Columbia EIP 2014 Forum

[Anonymous User]

It's just so gloriously clueless. It reads like someone who read chambers and made a list of firms that are Band 1 in certain practice areas.

How would you differentiate the corporate work of that "group" of firms, personally?

Are there notably different practice strengths or will it mostly come down to your fit with the firm at that level?

[Anonymous User]

My bad. Lets keep it to bid list misery.

[toothbrush]

My bid list is in shambles, so I will not post it quite yet. Some 1:2:2:1 combination of large class NY, selective NY, DC longshots, and TX firms that never hit their bid maximum.

However, more pressing:
1) Fed Courts - Metzger (Alt: Corporations - Jackson)
2) Corporations - Jackson (Alt: Evidence - Capra)
3) Evidence - Capra (Alt: Advanced Con Law - Amar)
4) Advanced Con Law - Amar (Alt: Greenberg/Thomas Discrimination)
5) Copyright - Wu
6) Comparative Con Law - Greene/Krishnaswamy

I feel like corporations is a no go at #2, but a guy can dream. Goin' for ~10 credits from this list, plus 4 more for an externship.

Thoughts?

-Lester Nygaard

Is this class legendary? I only know of Prof. Amar from outside (I don't go to CLS). Am I blinded by fame or is he/that class awesome?

edit: as Op does not want to derail, someone PM me

[Anonymous User]

Nvm. There is no way to ask my question here and keep otherwise on topic. I'll make a new thread.

-Lester Nygaard

[Anonymous User]

Would really appreciate any feedback. A shade under median, K-JD, good interviewer. Thinking litigation, all offices NYC. I'm not wed to, or against, any firms, so any suggestions are super welcome.


1.Proskauer Rose
2.Kirkland & Ellis
3.Shearman & Sterling
4.Sidley
5.Alston & Bird
6.Paul Hastings
7.WilmerHale
8.Hogan Lovells
9.Kaye Scholer
10.White & Case
11.Weil Gotshal
12.Milbank
13.Cahill
14.Ropes & Gray
15.Wilkie
16.Schulte
17.MoFo
18.Jones Day
19.Akin Gump
20.K&L Gates
21.Cadwalader
22.Chadbourne
23.Hughes Hubbard
24.Dechert
25.Orrick King & Spaulding
26.Crowell & Moring
27.Cooley
28.Troutman Sanders
29.Arent Fox
30.Brown Rudnick

Thanks guys.

-Alonzo Harris

[Anonymous User]

It's just so gloriously clueless. It reads like someone who read chambers and made a list of firms that are Band 1 in certain practice areas.

How would you differentiate the corporate work of that "group" of firms, personally?

Are there notably different practice strengths or will it mostly come down to your fit with the firm at that level?

There are some practice areas (and firms) that it is better to be an associate at, and some where the partnership is equally prestigious, but being an transactional associate blows (and more to the point, you don't get the kind of training you need!) (cough cough Cahill)

I think that if you have the grades to meet S&C's cutoff, and you are interested in transactional work, it absolutely, stone-cold needs to be high enough on your list to guarantee an interview. It's arguably the best non-Wachtell transactional firm in the country! Dithering around with Kirkland and Debevoise and whatever else is simply madness. Back in my day, every serious (i.e. mid-Stone or higher) transactional candidate made sure to get their S&C offer.

If you get S&C and Cleary, or S&C and Cravath, etc., than you can start dicking around with fit and midtown v. downtown and all that other crap, but for gods sake, you want to do transactional work, you have to focus on getting an offer at a top transactional firm. And the number of really top transactional firms isn't that large - arguably, it excludes Davis Polk until they rebuild their M&A practice, though Davis Polk is still a marvellous firm - Wachtell, Cravath, Cleary, Simpson, S&C, maybe DPW and that's kind of it. Sure, you can make arguments for a practice group here or there, but that list is the limited number of places where no matter what group ultimately takes a shining to you, you're in a top-notch situation with superb training.

