in mind that at the callback-offer stage, most likely none of the hiring committee will meet you, and grades still matter. At the initial interview stage, it's possible to interview well, hit it off with an associate or a partner who is not on the hiring committee, get called back, but not really stand a decent shot at landing an offer due to other factors (resume, grades, lack of diversity etc.). The non-IP people I know who got offers were at least in the top quarter.

Interesting. Most of what I've seen and heard has indicated that the grade cutoffs were applied prior to the callback stage. Sounds like we've had some different experiences with this.

Only some firms have hard cut-offs, and the hiring committee doesn't have the time to review every application at the initial stage. This is why solo interviewers, especially partners, have some leeway in calling back people they get along with during the interview. (It varies by firm, but I received same-day phone calls for callbacks from interviewers immediately after they finished interviewing for the day.) Plus, I think firms are willing to expend a lot of money on callbacks, so it's not a big deal to give leeway to interviewers. Almost every firm I talked to conducted multiple callback interviews simultaneously, everyday, all day, for 1.5-2 months. I think a much more thorough analysis is completed by the hiring committee, which I never met, during the callback stage. Of course, we will never know for sure what happens unless we're on the hiring committee, but this is what I gathered.

Applying a grade cut off AFTER a call back sounds like a 400 dollars waste of air fare and hotel.

Desert Fox wrote:Applying a grade cut off AFTER a call back sounds like a 400 dollars waste of air fare and hotel.

Again, it depends on the firm. Also, one possibility is that there is a somewhat "soft" grade cut off for callbacks, where a really good interviewer could elude rejection, and a more stringent standard for offers imposed by the hiring committee in the context of an applicant's resume, diversity, etc.

Another explanation is that firms have a hard cutoff for callbacks, and at the offer stage,they compare you with other applicants, and your GPA is comparatively lower. SF has tiny classes, so they would only offer a few people with the highest GPA in this situation. This sounds like a reasonable explanation.

Firms spend 30k+ on each summer associate. They are probably willing to spend a comparatively minuscule 400 on each callback in order to get their pick of the crop for offers. Each summer associate costs as much as 75 callbacks worth 400 each. And if you are from a local school, callbacks cost what, 5 bucks?

cornellbeez wrote:one possibility is that there is a somewhat "soft" grade cut off for callbacks, where a really good interviewer could elude rejection

I will say this much: the above does not describe me in any way.

Though I do get your actual point.

Desert Fox wrote:Applying a grade cut off AFTER a call back sounds like a 400 dollars waste of air fare and hotel.

I have never known a firm to be judicious in its use of $400.