Columbia EIP 2014 Forum

[Anonymous User]

Good news for DC. Outside some potential net loss due to merging DC screeners with other cities, no bids were lost. Of those that were merged, the cities added were generally not bid on.

[Anonymous User]

S&C associate here:

(1) I'm not aware of any auto-callback number - not that I'm privy to any special recruiting info that you guys don't know. Definitely most folks I've interviewed have honors, but I've seen without honors, albeit with compelling "softs" (a strong finance background before law school, ex-military guy who hadn't been in school for years , etc.).

(2) That being said, in my experience its true that S&C puts more weight on credentials (be it grades or otherwise) than "fit". I don't think that's because we think "fit" is less important; more that accurately assessing "fit" based on a 20 minute interview is mostly BS and leads to a lot of interviewers boosting folks who have similar backgrounds to the interviewer. S&C takes meritocracy seriously - you'll hear that during recruiting as part of the firm's pitch and in my experience it is true.

(3) I've interviewed tons of K-JDs. It nuts to think that a K-JD with good grades wouldn't get a CB or offer at S&C because they didn't have an employment history - you think a firm wants to turn away talented folks because they didn't spend 2 years working some BS analyst job? Can't imagine why career services is giving that advice.
(To be fair, it's generally assumed that the long term yield at firms for K-JDs is lower than for folks with an employment history, because some fraction of K-JDs arrive at a professional workplace for the first time in their lives and realize that it isn't for them. But some of the most talented folks are K-JD and firms want to recruit those folks.)

Thanks for your input -- really helpful. Can you speak as to the "screamer" rep of the firm? I'm sure this has been asked before and differs per experience, but any additional "insider" information would be nice.

The rep is total BS. Like everywhere else, there are a few jerks that you have to avoid working with and a lot of great guys who are fantastic to work with. All these firms are culturally similar enough that who you work with / what group you end up being in matters way more than global firm "culture". That being said, you'll get a "feeling" sometimes about a place - Davis Polk gave me the creeps and even today, when I work across the table from them there's something about the way the associates act that turns me off - but given that its really hard for you to know ex ante what you'll end up doing within a firm, choosing a firm is basically a slightly educated guess. Go with your gut - or something substantive, like picking Cleary if you want to do lots of work in Europe or something like that - and not silly gossip. Not even sure where some of these "reputations" start - who on earth decides that, say, Debevoise is a "quality of life" firm? (I know plenty of folks there who get crushed.) Or that S&C is a place with "screamers"? (As if that flies in 2014! It doesn't even make sense!) Or that Cleary is "quirky" or "nerdy". (Seriously, you've been to law school and you haven't realized that everyone is a quirky nerd? If you didn't figure that out already . . .)

[itbdvorm]

S&C associate here:

(1) I'm not aware of any auto-callback number - not that I'm privy to any special recruiting info that you guys don't know. Definitely most folks I've interviewed have honors, but I've seen without honors, albeit with compelling "softs" (a strong finance background before law school, ex-military guy who hadn't been in school for years , etc.).

(2) That being said, in my experience its true that S&C puts more weight on credentials (be it grades or otherwise) than "fit". I don't think that's because we think "fit" is less important; more that accurately assessing "fit" based on a 20 minute interview is mostly BS and leads to a lot of interviewers boosting folks who have similar backgrounds to the interviewer. S&C takes meritocracy seriously - you'll hear that during recruiting as part of the firm's pitch and in my experience it is true.

(3) I've interviewed tons of K-JDs. It nuts to think that a K-JD with good grades wouldn't get a CB or offer at S&C because they didn't have an employment history - you think a firm wants to turn away talented folks because they didn't spend 2 years working some BS analyst job? Can't imagine why career services is giving that advice.
(To be fair, it's generally assumed that the long term yield at firms for K-JDs is lower than for folks with an employment history, because some fraction of K-JDs arrive at a professional workplace for the first time in their lives and realize that it isn't for them. But some of the most talented folks are K-JD and firms want to recruit those folks.)