So anyways, that's what's so crazy about hyper-fetishizing Chambers band rankings and what not. For transactional, the game hasn't changed in a decade and is really simple. Get yourself into one of the top places, and your bidding should be designed entirely to accomplish that. If you end up at Cleary and not Davis Polk, or S&C and not Cravath, etc., that is all just a meaningless rounding error - once you have the top-tier offer, you're playing with house money and you can futz around with Chambers rankings till the cows come home.

[Anonymous User]

There are some practice areas (and firms) that it is better to be an associate at, and some where the partnership is equally prestigious, but being an transactional associate blows (and more to the point, you don't get the kind of training you need!) (cough cough Cahill)

I think that if you have the grades to meet S&C's cutoff, and you are interested in transactional work, it absolutely, stone-cold needs to be high enough on your list to guarantee an interview. It's arguably the best non-Wachtell transactional firm in the country! Dithering around with Kirkland and Debevoise and whatever else is simply madness. Back in my day, every serious (i.e. mid-Stone or higher) transactional candidate made sure to get their S&C offer.

If you get S&C and Cleary, or S&C and Cravath, etc., than you can start dicking around with fit and midtown v. downtown and all that other crap, but for gods sake, you want to do transactional work, you have to focus on getting an offer at a top transactional firm. And the number of really top transactional firms isn't that large - arguably, it excludes Davis Polk until they rebuild their M&A practice, though Davis Polk is still a marvellous firm - Wachtell, Cravath, Cleary, Simpson, S&C, maybe DPW and that's kind of it. Sure, you can make arguments for a practice group here or there, but that list is the limited number of places where no matter what group ultimately takes a shining to you, you're in a top-notch situation with superb training.

So anyways, that's what's so crazy about hyper-fetishizing Chambers band rankings and what not. For transactional, the game hasn't changed in a decade and is really simple. Get yourself into one of the top places, and your bidding should be designed entirely to accomplish that. If you end up at Cleary and not Davis Polk, or S&C and not Cravath, etc., that is all just a meaningless rounding error - once you have the top-tier offer, you're playing with house money and you can futz around with Chambers rankings till the cows come home.

As someone considering transactional, this is very helpful. Would you mind expanding on why DPW is a bit behind the rest? They're one of my top choices and I hadn't heard that their M&A practice was in need of rebuilding before. Also, is there a reason Skadden isn't on your list?

[Anonymous User]

hey, weird question (for CLS i guess), but any idea about "lifestyle" firms? i'm a kent, mostly uninterested in prestige. thinking particularly for NY litigation firms that come to EIP. by lifestyle i just mean a firm where 80 hour weeks are a rarity, if they're ever required. don't want to get into the merits of the choice, only if anyone has any tips about where to look. i've heard good things in particular about akin, milbank, wilmerhale, and goodwin. anyone thinking of bidding in this way?

-Lyra

[jbagelboy]

Damn, I count 7 Kents in this thread now. Either all high performers at CLS lurk tls or there are quite a few more kents than in past years.

Lyra: would you consider DC / CA or does it have to be NY? You are competitive for some of the best litigation/lifestyle matches out there but idk about nyc.

[Anonymous User]

bagel,

i have a preference for nyc, but most of my firm list is pretty low on the CLS radar, so i think i could afford to do 20/5/5 with the other markets near the top. what firms come to mind?

-lyra

[Anonymous User]

Alright, all grades in. 3.47, but with 3 Bs (woops).

Leaning transactional, positive remarks on my interviewing so I assume it's average, K-JD, no excuse for the low grades and they're in both semesters. If there's just a list of firms that would absolutely never take me, that's enough info—hard to tell from the offers by honors report where firms start cutting low Stone. Targeting NY, unless London is within reach/not going to stunt my career/I can't just pick slots up after bidding happens.

And if I should be extra conservative because of the weird split grades, also good to know.

