Michigan 2014 OCI Thread!!!!!!! Forum

[Anonymous User]

I agree with the above poster. Though, I would add that you should take into account the number of offers that a firm gave out. For example, if your GPA is an equally good match for firm A that interviewed 42 students, gave 4 CBs, and made 1 offer, that firm isn't nearly as attractive as firm B that interviewed 42, gave 14 CBs, and made 11 offers.

My experience was similar to above poster's 3.8-4.0, ~12 CBs

You should try to get an offer before OCI, and if you succeed in that, you should only interview with firms that you'll actually strongly consider. At the end of the day, most of these places are very similar. GPA is the elephant in the room. And from the prospective of most students, the Vault list is the indication of prestige that dominates (with the caveat that it favors big firms and NYC firms).

Data:
https://www.law.umich.edu/careers/types ... 20Data.pdf

[Anonymous User]

I keep seeing that you should be "conservative," but does this mean that you should only bid firms where you hit or surpass median? Have big classes?
Would it be foolhardy to bid firms where your GPA are closer to the 25th percentile, especially if you have WE and ties to the area?

I'm a recent alum who bid in a year when things were ok but not great. Despite being a K-JD who didn't go to a prestigious undergrad and didn't otherwise have any unique qualities, I got a reasonable number of callbacks and ended up accepting an offer from a V5 NY firm where my GPA was below their 25th percentile.

What does this mean? Be conservative, but don't be crazy. Certain firms always bring enough attorneys to interview everyone who bids, while others —historically the good but slightly less selective ones — are so oversubscribed that if you don't bid them in the top 5 or so, you won't get an interview.

So in the bottom 5 or 10 slots, feel free to take a flyer at a firm that's known for being pretty selective but which seems like they offer a lot of interviews. I'm pretty sure Cravath, DPW, and Latham are all in this category. You may have a good interview even though you feel like you're underqualified and end up with a callback. Conversely, fill the top 10 slots with less selective firms. Not the firms you want to work at the most, but the firms you think will have the most other people who look at it and think "wow, that looks like I meet their GPA requirement." So regardless of whether you have a 2.950 or a 3.950, the super selective firms should probably be in the lower part of your bid list because there isn't as much competition to get a screener with them (and at least a few of them should be on there regardless; you could surprise yourself).

This isn't to say that if you have a low GPA you should exclusively apply to firms that seem like reaches, just that you should avoid being too risk-averse.

Don't read too much into the curve adjustment, in my experience firms don't seem to really know where the curve is set, so it's unlikely they've materially adjusted their cutoffs based on the new medians.

[Anonymous User]

3.33 GPA with entrepreneurship experience. Interested in Corporate M&A in CA (ideally LA or SF). Should I bid mostly NY to be safe. Do I still have a shot at firms like Milbank (3.37 Median), Cooley (3.36), and Sheappard Mullin (3.33), Pilsbury (3.32), or Goodwin (3.40) in CA? Thanks for your help!

[sucsuroc]

3.33 GPA with entrepreneurship experience. Interested in Corporate M&A in CA (ideally LA or SF). Should I bid mostly NY to be safe. Do I still have a shot at firms like Milbank (3.37 Median), Cooley (3.36), and Sheappard Mullin (3.33), Pilsbury (3.32), or Goodwin (3.40) in CA? Thanks for your help!

I'd bid mostly NY to be safe, but YMMV. I knew someone with strong ties to CA and a reasonably good GPA who did not get any offers in CA, but I don't know if something else was going on.

You've definitely got a good shot at firms where you are roughly at their medians--remember, median means half of people who get offers have a GPA below that number. During my year, I viewed firms' 25th percentiles as their normal cutoffs and assumed anyone who got an offer below that number had something pretty special going on. The reason I thought this is that SullCrom's 25th percentile was roughly equivalent to their "cutoff" from the year before. This may have changed, but I think it's probably still a safe rule of thumb.

Bid firms where you're at or above the median at the top of your bid list (top 10) as those firms are most likely to be oversubscribed. Your goal is to maximize the total number of screeners you get. Spend your last few bids on "reach" firms; they always interview everyone who bids and your bid will be wasted if you spend it on a firm that doesn't interview everyone who bids.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks, Sucsuroc!

[Anonymous User]

I've been reading this thread and amidst all the (unreliable, mostly) anecdotal evidence about whether or not the class "did well" at OCI, people kept saying "wait until the data comes out". I'd like to see this data...does anyone know where I can find it?

[Anonymous User]

In OCP's office. They're not obligated to release it, as far as I know? They'll post a summer employment list in the fall, but that conceals a lot of things. I don't know of a reliable source until 509 data 9 months after graduation. Unfortunately, the smaller class sizes currently at the school won't be reflected in data for 1, 2, and 3 years respectively, as next month's release will be class of '15.

I'd love to be proven wrong, but I don't know of anything reliable short of LEAKS!!1 from career services.

[Anonymous User]

That's kind of what I was afraid of.

Very difficult to decide whether or not to matriculate to the university (especially taking on significant debt) while it's possible that it won't even nearly pay off if the downward trend continues ...