S&C Questions Forum

[Anonymous User]

Maybe it's because s&c offers socially awkward people who have high grades but can't get offers at peer firms. I say this as someone who has interviewed with these peer firms recently and so far has only an offer from s&c from those firms. As you said yourself, skadden offered fewer people at your school than s&c despite lower grade cutoffs.

My impression was that Skadden had a lot of socially awkward people as well (2/4 interviewers at CB). If you have the grades (top 15% at HYS), you will be getting an offer not only from S&C but also from most of its peer firms. S&C (though filled with law review nerds) isn't desperate for people with high grades. It offers less than a third of the people who met their grade cut-offs (HYS). I'm sure most of the other 2/3 did screeners with them as well.

last year s&c offered all but two of the people that accepted their callbacks from one of hys. their yield was ~30% at that same hys. also, you don't need 15% at any of hys to sweep the v5. median puts you in contention at all but possibly wachtell.

also, at one of hys, s&c offered over half of interviewers. you appear not to know what you're talking about.

places with the highest yields at hys are not in the V10. Think w&c, munger etc. i consider yields useless, nonetheless.

[Anonymous User]

Maybe it's because s&c offers socially awkward people who have high grades but can't get offers at peer firms. I say this as someone who has interviewed with these peer firms recently and so far has only an offer from s&c from those firms. As you said yourself, skadden offered fewer people at your school than s&c despite lower grade cutoffs.

My impression was that Skadden had a lot of socially awkward people as well (2/4 interviewers at CB). If you have the grades (top 15% at HYS), you will be getting an offer not only from S&C but also from most of its peer firms. S&C (though filled with law review nerds) isn't desperate for people with high grades. It offers less than a third of the people who met their grade cut-offs (HYS). I'm sure most of the other 2/3 did screeners with them as well.

last year s&c offered all but two of the people that accepted their callbacks from one of hys. their yield was ~30% at that same hys. also, you don't need 15% at any of hys to sweep the v5. median puts you in contention at all but possibly wachtell.

also, at one of hys, s&c offered over half of interviewers. you appear not to know what you're talking about.

places with the highest yields at hys are not in the V10. Think w&c, munger etc. i consider yields useless, nonetheless.

You don't need 15% to sweep V5, but being 15% at HYS guarantees multiple (most likely 4) V5 offers.

Outside of W&C, Munger, etc., the traditional NYC powerhouses have the highest yields at one of HYS (including CSM, S&C, DPW, but not Skadden).

[Anonymous User]

You don't need 15% to sweep V5, but being 15% at HYS guarantees multiple (most likely 4) V5 offers.

Outside of W&C, Munger, etc., the traditional NYC powerhouses have the highest yields at one of HYS (including CSM, S&C, DPW, but not Skadden).

Technically no, but for reasons that have nothing to do with universal desirability. Also, the "etc" encompasses a lot of firms. Andrew Kurth Houston (I had never heard of this firm before last year), Susman, among others.

A&P (DC, no less) gets a lot of traction on this board but A&P's yield was less than 10% last year at one of hys.

The whole yield thing is not a particularly helpful metric. Discounting the herd mentality common among law students, the firms with large summer classes need to offer a large number of people to get their traditional yield. Some firms get a high yield because they happen to be the most prestigious in their secondary market, and people who bid on them are more likely to want to be in that secondary market.

There are also a surprisingly large amount of people that hate new york at (at least) two of hys. DC is extremely competitive due to the demand, relative to supply.

in order for yields to come close to being meaningful, it'd have to include information on the choices made by cross-offerees, holding location constant. additionally, hys is the wrong place to be looking since students at that level tend to have other options. yalies, rightfully or wrongfully, have a reputation for quitting biglaw in the first few years.

[Anonymous User]

My impression from my CB at S&C is that the people there are nice but a little aspie. I realize that it's a small sample size, but one imagines that they are putting their best foot forward. If they couldn't even scrape together 4 non-aspies for the CB I can't imagine what a representative sample of the firm is like.

[Anonymous User]

My impression from my CB at S&C is that the people there are nice but a little aspie. I realize that it's a small sample size, but one imagines that they are putting their best foot forward. If they couldn't even scrape together 4 non-aspies for the CB I can't imagine what a representative sample of the firm is like.

For me among all CBs, Skadden and Weil felt least aspie. S&C, DPW, Gibson Dunn, Kirkland, and Latham were in the middle (mix of calm and confident types and others). Cravath, Debevoise, and Cleary felt most aspie (Debevoise was an off-the-chart outlier).