Thanks for your input -- really helpful. Can you speak as to the "screamer" rep of the firm? I'm sure this has been asked before and differs per experience, but any additional "insider" information would be nice.

The rep is total BS. Like everywhere else, there are a few jerks that you have to avoid working with and a lot of great guys who are fantastic to work with. All these firms are culturally similar enough that who you work with / what group you end up being in matters way more than global firm "culture". That being said, you'll get a "feeling" sometimes about a place - Davis Polk gave me the creeps and even today, when I work across the table from them there's something about the way the associates act that turns me off - but given that its really hard for you to know ex ante what you'll end up doing within a firm, choosing a firm is basically a slightly educated guess. Go with your gut - or something substantive, like picking Cleary if you want to do lots of work in Europe or something like that - and not silly gossip. Not even sure where some of these "reputations" start - who on earth decides that, say, Debevoise is a "quality of life" firm? (I know plenty of folks there who get crushed.) Or that S&C is a place with "screamers"? (As if that flies in 2014! It doesn't even make sense!) Or that Cleary is "quirky" or "nerdy". (Seriously, you've been to law school and you haven't realized that everyone is a quirky nerd? If you didn't figure that out already . . .)

I'll second this one. "Reputation" is maybe something to take into account after you've interviewed at a place, gotten your offers and are deciding between places. No need to cross off firms at this stage based upon random message board postings. Some questionable decisions seem to be being made by people including / not including firms in this thread...

[Anonymous User]

S&C associate here:

(1) I'm not aware of any auto-callback number - not that I'm privy to any special recruiting info that you guys don't know. Definitely most folks I've interviewed have honors, but I've seen without honors, albeit with compelling "softs" (a strong finance background before law school, ex-military guy who hadn't been in school for years , etc.).

(2) That being said, in my experience its true that S&C puts more weight on credentials (be it grades or otherwise) than "fit". I don't think that's because we think "fit" is less important; more that accurately assessing "fit" based on a 20 minute interview is mostly BS and leads to a lot of interviewers boosting folks who have similar backgrounds to the interviewer. S&C takes meritocracy seriously - you'll hear that during recruiting as part of the firm's pitch and in my experience it is true.

(3) I've interviewed tons of K-JDs. It nuts to think that a K-JD with good grades wouldn't get a CB or offer at S&C because they didn't have an employment history - you think a firm wants to turn away talented folks because they didn't spend 2 years working some BS analyst job? Can't imagine why career services is giving that advice.
(To be fair, it's generally assumed that the long term yield at firms for K-JDs is lower than for folks with an employment history, because some fraction of K-JDs arrive at a professional workplace for the first time in their lives and realize that it isn't for them. But some of the most talented folks are K-JD and firms want to recruit those folks.)

Thanks for your input -- really helpful. Can you speak as to the "screamer" rep of the firm? I'm sure this has been asked before and differs per experience, but any additional "insider" information would be nice.

The rep is total BS. Like everywhere else, there are a few jerks that you have to avoid working with and a lot of great guys who are fantastic to work with. All these firms are culturally similar enough that who you work with / what group you end up being in matters way more than global firm "culture". That being said, you'll get a "feeling" sometimes about a place - Davis Polk gave me the creeps and even today, when I work across the table from them there's something about the way the associates act that turns me off - but given that its really hard for you to know ex ante what you'll end up doing within a firm, choosing a firm is basically a slightly educated guess. Go with your gut - or something substantive, like picking Cleary if you want to do lots of work in Europe or something like that - and not silly gossip. Not even sure where some of these "reputations" start - who on earth decides that, say, Debevoise is a "quality of life" firm? (I know plenty of folks there who get crushed.) Or that S&C is a place with "screamers"? (As if that flies in 2014! It doesn't even make sense!) Or that Cleary is "quirky" or "nerdy". (Seriously, you've been to law school and you haven't realized that everyone is a quirky nerd? If you didn't figure that out already . . .)

Thanks man. That all seems pretty reasonable.

[Anonymous User]

I'll second this one. "Reputation" is maybe something to take into account after you've interviewed at a place, gotten your offers and are deciding between places. No need to cross off firms at this stage based upon random message board postings. Some questionable decisions seem to be being made by people including / not including firms in this thread...

