Top Law Schools

So I've been doing searches up here and trying to get my final bidlist down and I've consistently seen the advice of not splitting your markets beyond two, but in most of those cases people were trying to do 1/3 of their bids evenly between the three markets. I'm wondering if it might be acceptable to bid three markets if the focus is limited to certain firms? I'm highly interested in transactional work, particularly in M&A, Venture Capitalism/Emerging Companies, Capital Markets and to a lesser extent Private Equity and Banking/Financial institutions, but I also want to return to California for work (preferably LA), although I have worked in NY and would be ok with moving here. I have ties to LA in that I went to undergrad there and have a pretty strong network, but no specific ties to Northern California.

My issue is that few firms do VC / EC work like WSGR, Cooley and Fenwick, and few firms have robust M&A, Capital Markets and other corporate programs outside of GDC LA and Latham LA in Los Angeles (Skadden does for CM). I know most norcal firms like ties, but for WSGR, Cooley and Fenwick I've talked to senior associates and friends working there that tell me that the ties aren't as crucial if I can effectively communicate why I want to be in SV with them, which I think I can.

Would it really be crazy to bid WSGR, Fenwick, Cooley SV, GDC/Latham LA, and put the rest of my bids into NYC? If it helps I'm a URM, 3.55 GPA (around top 20-25% at M), no word on journals yet, an e board position, and some relevant work experience in a BigLaw firm and a quasi governmental organization (probably already outed myself, but if you know who I am I'd appreciate not being called out ).

Morning bump, would definitely appreciate some help here. Trying to get my bidlist semi finalized so I can get some feedback on it before it gets later in the game. Also would help to figure out who I need to prepare to mass mail.

I honestly don't know about the bidding. Sounds like you have clear enough reasons for wanting those markets to convince firms that you're not just bidding at random. SV might be tough without ties but you've given yourself other options so my guess would be that this isn't a completely crazy bidding strategy.

As to the mass mailing, no matter what firms you decide to bid on, you should mass mail in whatever markets you're interested in. Definitely contact SV and LA firms regardless of where you end up bidding.

Anonymous User wrote:I honestly don't know about the bidding. Sounds like you have clear enough reasons for wanting those markets to convince firms that you're not just bidding at random. SV might be tough without ties but you've given yourself other options so my guess would be that this isn't a completely crazy bidding strategy.

As to the mass mailing, no matter what firms you decide to bid on, you should mass mail in whatever markets you're interested in. Definitely contact SV and LA firms regardless of where you end up bidding.

Thanks, I appreciate it. Do you know if this strategy extends to offices of firms that you plan to bid in OCI in a different market? I haven't been able to find anything else about this through search, most deal with bidding on the same firm with different offices or going to a diversity fair where a firm taht is coming to OCI has a different office interviewing.

I guess an example might help. If I plan to bid Latham - LA and don't interview w/ the SF/SV offices at a diversity fair or something, would mass mailing the SF/SV office be advised (would likely be SV for their IPO type work), or would that be risky?