[Anonymous User]

For me among all CBs, Skadden and Weil felt least aspie. S&C, DPW, Gibson Dunn, Kirkland, and Latham were in the middle (mix of calm and confident types and aspies). Cravath, Debevoise, and Cleary felt most aspie (Debevoise was an off-the-chart outlier).

I found Debevoise, STB and Cravath to have the most awkward interviews (and I went back for second looks at the latter two). In at least a few cases, it just seemed like the associates I was talking to were way too exhausted for meaningful human interaction. I had much more enjoyable experiences at DPW, S&C, and Skadden--the interviewers were easier to talk to and generally more polished. Take that for whatever you think it's worth.

[legends159]

To the above anons calling people at these firms aspie - just remember that you will be in their shoes pretty soon and a new crop of entitled 2Ls will be calling you aspie on an internet forum.

Also remember that conversations are a two way street - and when your only job as an interviewee is to be presentable and sociable it's really unfair to also expect us, practicing lawyers, who are working many hours a day and have responsibilities, to take 30 minutes of our time and also carry the conversation. Remember that we are not forced to nor paid extra to interview you. We do it because we care about who the firm hires and as a favor to the recruiting department.

[aces]

Something I see a lot of is a lack of appreciation for sample sizes. Considering the size of firms like S&C, DPW, Skadden, STB, etc., your four callback interviewers are very unlikely to be representative of the firm at large unless they all happen to be in the practice area that you know you're going to be in (and even then, it helps if it's a relatively small practice area and not M&A or general litigation). Plus, the recruiting department isn't being especially picky about the associates and partners who are interviewing you-- August/September are such big vacation months and these firms interview so many students that recruiting is just trying to get warm bodies most of the time. They almost never vet the interviewers-- it's just whoever responded to the email and was in the office and free when you scheduled your interview. There's also a lot of stereotype confirmation bias and such.

Maybe after a second visit, you can get a larger and more representative sample. Or maybe you have friends working there that you can hit up for more information. But I always thought the emphasis on "which randomly drawn four/six people did I happen to get along with the most in our 20-minute contrived interaction" was kind of silly and misplaced. (Not that there's any better way of figuring out what firm to go to-- at best, it's largely a guessing game no matter what criteria a 2L chooses to emphasize.)

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Amen. Also, as a practicing associate, the lowest priority for qualities I want in someone I work with is "charisma". You want folks you work with to be responsible, smart, responsive, and not jerks; but socially awkward isn't really an issue. Trust me, no matter how sweet your coworkers are, your day will be miserable if you're picking up the slack for someone else; and no matter how awkward or stiff interactions may be, someone who pulls their weight is a godsend.

To the above anons calling people at these firms aspie - just remember that you will be in their shoes pretty soon and a new crop of entitled 2Ls will be calling you aspie on an internet forum.

Also remember that conversations are a two way street - and when your only job as an interviewee is to be presentable and sociable it's really unfair to also expect us, practicing lawyers, who are working many hours a day and have responsibilities, to take 30 minutes of our time and also carry the conversation. Remember that we are not forced to nor paid extra to interview you. We do it because we care about who the firm hires and as a favor to the recruiting department.

[Anonymous User]

The most important thing about S&C is that when they give you your offer for a SA position they mail you a box of the worlds best cookies.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone give me a quick rundown of the LA office?

[Anonymous User]

The most important thing about S&C is that when they give you your offer for a SA position they mail you a box of the worlds best cookies.

I got zero cookies.

[Anonymous User]

The most important thing about S&C is that when they give you your offer for a SA position they mail you a box of the worlds best cookies.

I got zero cookies.

Hmm, it might only be for the NYC office?

[legends159]

The most important thing about S&C is that when they give you your offer for a SA position they mail you a box of the worlds best cookies.

I got zero cookies.

Hmm, it might only be for the NYC office?

Market SHATTERING cookies!!!

IIRC those cookies were pretty damn tasty. They also send them for the DC office

[VulcanVulcanVulcan]

Maybe it's because s&c offers socially awkward people who have high grades but can't get offers at peer firms. I say this as someone who has interviewed with these peer firms recently and so far has only an offer from s&c from those firms. As you said yourself, skadden offered fewer people at your school than s&c despite lower grade cutoffs.

My impression was that Skadden had a lot of socially awkward people as well (2/4 interviewers at CB). If you have the grades (top 15% at HYS), you will be getting an offer not only from S&C but also from most of its peer firms. S&C (though filled with law review nerds) isn't desperate for people with high grades. It offers less than a third of the people who met their grade cut-offs (HYS). I'm sure most of the other 2/3 did screeners with them as well.

last year s&c offered all but two of the people that accepted their callbacks from one of hys. their yield was ~30% at that same hys. also, you don't need 15% at any of hys to sweep the v5. median puts you in contention at all but possibly wachtell.

also, at one of hys, s&c offered over half of interviewers. you appear not to know what you're talking about.

places with the highest yields at hys are not in the V10. Think w&c, munger etc. i consider yields useless, nonetheless.