I'd like to add a slightly different perspective on "fit/culture."

I agree that it shouldn't be used to eliminate firms that you would otherwise bid on. That said, if you have 15 firms that you need to bid in your top 10 to get, you can't bid them all. In that situation, I think fit is a good way to cull---it's what I did last year anyway.

It's tricky, because "firm culture" is mostly BS: as others have said, there's a lot more difference within firms than between firms. That said, it's not entierly BS---there is a noticeable difference between the average S&C associate and the average DPW associate.  There are also fairly large differnces in how much out-of-office socialization firms expect from their lawyers. And, in the end, whether you like the people you work with will have a big impact on how much you like your job.

So, firm culture is 90% BS, but the 10% that isn't can really matter---I think, enough to use it to break ties if you want to bid more firms than you can fit.

—B

[Anonymous User]

I'll second this one. "Reputation" is maybe something to take into account after you've interviewed at a place, gotten your offers and are deciding between places. No need to cross off firms at this stage based upon random message board postings. Some questionable decisions seem to be being made by people including / not including firms in this thread...

I'd like to add a slightly different perspective on "fit/culture."

I agree that it shouldn't be used to eliminate firms that you would otherwise bid on. That said, if you have 15 firms that you need to bid in your top 10 to get, you can't bid them all. In that situation, I think fit is a good way to cull---it's what I did last year anyway.

It's tricky, because "firm culture" is mostly BS: as others have said, there's a lot more difference within firms than between firms. That said, it's not entierly BS---there is a noticeable difference between the average S&C associate and the average DPW associate.  There are also fairly large differnces in how much out-of-office socialization firms expect from their lawyers. And, in the end, whether you like the people you work with will have a big impact on how much you like your job.

So, firm culture is 90% BS, but the 10% that isn't can really matter---I think, enough to use it to break ties if you want to bid more firms than you can fit.

—B

Thank you.

What's the best resource to get a sense of different cultures or reputations for the firms? Older friends? Websites like Chambers or Vault all say the same generic description for every firm so not too helpful.

[Anonymous User]

So, firm culture is 90% BS, but the 10% that isn't can really matter---I think, enough to use it to break ties if you want to bid more firms than you can fit.

—B

Sure - but how do you know those cultural differences when prepping a bid list? How many S&C associates does the typical rising 2L know? DPW associates? They're just going off of gossip, which is wildly inaccurate.

Also, I've never encountered significant differences in out of office socialization between firms. Pretty much every firm expects you to put your face in at the occaisional happy hour and rarely, if ever, demands more than that. - maybe a summer outing once a year to some partner's house or a country club? Just as an example, I'm at S&C (reputedly antisocial), and two of my best friends are at Simpson (reputedly social/fratty) and Gibson (reputedly social, but in a less fratty way) and all of our firm social obligations are basically the same, mas o menos. Truth be told, no one really cares about your ex-work social style as long as you don't wear it on your sleave - just as on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog, at work, everybody's wearing a suit (metaphorically and in some cases literally).

[Anonymous User]

I'll second this one. "Reputation" is maybe something to take into account after you've interviewed at a place, gotten your offers and are deciding between places. No need to cross off firms at this stage based upon random message board postings. Some questionable decisions seem to be being made by people including / not including firms in this thread...

I'd like to add a slightly different perspective on "fit/culture."

I agree that it shouldn't be used to eliminate firms that you would otherwise bid on. That said, if you have 15 firms that you need to bid in your top 10 to get, you can't bid them all. In that situation, I think fit is a good way to cull---it's what I did last year anyway.

It's tricky, because "firm culture" is mostly BS: as others have said, there's a lot more difference within firms than between firms. That said, it's not entierly BS---there is a noticeable difference between the average S&C associate and the average DPW associate.  There are also fairly large differnces in how much out-of-office socialization firms expect from their lawyers. And, in the end, whether you like the people you work with will have a big impact on how much you like your job.

