Leak your school's OCI data here Forum

[miamiman]

so 65% got SAs but only 40% are within the V100. what are the other 25% then?

...there are big firms outside the V100.

just NLJ 250 type?

[thesealocust]

oops

[Anonymous User]

Vividly recall having an interview with Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, a firm in NYC that pays market. I tried to check its vault rank. Turns out it isn't V100.

Very interesting firm, though. They have the market cornered on work that the big NYC firms are conflicted out of. One example is the Lehman bankruptcy, for which I believe they've been doing the work Weil is conflicted out of.

[Hitachi]

The assumption was that the number is trivial, not that it's 0...

And my reply was designed to contest this - among the small and unrepresentative group of people I know well enough to know exactly how they got their jobs, I'd say about 25% got BigLaw outside of OCI, and that was all at Vault firms. Of course, there are also decent-sized non-Vault firms at OCI, like Kasowitz, Cahill and Kaye Scholer.

[Anonymous User]

As for Duke, I heard it was between 30-40% for OCI purposes. Keep in mind other schools have not released non-OCI information. Columbia only released OCI information (67% got offers AT OCI). Same with the others. It does not make sense to compare "total" info to only OCI info from other schools.

[Anonymous User]

Of course, there are also decent-sized non-Vault firms at OCI, like Kasowitz, Cahill and Kaye Scholer.

uhhh... both Cahill and Kaye Scholer are in the Vault 100. And I believe Kasowitz did do Michigan OCI.

I'd say about 25% got BigLaw outside of OCI

So you're saying you know 93 people who got biglaw outside of OCI? 25% of 360+15 or so transfers comes out to 93. That's the size of one whole 1L section...

I hope you won't get mad at me if I don't believe you. And if you come right back and say you're just extrapolating, then you'll have been committing the same bullshit speculation that you accused me of.

[of Benito Cereno]

.,.,.,

[underdawg]

lol anon is dumb

[Anonymous User]

I misread.

So she says 25% of a group that is unrepresentative got biglaw jobs outside of OCI... THAT'S supposed to be a response to the claim that the number of people who got biglaw jobs outside of OCI is trivial?

My goodness.

You guys are even dumber for jumping on that bandwagon.

[BradyToMoss]

Seriously, if you feel the need to delve into petty arguments and derail a good thread, remove the anonymous cloak.

[Hitachi]

And I believe Kasowitz did do Michigan OCI.

Precisely! My point was that there were large non-Vault firms that DID do OCI, hence countering the effect of Vault jobs outside of OCI (for trying to divine the number of OCI jobs from the raw Duke data). And my sample is by no means proof of any particular % of jobs, but it's certainly evidence of non-triviality. Moreover, speculative extrapolation requires well-founded assumptions, rather than merely ones which can't be disproven. I'm not seeing that level of support for the assumption of a near-dichotomy between Vault jobs at OCI and non-Vault outside of OCI - whether that means that Duke actually had more or fewer jobs through OCI than TrampsLikeU$r estimated, I don't know. The problem is not really any single assumption, but the fact that there are so many layers of questionable assumptions in an attempt to compare entirely dissimilar data.

Apparently I need to brush up on my V 6X firms though.

[Anonymous User]

I'm too drunk to understand your argument, but I'll assume you're right.

[awesomepossum]

And I believe Kasowitz did do Michigan OCI.

Precisely! My point was that there were large non-Vault firms that DID do OCI, hence countering the effect of Vault jobs outside of OCI (for trying to divine the number of OCI jobs from the raw Duke data). And my sample is by no means proof of any particular % of jobs, but it's certainly evidence of non-triviality. Moreover, speculative extrapolation requires well-founded assumptions, rather than merely ones which can't be disproven. I'm not seeing that level of support for the assumption of a near-dichotomy between Vault jobs at OCI and non-Vault outside of OCI - whether that means that Duke actually had more or fewer jobs through OCI than TrampsLikeU$r estimated, I don't know. The problem is not really any single assumption, but the fact that there are so many layers of questionable assumptions in an attempt to compare entirely dissimilar data.

Apparently I need to brush up on my V 6X firms though.

Holy crap. What does that even mean. I think it's time for me to go out and drink.

[d34d9823]

And I believe Kasowitz did do Michigan OCI.