- Nick Slade

[Anonymous User]

Alright, all grades in. 3.47, but with 3 Bs (woops).

Leaning transactional, positive remarks on my interviewing so I assume it's average, K-JD, no excuse for the low grades and they're in both semesters. If there's just a list of firms that would absolutely never take me, that's enough info—hard to tell from the offers by honors report where firms start cutting low Stone. Targeting NY, unless London is within reach/not going to stunt my career/I can't just pick slots up after bidding happens.

And if I should be extra conservative because of the weird split grades, also good to know.

- Nick Slade

Haha I basically have the same GPA (3.49 or so calculated on credits) with two Bs and K-JD as well. I'm not doing anything differently because of the Bs, just making the bid list based on the cumulative GPA. As much as the Bs suck, I don't think it matters at all. Leaning transactional, bidding everywhere NYC except Wachtell.

[Anonymous User]

Finished up with a 3.75. On the other hand, K-JD with what I take to be fairly poor interviewing skills. These are my early thoughts, I'm happy to hear people tell me they're dumb.

- Leaning transactional, all in NYC (wouldn't mind elsewhere, but no ties whatsoever).
- I figure Wachtell is probably a long shot in terms of getting an offer, but certainly worth a bid?
- I was sort of pleased to read the stuff about S&C earlier in the thread. Taking nothing for granted obviously, but I feel like I might be the sort of person they're willing to tolerate. So maybe bid them slightly higher to make sure I get an interview?
- I think it would be great to work overseas ... but I've never been outside the country and don't speak any languages. Bidding for these offices (or mentioning that at interviews) seems like a path to striking out?
- Like an above poster said, I'd like to hear more about "lifestyle" firms, though I realize that's not really compatible with bidding NYC.

- Ned S.

[KingFish]

It's on symplicity next to the offers by honors sheet. It's called "bidding outcomes" or something like that

I feel really dumb, because I can't find either of these two.

[MCFC]

It's on symplicity next to the offers by honors sheet. It's called "bidding outcomes" or something like that

I feel really dumb, because I can't find either of these two.

It took me a while too. Log in to Symplicity. Go to "Interview Programs". Scroll down. At the bottom of the white box should be a line with three links that says

View the Offers by Honors Report ( by Firm Name ) or view the Offers by Honors Report ( by Percentage ). View the 2013 EIP Bidding Outcomes Report

[Anonymous User]

It's on symplicity next to the offers by honors sheet. It's called "bidding outcomes" or something like that

I feel really dumb, because I can't find either of these two.

I feel like the OCI tab of the sympicity site is messed up. It keeps bringing me to profile->evaluations instead of all the information about firms and the docs.

[Anonymous User]

Alright, here is attempt number two (3.75/Kent). Thanks a lot for the advice so far. As far as priorities, I am significantly more concerned with getting the bolded firms than any other firm on the list. Also, for clarification, Cooley is LA, which is a new office (not PA, which is in higher demand). Thanks again!

1. Arnold & Porter (LA)
2. MoFo (LA)
3. Jones Day (LA)
4. Debevoise (NY)
5. Paul Hastings (LA)
6. Skadden (LA)
7. Weil (NY)
8. Paul Weiss (NY)
9. Davis Polk (NY)
10. Cleary (NY)
11. Latham (LA)
12. O’Melveny Myers (CC)
13. Sheppard Mullin (LA)
14. Gibson Dunn (LA)
15. Sheppard Mullin (CC)
16. O’Melveny Myers (LA)
17. Cravath (NY)
18. Wachtell (NY)
19. Munger (LA)
20. Irell (LA)
21. Proskauer (LA)
22. Sidley Austin (LA)
23. Manatt (LA)
24. Kirkland & Ellis (LA)
25. Cooley (LA)
26. Greenberg Traurig (LA)
27. Sullivan & Cromwell (LA)
28. White & Case (LA)
29. Akin Gump (LA)
30. Simpson Thacher (LA)

-Daario Naharis

[MCFC]

It's on symplicity next to the offers by honors sheet. It's called "bidding outcomes" or something like that

I feel really dumb, because I can't find either of these two.