So, firm culture is 90% BS, but the 10% that isn't can really matter---I think, enough to use it to break ties if you want to bid more firms than you can fit.

—B

Thank you.

What's the best resource to get a sense of different cultures or reputations for the firms? Older friends? Websites like Chambers or Vault all say the same generic description for every firm so not too helpful.

Older friends are probably the best sources. Chambers and vault mostly useless, if not entirely useless.

I'm not convinced culture is relevant for you when making a bid list, because there aren't THAT many firms in the same "tier" within a given city. Like, if you want to do corporate in NY, and you have a 3.5 GPA, you pretty much have 10-15 firms you're highly targeting and the goal is to get interviews at all of them and then to yield 5-7 CBs out of those 15. You have enough space in a bidlist to effect that, regardless of culture or fit or stuff like that. I would trust your gut after your CBs - when you've had a chance to meet people - way more than what friends tell you or gossip tells you.

[Anonymous User]

I'll second this one. "Reputation" is maybe something to take into account after you've interviewed at a place, gotten your offers and are deciding between places. No need to cross off firms at this stage based upon random message board postings. Some questionable decisions seem to be being made by people including / not including firms in this thread...

I'd like to add a slightly different perspective on "fit/culture."

I agree that it shouldn't be used to eliminate firms that you would otherwise bid on. That said, if you have 15 firms that you need to bid in your top 10 to get, you can't bid them all. In that situation, I think fit is a good way to cull---it's what I did last year anyway.

It's tricky, because "firm culture" is mostly BS: as others have said, there's a lot more difference within firms than between firms. That said, it's not entierly BS---there is a noticeable difference between the average S&C associate and the average DPW associate.  There are also fairly large differnces in how much out-of-office socialization firms expect from their lawyers. And, in the end, whether you like the people you work with will have a big impact on how much you like your job.

So, firm culture is 90% BS, but the 10% that isn't can really matter---I think, enough to use it to break ties if you want to bid more firms than you can fit.

—B

Thank you.

What's the best resource to get a sense of different cultures or reputations for the firms? Older friends? Websites like Chambers or Vault all say the same generic description for every firm so not too helpful.

Older friends are probably the best sources. Chambers and vault mostly useless, if not entirely useless.

I'm not convinced culture is relevant for you when making a bid list, because there aren't THAT many firms in the same "tier" within a given city. Like, if you want to do corporate in NY, and you have a 3.5 GPA, you pretty much have 10-15 firms you're highly targeting and the goal is to get interviews at all of them and then to yield 5-7 CBs out of those 15. You have enough space in a bidlist to effect that, regardless of culture or fit or stuff like that. I would trust your gut after your CBs - when you've had a chance to meet people - way more than what friends tell you or gossip tells you.

Yea that makes sense. It's funny because I actually have a 3.5 GPA and targeting NY corporate. Haven't paid attention to any reputation or culture in building my bid list. You're right that there just weren't enough firms to eliminate or add solely based on reputation.

[Anonymous User]

I'm not convinced culture is relevant for you when making a bid list, because there aren't THAT many firms in the same "tier" within a given city. Like, if you want to do corporate in NY, and you have a 3.5 GPA, you pretty much have 10-15 firms you're highly targeting and the goal is to get interviews at all of them and then to yield 5-7 CBs out of those 15. You have enough space in a bidlist to effect that, regardless of culture or fit or stuff like that. I would trust your gut after your CBs - when you've had a chance to meet people - way more than what friends tell you or gossip tells you.

I agree that "bid everyone, judge fit after CBs" is TCR if you have the bids for it---and you should if you're just targeting corporate in NYC (and are comfortable not having that many reaches/"safetys" in your bid list). On the other hand, if you're targeting multiple cities or not settled on lit versus corp, then you may have to make some choices.

-B

[Anonymous User]

I'm not convinced culture is relevant for you when making a bid list, because there aren't THAT many firms in the same "tier" within a given city. Like, if you want to do corporate in NY, and you have a 3.5 GPA, you pretty much have 10-15 firms you're highly targeting and the goal is to get interviews at all of them and then to yield 5-7 CBs out of those 15. You have enough space in a bidlist to effect that, regardless of culture or fit or stuff like that. I would trust your gut after your CBs - when you've had a chance to meet people - way more than what friends tell you or gossip tells you.