You don't need 15% to sweep V5, but being 15% at HYS guarantees multiple (most likely 4) V5 offers.

Outside of W&C, Munger, etc., the traditional NYC powerhouses have the highest yields at one of HYS (including CSM, S&C, DPW, but not Skadden).

I've looked at the yield data for multiple of HYS and I've also noticed that Skadden NY gets absolutely crushed relative to the rest of V5. Any speculation as to why this is?

[Anonymous User]

Question for anyone who might be able to answer or speculate. I bid S&C but didn't get an interview and resume-dropped during OCI. I didn't hear anything for a few weeks and just received a call asking me to come in an interview. The recruiter said that I'd do a screener first and added that, if everything goes well, she'll help me arrange the CB. I was very disappointed to have not received a screener (bid them pretty high) and this would be my first choice firm, if offered. I know their reputation for giving offers to most individuals who do callbacks, but would anyone be able to speculate as to my chances given that they're calling me in from a resume-drop this late in the game?

[Old Gregg]

Question for anyone who might be able to answer or speculate. I bid S&C but didn't get an interview and resume-dropped during OCI. I didn't hear anything for a few weeks and just received a call asking me to come in an interview. The recruiter said that I'd do a screener first and added that, if everything goes well, she'll help me arrange the CB. I was very disappointed to have not received a screener (bid them pretty high) and this would be my first choice firm, if offered. I know their reputation for giving offers to most individuals who do callbacks, but would anyone be able to speculate as to my chances given that they're calling me in from a resume-drop this late in the game?

They haven't filled their summer class up enough, Kasowitz-style, and need some more warm bodies.

[Anonymous User]

I've looked at the yield data for multiple of HYS and I've also noticed that Skadden NY gets absolutely crushed relative to the rest of V5. Any speculation as to why this is?

Skadden's reputation puts it at a difficult position. People don't think Skadden's as prestigious as other V5 firms + STB because of Skadden's size. Also, people think Skadden's among the worst sweatshops (along with WLRK and Cravath).

[Anonymous User]

I've looked at the yield data for multiple of HYS and I've also noticed that Skadden NY gets absolutely crushed relative to the rest of V5. Any speculation as to why this is?

skadden is not particularly selective at hys, for one. they also have a collection of weird stereotypes like being annoyingly fratty, producing some truly shit associates on account of their lack of selectivity, and being a sweatshop. the sum of these is enough to put some people off. law firm choices at hys run the gamut tho. you cannot really put much stock into the choices of law students at hys. they face choices that law students from other schools consider unattainable, such as boutiques, those mythical secondary market biglaw with work-life balance etc.

if people keep focusing on this silly yield thing, all that is going to do is encourage law firms at that level to indulge in stupid yield-protect tactics like law schools do.

[Anonymous User]

Fit/interests matter more than anything else at this level.

[Anonymous User]

I've looked at the yield data for multiple of HYS and I've also noticed that Skadden NY gets absolutely crushed relative to the rest of V5. Any speculation as to why this is?

skadden is not particularly selective at hys, for one. they also have a collection of weird stereotypes like being annoyingly fratty, producing some truly shit associates on account of their lack of selectivity, and being a sweatshop. the sum of these is enough to put some people off. law firm choices at hys run the gamut tho. you cannot really put much stock into the choices of law students at hys. they face choices that law students from other schools consider unattainable, such as boutiques, those mythical secondary market biglaw with work-life balance etc.

if people keep focusing on this silly yield thing, all that is going to do is encourage law firms at that level to indulge in stupid yield-protect tactics like law schools do.

Why isn't Skadden selective at HYS? They give fewer offers than non-WLRK V5's.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone give me a quick rundown of the LA office?

Also interested.

[Anonymous User]

Apparently there is a rumor going around multiple schools that S&C told low-billing SAs this past summer that they had low numbers. This is categorically untrue--summer at S&C is really not about billing at all and the firm makes that clear. It's about finding your place at the firm, meeting people, figuring out what you want to do. I was a SA there this past summer and never heard anyone at the firm, ever, talk about how many hours SAs were billing. I really doubt many of my hours were actually charged to clients, if any.

Some firms care about SA billing, but S&C is really, really not one of them.

[Anonymous User]

If you receive a CB after a screener received from mass-mailing, is the offer rate likely to be as high as it is for those who receive their CB's from screeners at OCI?