UChicago OCI 2014 Forum

[20141023]

.

[Crowing]

Actually entering bids on Symplicity's slow-ass system is a surprisingly time-consuming task.

And every time you change ONE you have to go back and change them all, one by one. Argh.

Wait what? When I change one it bumps all the rest accordingly.

[beepboopbeep]

lol... Also, at first I had gone through and just selected the numbers from the drop-down menu because it specifically says "THERE IS NO "Submit" BUTTON. As soon as you select a bid number in the drop down field it is submitted." However, I later noticed that for some firms it takes you to another page after selecting it and you have to click "Apply" in order to make it actually count your bid. We should probably have you design a new website for next year.

That "feature" is driving me insane right now. Why does it automatically work just sometimes?

[20141023]

.

[Anonymous User]

One last post before I send this on to the lottery gods. Transactional leaning. 178-179

1. Jones Day (Chi)
2. Kirkland (Chi)
3. Sidley (Chi)
4. Jenner (Chi)
5. Katten (Chi)
6. Mayer Brown (Chi)
7. Skadden (Chi)
8. Shearman (NYC)
9. McDermott (Chi)
10. Latham (Chi)
11. Foley (Chi)
12. DPW (NYC)
13. Cleary (NYC)
14. STB (NYC)
15. Paul Weiss (NYC)
16. Debevoise (NYC)
17. Cravath (NYC)
18. S&C (NYC)
19. Sheppard Mullin (NYC)
20. Dechert (NYC)
21. Barack (Chi)
22. Pircher (Chi)
23. Greenberg (Chi)
24. Edelson (Chi)

[Anonymous User]

Which NYC firms are much less focused on fit/personality?

[Anonymous User]

Another bid list to review! 178.5, URM, 3+ years WE, no journal. Strongly targeting transactional and Bay Area, with NY as safeties. [Interview Slots] and {2014 SA positions from NALP} in brackets

1. Goodwin Procter (SV) [6] {3}
2. Gunderson Dettmer (SV) [21] {0}
3. Gibson Dunn (SF) [12] {13}
4. Morrison and Foerster (SF) [21] {17}
5. Latham (SV) [22] {12}
6. Skadden (NY) [42] {94}
7. Weil (NY) [21] {46}
8. Paul Weiss (NY) [42] {84}
9. Fenwick (SV) [21] {19}
10. Cooley (SV) [42] {17}
11. Wilson Sonsini (SV) [40] {30}
12. Cleary (NY) [42] {79}
13. Sullivan & Cromwell (NY) [42] {122 firmwide}
14. Jones Day (SV) [21] {6}
15. Davis Polk (SV) [21] {8}
16. Simpson Thatcher (NY) [57] {102}
17. Orrick (SV) [21] {6}
18. Cravath (NY) [38] {95}
19. Shearman (NY) [21] {43}
20. Fried Frank (NY) [21] {34}

My top choices are the SV native firms (Wilson, Cooley, Fenwick, Gunderson). Should I bid them higher? Is Gunderson really not hiring any SA?

[Anonymous User]

177.4 (can tell a compelling story why my grades went down, if thats the type of thing interviewers go for), Female, no journal, 3 years WE, litigation (also interested in regulatory), bidding Chicago/DC, no idea what I'm doing. Thanks!

1 Schiff Chicago
2 Mayer Brown Chicago
3 Kirkland Chicago
4 K & L Chicago
5 Katten Chicago
6 Winston & Strawn Chicago
7 Jones Day DC
8 Jenner DC
9. Cadwalader DC
10 Edelson Chicago
11 Chapman Chicago
12 Pircher Chicago
13 White & Case DC
14 Baker Hostetler DC
15 Morgan Lewis Chicago
16 Reed Smith Chicago
17 Perkins Coie Chicago
18 Crowell DC

[gchatbrah]

177.4 (can tell a compelling story why my grades went down, if thats the type of thing interviewers go for), Female, no journal, 3 years WE, litigation (also interested in regulatory), bidding Chicago/DC, no idea what I'm doing. Thanks!