Apologies if this is obvious, but what are the 10-15ish NY target firms for the 3.5 GPA leaning corporate, if you don't mind my asking?

[Anonymous User]

Apologies if this is obvious, but what are the 10-15ish NY target firms for the 3.5 GPA leaning corporate, if you don't mind my asking?

Check out: http://www.chambersandpartners.com/1280 ... torial/5/1 as a pretty decent proxy. You can also look at the nationwide rankings here http://www.chambersandpartners.com/guide/usa/5/12788/1 where you can dig into more specific practice groups, if you think you might be interested in other corporate groups such as capital markets, FIG, restructuring, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Apologies if this is obvious, but what are the 10-15ish NY target firms for the 3.5 GPA leaning corporate, if you don't mind my asking?

Check out: http://www.chambersandpartners.com/1280 ... torial/5/1 as a pretty decent proxy. You can also look at the nationwide rankings here http://www.chambersandpartners.com/guide/usa/5/12788/1 where you can dig into more specific practice groups, if you think you might be interested in other corporate groups such as capital markets, FIG, restructuring, etc.

Extremely helpful - thank you! Do you think 3.5 puts you more in the camp targeting "highly regarded" rather than "elite" firms?

[Anonymous User]

Okay, thought I'd give this another try - any thoughts on my (updated) bid list much appreciated! ~3.6 GPA, really hoping for Bay Area but want to try picking up those firms during add/drop, and use most of my bids in NY to ensure I get a job somewhere. I will have already interviewed with a few Bay Area firms that are notably absent from the list (e.g., Cooley). Many thanks!

1 Proskauer Rose (NY)
2 Kirkland & Ellis (NY)
3 Morrison & Foerster (SF)
4 Sidley Austin (NY)
5 Skadden (NY)
6 Debevoise (NY)
7 hogan lovells (NY)
8 Clifford Chance (NY)
9 Weil (NY)
10 Milbank (NY)
11 Akin Gump (NY)
12 Sullivan & Cromwell (NY)
13 Ropes & Gray (NY)
14 Cahill Gordon (NY)
15 Freshfields (NY)
16 Cleary (NY)
17 Paul Weiss (NY)
18 Fried Frank (NY)
19 Cadwalader (NY)
20 Cravath (NY)
21
22
23 Wilson Sonsini (SV)
24 Pillsbury Winthrop (SF)
25 Shearman & Sterling (SV)
26 Gibson Dunn (SF)
27 O'Melveny (SV)
28 Kirkland & Ellis (SF)
29 Paul Hastings (SF)
30 Sheppard Mullin (SF)

-meechum

[Anonymous User]

Okay, thought I'd give this another try - any thoughts on my (updated) bid list much appreciated! ~3.6 GPA, really hoping for Bay Area but want to try picking up those firms during add/drop, and use most of my bids in NY to ensure I get a job somewhere. I will have already interviewed with a few Bay Area firms that are notably absent from the list (e.g., Cooley). Many thanks!

1 Proskauer Rose (NY)
2 Kirkland & Ellis (NY)
3 Morrison & Foerster (SF)
4 Sidley Austin (NY)
5 Skadden (NY)
6 Debevoise (NY)
7 Hogan Lovells (NY)
8 Clifford Chance (NY)
9 Weil (NY)
10 Milbank (NY)
11 Akin Gump (NY)
12 Sullivan & Cromwell (NY)
13 Ropes & Gray (NY)
14 Cahill Gordon (NY)
15 Freshfields (NY)
16 Cleary (NY)
17 Paul Weiss (NY)
18 Fried Frank (NY)
19 Cadwalader (NY)
20 Cravath (NY)
21
22
23 Wilson Sonsini (SV)
24 Pillsbury Winthrop (SF)
25 Shearman & Sterling (SV)
26 Gibson Dunn (SF)
27 O'Melveny (SV)
28 Kirkland & Ellis (SF)
29 Paul Hastings (SF)
30 Sheppard Mullin (SF)

-meechum

Looks like you've given yourself a very fair shot to get a lot of your bids. Good mix of firms I think. Maybe add a couple more reach SF/SV offices just to roll the dice?