Precisely! My point was that there were large non-Vault firms that DID do OCI, hence countering the effect of Vault jobs outside of OCI (for trying to divine the number of OCI jobs from the raw Duke data). And my sample is by no means proof of any particular % of jobs, but it's certainly evidence of non-triviality. Moreover, speculative extrapolation requires well-founded assumptions, rather than merely ones which can't be disproven. I'm not seeing that level of support for the assumption of a near-dichotomy between Vault jobs at OCI and non-Vault outside of OCI - whether that means that Duke actually had more or fewer jobs through OCI than TrampsLikeU$r estimated, I don't know. The problem is not really any single assumption, but the fact that there are so many layers of questionable assumptions in an attempt to compare entirely dissimilar data.

Apparently I need to brush up on my V 6X firms though.

You officially win the internet...or lose it, I'm not sure, really.

[Anonymous User]

And I believe Kasowitz did do Michigan OCI.

Precisely! My point was that there were large non-Vault firms that DID do OCI, hence countering the effect of Vault jobs outside of OCI (for trying to divine the number of OCI jobs from the raw Duke data). And my sample is by no means proof of any particular % of jobs, but it's certainly evidence of non-triviality. Moreover, speculative extrapolation requires well-founded assumptions, rather than merely ones which can't be disproven. I'm not seeing that level of support for the assumption of a near-dichotomy between Vault jobs at OCI and non-Vault outside of OCI - whether that means that Duke actually had more or fewer jobs through OCI than TrampsLikeU$r estimated, I don't know. The problem is not really any single assumption, but the fact that there are so many layers of questionable assumptions in an attempt to compare entirely dissimilar data.

Apparently I need to brush up on my V 6X firms though.

Holy crap. What does that even mean. I think it's time for me to go out and drink.

Three steps ahead of you, friend.

JE SUIS NAPOLEON!!

[AngryAvocado]

And I believe Kasowitz did do Michigan OCI.

Precisely! My point was that there were large non-Vault firms that DID do OCI, hence countering the effect of Vault jobs outside of OCI (for trying to divine the number of OCI jobs from the raw Duke data). And my sample is by no means proof of any particular % of jobs, but it's certainly evidence of non-triviality. Moreover, speculative extrapolation requires well-founded assumptions, rather than merely ones which can't be disproven. I'm not seeing that level of support for the assumption of a near-dichotomy between Vault jobs at OCI and non-Vault outside of OCI - whether that means that Duke actually had more or fewer jobs through OCI than TrampsLikeU$r estimated, I don't know. The problem is not really any single assumption, but the fact that there are so many layers of questionable assumptions in an attempt to compare entirely dissimilar data.

Apparently I need to brush up on my V 6X firms though.

--ImageRemoved--

[Anonymous User]

As for Duke, I heard it was between 30-40% for OCI purposes. Keep in mind other schools have not released non-OCI information. Columbia only released OCI information (67% got offers AT OCI). Same with the others. It does not make sense to compare "total" info to only OCI info from other schools.

To subdivide this based Based on Duke's recently reported class of 2011 summer employment career information, 22 SA positions are with V10.

9 = Simpson
4 = Cleary
4 = Covington
2 = Skadden
2 = Kirkland
1= Sullivan

[rayiner]

Duke's OCS data seems pretty legit considering they give detailed breakdowns and historically Duke has given complete employment data (along with Vandy). If that's the case, that makes the idea of 30% offers through OCI at Michigan even more suspect.

[thesealocust]

edited / never mind

[Anonymous User]

Duke's data was emailed to students, it's not public (yet).

[thesealocust]

edited / never mind

[Anonymous User]

So make it public. There's no way in hell Duke sends out that information thinking it will actually remain private.

[Anonymous User]

So make it public. There's no way in hell Duke sends out that information thinking it will actually remain private.

It has every student's name and where they are working, think that should probably remain private. I might try to redact the names and see if I can post it this weekend though.

[RVP11]

So make it public. There's no way in hell Duke sends out that information thinking it will actually remain private.

It has every student's name and where they are working, think that should probably remain private. I might try to redact the names and see if I can post it this weekend though.

Couldn't you just post the % of people at different levels of firms?

[thatsnotmyname]

The percentage of people at different level of firms has already been posted:

According to Duke career services handout, about 62-65% of the class got SA gigs.

V10: 10-11%, V20: 17-18%, V50: 29-31%, V100: 37-39%.

Note that the estimates are because there seemed to be at least a handful people who didn't report, but I'm not sure how big the 2L class is because of the addition of transfers.

No info on which offers came from OCI, but I would imagine most of the V100 as well as about 10% more that are market-rate firms from places that usually come to OCI. So probably somewhere in the range of 45%.

Average starting salary for the firm jobs= $135k (estimated- I looked them up on NALP and other sites, and guessed 50k for the firms that had no information).