OP here. The others below your post aren't me, to be clear.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 3:20 pmHey, thanks for doing this. I'm a 1L at CLS and have a question about grades for V10 firms. Once you hit Stone (but fall below Kent), does it matter how much higher you are for the big NYC firms (Cravath, Paul Weiss, S&C, etc.)? As in, is a 3.4 treated differently than a 3.6 for recruiting purposes?
Also, to the extent you can speak to this: do non-Kent people have a shot at Wachtell? Currently sitting at an A- average and, god willing, might be able to inch it up to 3.7, but a 3.8 is just eons away lol. I have a background in non-elite finance/consulting and did undergraduate research in the M&A/corporate governance space so I think I might be able to communicate a tailored interest in what the firm does. But I know grades are king...just don't know how far down Wachtell might dip at CLS. Thanks again!
Yeah, non-Kent people have a shot at Wachtell, though I know at least one of the guys who typically conducted CLS screeners was particularly grade-focused. Work experience matters. You shouldn't put them on a pedestal, though, for a variety of reasons (not that there aren't good reasons to work there - there are - but it's not the end-all for law firms and there are also perfectly good reasons to choose somewhere else).
Just hitting the Stone cut-off puts you in the running for almost all of the big NY firms (not Wachtell, but eh), but having "higher Stone" isn't meaningless. Like the other person said, S&C is probably the most grade-focused of the bunch. My year, the general rule was that if you had a 3.6 or up, you had a 95+% chance of getting an offer at S&C (you weren't out if you were low Stone, but it was certainly more up in the air). I heard that the year before me, a dude with Kent struck out at EIP and OCS mass-mailed a bunch of firms seeing if they'd be willing to interview a Kent Scholar, and S&C and Boies were the ones to respond affirmatively. That said, the levels of grades generally do matter substantially less once you hit the Stone cut-off (for the general large NY powerhouse firms, not boutiques or similar) - my CSM/STB/DPW/S&C-type firm rejected a few Kents each year.
There's nothing for you to really do, though, besides try to keep your grades high and interview as if you have a chance.
Caveat - I didn't get a Wachtell offer lol. I bombed one interview in particular at the callback stage, and I'll obviously never know if I was close to an offer to begin with. That said, I can say I got a callback without Kent 1L or any work experience in finance.
It's not like a 3.4 vs. 3.6 doesn't matter at all, but it doesn't massively affect your chances at Cravath, DPW or Cleary compared to how you interview. I'm reasonably certain on this for the first two, at least, provided that you're coming from CLS. I'll take a good disposition over a 0.2 GPA increase any day.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 4:44 pmCLS 2L/3L here. To be completely honest — yes, I think a 3.4 is treated differently than a 3.6 at this tier of firm (i.e., it makes a difference not only at S&C, but also at Cravath, DPW, Cleary, etc.). GPA is not just a soft threshold for these firms; it's also a sliding scale. If you go into EIP/WIP with a 3.4, I do think you have to sell yourself somewhat better, demonstrate higher interest in the firm, have better WE, have better poise/presence, and so on vs. the 3.6 candidate. That's not to say the 3.4 is dead in the water or that the 3.6 is a shoe-in, just that the bar you have to clear moves up or down a little bit.
I'd echo the advice about not fixating on Wachtell. It takes just a handful (like like 4-6 people) from CLS each each year, so it's not only extremely grade-selective, but selective on a whole other set of other dimensions (e.g., pre-law school finance WE, demonstrated interest in public M&A — things that are basically proxies for "able and willing to work 2,700+ billable hours per year"). Just having the grades is not enough: I applied with a GPA >4.0 and didn't receive an offer. Conversely, I imagine that Wachtell would strongly consider somebody with a marginal GPA (marginal meaning 3.7) if that candidate had BB IB experience. And a 4-6 cohort is small enough that there's also some inherent randomness in the process.
Agreed on the Wachtell front though.