[Anonymous User]

Okay, thought I'd give this another try - any thoughts on my (updated) bid list much appreciated! ~3.6 GPA, really hoping for Bay Area but want to try picking up those firms during add/drop, and use most of my bids in NY to ensure I get a job somewhere. I will have already interviewed with a few Bay Area firms that are notably absent from the list (e.g., Cooley). Many thanks!

1 Proskauer Rose (NY)
2 Kirkland & Ellis (NY)
3 Morrison & Foerster (SF)
4 Sidley Austin (NY)
5 Skadden (NY)
6 Debevoise (NY)
7 Hogan Lovells (NY)
8 Clifford Chance (NY)
9 Weil (NY)
10 Milbank (NY)
11 Akin Gump (NY)
12 Sullivan & Cromwell (NY)
13 Ropes & Gray (NY)
14 Cahill Gordon (NY)
15 Freshfields (NY)
16 Cleary (NY)
17 Paul Weiss (NY)
18 Fried Frank (NY)
19 Cadwalader (NY)
20 Cravath (NY)
21
22
23 Wilson Sonsini (SV)
24 Pillsbury Winthrop (SF)
25 Shearman & Sterling (SV)
26 Gibson Dunn (SF)
27 O'Melveny (SV)
28 Kirkland & Ellis (SF)
29 Paul Hastings (SF)
30 Sheppard Mullin (SF)

-meechum

Why no Davis NY? You may have picked up Davis SV already, but still. Is that the same for Simpson? You bid Kirkland twice, so am curious about the other firms. It looks pretty solid outside of that.

I might bid Paul Weiss a little higher (same number of interview slots as last year, but you're on the low end and it's a popular firm) if you really wanted it, but there's nothing too alarming about its present spot.

[Anonymous User]

Extremely helpful - thank you! Do you think 3.5 puts you more in the camp targeting "highly regarded" rather than "elite" firms?

Same OP from above. Definitely not! Don't let this board / Columbia people get you down, a 3.5 is quite good. WLRK is out for you, and S&C / Cravath may be an uphill battle (though definitely not impossible). The other band 1/2 firms are definitely in your wheelhouse, particularly if you are a decent interviewer / have some work experience or something else to make you stand out.

One other point that I'm not sure 2Ls understand adequately: Do not chose a firm based on a general sense of "prestige" if you are leaning either towards litigation or corporate (and of course that includes particular practice areas within that larger group). For example, if you want to do corporate work, you would be better off at Willkie than Gibson Dunn.

[Anonymous User]

If you're mass mailing firms for a secondary market, but work commitments will likely keep you from traveling to the city before EIP, is it terrible to mention you'd be able to do a Skype (screener) interview?

[Anonymous User]

Okay, thought I'd give this another try - any thoughts on my (updated) bid list much appreciated! ~3.6 GPA, really hoping for Bay Area but want to try picking up those firms during add/drop, and use most of my bids in NY to ensure I get a job somewhere. I will have already interviewed with a few Bay Area firms that are notably absent from the list (e.g., Cooley). Many thanks!

1 Proskauer Rose (NY)
2 Kirkland & Ellis (NY)
3 Morrison & Foerster (SF)
4 Sidley Austin (NY)
5 Skadden (NY)
6 Debevoise (NY)
7 Hogan Lovells (NY)
8 Clifford Chance (NY)
9 Weil (NY)
10 Milbank (NY)
11 Akin Gump (NY)
12 Sullivan & Cromwell (NY)
13 Ropes & Gray (NY)
14 Cahill Gordon (NY)
15 Freshfields (NY)
16 Cleary (NY)
17 Paul Weiss (NY)
18 Fried Frank (NY)
19 Cadwalader (NY)
20 Cravath (NY)
21
22
23 Wilson Sonsini (SV)
24 Pillsbury Winthrop (SF)
25 Shearman & Sterling (SV)
26 Gibson Dunn (SF)
27 O'Melveny (SV)
28 Kirkland & Ellis (SF)
29 Paul Hastings (SF)
30 Sheppard Mullin (SF)

-meechum

Why no Davis NY? You may have picked up Davis SV already, but still. Is that the same for Simpson? You bid Kirkland twice, so am curious about the other firms. It looks pretty solid outside of that.