1 Schiff Chicago
2 Mayer Brown Chicago
3 Kirkland Chicago
4 K & L Chicago
5 Katten Chicago
6 Winston & Strawn Chicago
7 Jones Day DC
8 Jenner DC
9. Cadwalader DC
10 Edelson Chicago
11 Chapman Chicago
12 Pircher Chicago
13 White & Case DC
14 Baker Hostetler DC
15 Morgan Lewis Chicago
16 Reed Smith Chicago
17 Perkins Coie Chicago
18 Crowell DC

What sort of work experience (it needs to be related to something in DC, and in a compelling fashion, to battle median grades with DC firms)?

I wouldn't split DC/Chi with these grades -- it's way too dicey. If it were me (and I had this GPA, so in some ways it was), I'd pick a market (probably Chicago) and then pepper this heavily with the big NYC classes.

EDIT: My ultimate suggestion would actually just bid NYC with a sampling of Chicago firms mixed in, as opposed to the other way around, but this obviously doesn't apply if you object to working in New York.

[20141023]

.

[Anonymous User]

Can Mofo be got in the low 20's? Is the SF office good for non IP lit?

[Anonymous User]

Which NYC firms are much less focused on fit/personality?

Debevoise, skadden, s&c

[Anonymous User]

What sort of work experience (it needs to be related to something in DC, and in a compelling fashion, to battle median grades with DC firms)?

I wouldn't split DC/Chi with these grades -- it's way too dicey. If it were me (and I had this GPA, so in some ways it was), I'd pick a market (probably Chicago) and then pepper this heavily with the big NYC classes.

EDIT: My ultimate suggestion would actually just bid NYC with a sampling of Chicago firms mixed in, as opposed to the other way around, but this obviously doesn't apply if you object to working in New York.

Legal experience, but nothing specifically related to policy or regulatory. Object to working in NY. Am also applying to a few firms in my home state, but am not listing so as not to out myself.

[Anonymous User]

Which NYC firms are much less focused on fit/personality?

Debevoise, skadden, s&c

Surprised to hear this though debevoise had a rep as a more personality focused firm

[gchatbrah]

Which NYC firms are much less focused on fit/personality?

Debevoise, skadden, s&c

Surprised to hear this though debevoise had a rep as a more personality focused firm

Will disagree on Deb. While they have a reputation of being intellectual/grade sensitive, my experience last year was that the CB stage still screened heavily for personality. Some 177s got offers while 178ers got dinged, after both cohorts reached the callback stage.

I don't know if I'd call Skadden "less focused" on personality, considering they're not particularly grade sensitive. They have a massive class to fill, so that mitigates against being picky, but their process likely has to include some sort of personality considerations when they really aren't using grades to cull the herd.

However, if this question was really asking "which firms will autoffer my 179+", then this answer is probably right.

[WheninLaw]

Can Mofo be got in the low 20's? Is the SF office good for non IP lit?

Absolutely cannot be gotten in the low 20's. Yes, it has a good lit practice. Somewhat infamous for unhappy associates.

[Anonymous User]

How high should I be bidding Texas firms? Most of them (including Baker Botts and V&E) have 21 slots. Also bidding Chicago (and a handful of NY firms because obviously), so trying to balance out the Chicago firms with the Texas ones.

[Anonymous User]

How high should I be bidding Texas firms? Most of them (including Baker Botts and V&E) have 21 slots. Also bidding Chicago (and a handful of NY firms because obviously), so trying to balance out the Chicago firms with the Texas ones.

I'm wondering the same. V&E, Mayer Brown, and Latham share with non-TX offices too.

[Anonymous User]

Which NYC firms are much less focused on fit/personality?

Debevoise, skadden, s&c

Surprised to hear this though debevoise had a rep as a more personality focused firm

Will disagree on Deb. While they have a reputation of being intellectual/grade sensitive, my experience last year was that the CB stage still screened heavily for personality. Some 177s got offers while 178ers got dinged, after both cohorts reached the callback stage.