I feel like the OCI tab of the sympicity site is messed up. It keeps bringing me to profile->evaluations instead of all the information about firms and the docs.

I think that's by design? Pretty sure you have to complete that evaluation before you can do something EIP related (I forget what exactly now, submit a bidlist maybe?).

[Anonymous User]

Looking for negative feedback. Fellow CLSers, please tell me anything about my list that sucks.

About me: 3.34. Lit focused. Splitting between NY and LA, although I'd much rather go to LA where I have roots. (Would throw in SF, but it seems like a dead end.)

1. Proskauer
2. Skadden
3. Arnold Porter
4. Sidley Austin
5. DLA Piper
6. O’Melveny
7. MoFo (LA)
8. White & Case
9. Orrick
10. Cadwalader
11. Covington & Burling
12. Paul Weiss
13. Akin Gump
14. Ropes Gray
15. Chadbourne Park
16. K&L Gates
17. Paul Hastings (LA)
18. Fried Frank
19. Dechert
20. Willkie Farr
21. Jones Day (LA)
22. Skadden (LA)
23. Proskauer (LA)
24. Latham (LA)
25. Kirkland & Ellis (LA)
26. O’Melveny (LA)
27. Sidley Austin (LA)
28. Weil (Employment Litigation)
29. Sheppard Mullin (LA)
30. Wilson Sonsini (LA)

- Sherlock.

[Anonymous User]

Would really appreciate any feedback. A shade under median, K-JD, good interviewer. Thinking litigation, all offices NYC. I'm not wed to, or against, any firms, so any suggestions are super welcome.


1.Proskauer Rose
2.Kirkland & Ellis
3.Shearman & Sterling
4.Sidley
5.Alston & Bird
6.Paul Hastings
7.WilmerHale
8.Hogan Lovells
9.Kaye Scholer
10.White & Case
11.Weil Gotshal
12.Milbank
13.Cahill
14.Ropes & Gray
15.Wilkie
16.Schulte
17.MoFo
18.Jones Day
19.Akin Gump
20.K&L Gates
21.Cadwalader
22.Chadbourne
23.Hughes Hubbard
24.Dechert
25.Orrick King & Spaulding
26.Crowell & Moring
27.Cooley
28.Troutman Sanders
29.Arent Fox
30.Brown Rudnick

Thanks guys.

-Alonzo Harris

Bumping because I'm basically you: K-JD focusing on lit in NYC, a bit above median, good interviewer, and very openminded. Interested in using this as a template for a bid list and what others have to say

[KingFish]

It's on symplicity next to the offers by honors sheet. It's called "bidding outcomes" or something like that

I feel really dumb, because I can't find either of these two.

I feel like the OCI tab of the sympicity site is messed up. It keeps bringing me to profile->evaluations instead of all the information about firms and the docs.

I think that's by design? Pretty sure you have to complete that evaluation before you can do something EIP related (I forget what exactly now, submit a bidlist maybe?).

Ah I see, thanks.

[Anonymous User]

When it says "no multiple interviews" does that mean you cannot interview with both NY and DC?

[Anonymous User]

When it says "no multiple interviews" does that mean you cannot interview with both NY and DC?

Yes. That means you can only interview with 1 location (or set of locations depending on the firm's distribution).

-Lester Nygaard

[Anonymous User]

When it says "no multiple interviews" does that mean you cannot interview with both NY and DC?

Yes. That means you can only interview with 1 location (or set of locations depending on the firm's distribution).

-Lester Nygaard

And you just tell them in the screener that you are also interested in another office?

[Anonymous User]

is it possible to get all 30 interviews, especially if you're bidding on a secondary market like LA? seems like LA firms (at least based on last year's data) were vastly underbid.