I might bid Paul Weiss a little higher (same number of interview slots as last year, but you're on the low end and it's a popular firm) if you really wanted it, but there's nothing too alarming about its present spot.

I noticed that DPW and STB didn't allow for multiple interviews according to the OCS interview schedules sheet, so I assumed that meant, for example, if I interviewed with DPW's Menlo office outside of EIP, I couldn't interview for their NY office during EIP. Am I wrong about that? I would be thrilled if I were!

[Anonymous User]

I will hopefully have 2 NY offers before bids are due. I hit it off with people from the firms at their events and wheeled and dealed until they let me come in for an interview. I have one from a V50 and I was told the V30 would get back to me "shortly after July 4th weekend."

Since I'm not Stone, but above median, I'm considering not bidding NY and trying to break into DC or CA by splitting all 30 in those markets. Is that too aggro?

[Anonymous User]

I noticed that DPW and STB didn't allow for multiple interviews according to the OCS interview schedules sheet, so I assumed that meant, for example, if I interviewed with DPW's Menlo office outside of EIP, I couldn't interview for their NY office during EIP. Am I wrong about that? I would be thrilled if I were!

I'm operating under the assumption that no multiple interviews means they only want to see you once in the doubletree. I'm mass mailing every office I'd want to work at.

[Anonymous User]

I will hopefully have 2 NY offers before bids are due. I hit it off with people from the firms at their events and wheeled and dealed until they let me come in for an interview. I have one from a V50 and I was told the V30 would get back to me "shortly after July 4th weekend."

Since I'm not Stone, but above median, I'm considering not bidding NY and trying to break into DC or CA by splitting all 30 in those markets. Is that too aggro?

1) Do you have DC or CA ties?
2) How much do you like the offers you'll have? Are you confident you would be absolutely happy deciding between those two if you completely strike out in DC/CA (not saying you will)?

-Zoe

[Anonymous User]

What's the general word on Paul Weiss' corporate groups? I know the firm is generally known for litigation, but have heard its corporate is growing quickly. Is it worth bidding it super high if I'm interested in corporate work?

[Anonymous User]

What's the general word on Paul Weiss' corporate groups? I know the firm is generally known for litigation, but have heard its corporate is growing quickly. Is it worth bidding it super high if I'm interested in corporate work?

I don't think you should bid Paul Weiss much higher than 3-4 spots above '13 first failed bid regardless of if you want corporate or litigation. The game isn't to rank firms higher that you like more, but to rank the firms you like based on how likely they are to be gone before a certain spot.

That said, the corporate group is showing some decent signs of growth. Litigation still keeps the lights on though.

[Anonymous User]

What's the general word on Paul Weiss' corporate groups? I know the firm is generally known for litigation, but have heard its corporate is growing quickly. Is it worth bidding it super high if I'm interested in corporate work?

I spoke to OCS over an appointment, and apparently the separate bidding category for "Paul Weiss (Corporate)" was meant for 3Ls, not 2Ls. 2Ls pursuing corporate work at Paul Weiss should just bid the regular Paul Weiss. Not sure if that's what you were thinking about (I know I found it confusing!).

If you're just curious about its corporate work in general, they do some solid work but aren't in the same league as Simpson, Cleary, S&C, Cravath, Davis, etc. FWIW, I spoke to a few partners at an event last week and they kept mentioning that their biggest corporate client's Apollo, an investment group focused on private equity and some real estate. They also reiterated that the deals in general are slightly smaller than those from the perennial NY corporate powerhouses, but didn't necessarily see that as a bad thing for associates gaining experience, etc.