I don't know if I'd call Skadden "less focused" on personality, considering they're not particularly grade sensitive. They have a massive class to fill, so that mitigates against being picky, but their process likely has to include some sort of personality considerations when they really aren't using grades to cull the herd.

However, if this question was really asking "which firms will autoffer my 179+", then this answer is probably right.

Previous anon.

Answered because people that typically didn't have lots of offers at other firms (mediocre grades) secured offers at these firms (fwiw I'm not talking about anyone in the last two years, so this may have changed). I think they're good firms to bid if you're worried about your personality. Obviously just a data point, though.

[Emma.]

Another bid list to review! 178.5, URM, 3+ years WE, no journal. Strongly targeting transactional and Bay Area, with NY as safeties. [Interview Slots] and {2014 SA positions from NALP} in brackets

1. Goodwin Procter (SV) [6] {3}
2. Gunderson Dettmer (SV) [21] {0}
3. Gibson Dunn (SF) [12] {13}
4. Morrison and Foerster (SF) [21] {17}
5. Latham (SV) [22] {12}
6. Skadden (NY) [42] {94}
7. Weil (NY) [21] {46}
8. Paul Weiss (NY) [42] {84}
9. Fenwick (SV) [21] {19}
10. Cooley (SV) [42] {17}
11. Wilson Sonsini (SV) [40] {30}
12. Cleary (NY) [42] {79}
13. Sullivan & Cromwell (NY) [42] {122 firmwide}
14. Jones Day (SV) [21] {6}
15. Davis Polk (SV) [21] {8}
16. Simpson Thatcher (NY) [57] {102}
17. Orrick (SV) [21] {6}
18. Cravath (NY) [38] {95}
19. Shearman (NY) [21] {43}
20. Fried Frank (NY) [21] {34}

My top choices are the SV native firms (Wilson, Cooley, Fenwick, Gunderson). Should I bid them higher? Is Gunderson really not hiring any SA?

It is hard to know in any given year how high you have to bid those firms. Sometimes there are more than 20 people gunning for the Bay Area, and in those years you'd likely want Fenwick higher than you have it now.

[Neal Patrick Harris]

Some advice for everyone-- I've had a lot of people ask me about NY, like 15+ via pm. I've given the same advice on bidlists to everyone.

To the extent you love a firm and want to hedge/guarantee an interview, you shouldn't blindly rely on my numbers because there may be more interest in NY than last year.

It's also worth saying that I can't promise my advice will guarantee you interviews. I can only tell you what I'd do in your situation.

I'm not sure what you should do with this info, but I don't want to see people disappointed and unhappy they relied on me.

[20141023]

.

[Neal Patrick Harris]

Some advice for everyone-- I've had a lot of people ask me about NY, like 15+ via pm. I've given the same advice on bidlists to everyone.

To the extent you love a firm and want to hedge/guarantee an interview, you shouldn't blindly rely on my numbers because there may be more interest in NY than last year.

It's also worth saying that I can't promise my advice will guarantee you interviews. I can only tell you what I'd do in your situation.

I'm not sure what you should do with this info, but I don't want to see people disappointed and unhappy they relied on me.

just so you know, I am holding you personally responsible if I don't land my dream job.

:'(

[20141023]

.

[2014]

Some advice for everyone-- I've had a lot of people ask me about NY, like 15+ via pm. I've given the same advice on bidlists to everyone.

To the extent you love a firm and want to hedge/guarantee an interview, you shouldn't blindly rely on my numbers because there may be more interest in NY than last year.

It's also worth saying that I can't promise my advice will guarantee you interviews. I can only tell you what I'd do in your situation.

I'm not sure what you should do with this info, but I don't want to see people disappointed and unhappy they relied on me.

Echoing this. There are a lot of game theory implications to bidding that are necessarily impossible to predict especially for those of us who don't know if your class is more or less concentrated in different markets than ours was. If anyone blames me for missing interviews I will cut them.