What is needed to get hired at Cravath? Forum

[Anonymous User]

1L at CN in NYC and came into law school pretty much putting Cravath on a pedestal (blinded by Vault, I know). Reading posts around here, a lot of people seem to say that Cravath is fungible with S&C, Davis Polk, Simpson, etc. and I get this sense from posts that it isn't even "hard" to get a job at any of these NY shops (excluding WLRK, of course). But for Cravath, for instance, data from my school's OCS shows that fewer than 20 students summered there last year. Assuming maybe a 50% yield from offers made, that still works out to at most around 10%-15% of the class getting an offer from Cravath. I guess what I'm trying to say is: Doesn't that make Cravath plenty hard to get? Maybe people are comparing Cravath to places like Jenner & Block D.C., but summer hiring stats honestly suggest only top students (even at CN) can get Cravath. Of course, I don't have access to offer by honors data yet, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, I'm at a 3.67 after the first semester (don't know where that puts me in the class) - do I have a good chance to get a 2L position at the firm? What else does Cravath look for (e.g. special work experience, elite undergrad, etc.)?

[Anonymous User]

I don't have the exact answers, but this board may be tainting your view of hard. Consider that people at schools from Harvard up on this board haven't secured any offers yet let alone the most competitive. Sure, if you have a 3.7 (assuming top 10%ish)from CN, the door is open for V10 firms if you can come off normal for 30 min, but for people below, even at your school, it is an uphill battle and the bottom half of the class might not even get a second thought. Jenner and Block comp may also come from people gunning for SCOTUS/Appellate Lit. Any prominent SCOTUS/Appellate Lit practice in DC will be ultra competitive and probably require similar or greater credentials to top tier NY.

[Anonymous User]

1L at CN in NYC and came into law school pretty much putting Cravath on a pedestal (blinded by Vault, I know). Reading posts around here, a lot of people seem to say that Cravath is fungible with S&C, Davis Polk, Simpson, etc. and I get this sense from posts that it isn't even "hard" to get a job at any of these NY shops (excluding WLRK, of course). But for Cravath, for instance, data from my school's OCS shows that fewer than 20 students summered there last year. Assuming maybe a 50% yield from offers made, that still works out to at most around 10%-15% of the class getting an offer from Cravath. I guess what I'm trying to say is: Doesn't that make Cravath plenty hard to get? Maybe people are comparing Cravath to places like Jenner & Block D.C., but summer hiring stats honestly suggest only top students (even at CN) can get Cravath. Of course, I don't have access to offer by honors data yet, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, I'm at a 3.67 after the first semester (don't know where that puts me in the class) - do I have a good chance to get a 2L position at the firm? What else does Cravath look for (e.g. special work experience, elite undergrad, etc.)?

At my lower T14, your GPA would be more than enough for Cravath. Their CBs last much longer (about 6 vs. 3 hours) than CBs at other firms because of their 18-month rotational system, which is what differentiates them from those other firms you mentioned. From what I can tell there is no difference in "prestige" between Cravath and the rest of the V10. Also, as you mentioned, WLRK is much more prestigious and selective than Cravath.

Your conclusion does not follow from the OCS data because not every top student will want Cravath. For example, DC firms are generally more selective and many top students go there and bypass NY. There are also botiques and elite PI. And someone (perhaps the majority) might prefer an assignment system that lets you work with multiple partners over Cravath's 18-month thing. Cravath is a top firm but not *the* top firm.

[Anonymous User]

Lots of law students put Cravath up on a pedestal because of Vault, and Cravath's recruiting team definitely uses that to their advantage. The reason why people who are actually practicing law don't put Cravath on a pedestal is that after you've been practicing for a while, you realize that the V5/V10 firms are doing almost exactly the same caliber of work with the same kinds of clients. A Vault ranking means absolutely nothing when it comes to your day-to-day work and quality of life. There are a lot of very, very valid reasons why someone might not pick Cravath. For example, people who want to do litigation might pick Skadden, DPW, or GDC over Cravath, and that would be a wise decision.

[Anonymous User]

1L at CN in NYC and came into law school pretty much putting Cravath on a pedestal (blinded by Vault, I know). Reading posts around here, a lot of people seem to say that Cravath is fungible with S&C, Davis Polk, Simpson, etc. and I get this sense from posts that it isn't even "hard" to get a job at any of these NY shops (excluding WLRK, of course). But for Cravath, for instance, data from my school's OCS shows that fewer than 20 students summered there last year. Assuming maybe a 50% yield from offers made, that still works out to at most around 10%-15% of the class getting an offer from Cravath. I guess what I'm trying to say is: Doesn't that make Cravath plenty hard to get? Maybe people are comparing Cravath to places like Jenner & Block D.C., but summer hiring stats honestly suggest only top students (even at CN) can get Cravath. Of course, I don't have access to offer by honors data yet, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, I'm at a 3.67 after the first semester (don't know where that puts me in the class) - do I have a good chance to get a 2L position at the firm? What else does Cravath look for (e.g. special work experience, elite undergrad, etc.)?

Former Cravath associate here. It's no harder to get a job at Cravath than it is at Davis Polk, S&C, Simpson, etc. Your assumption of a 50% yield from offers made honestly sounds pretty high. I'm no expert or anything, but even 1/3 would be a good number. Maybe placing at the top of the Vault rankings affected that somewhat but 50% is insanely high.

You don't need special work experience, an elite undergrad or anything like that. If your grades are decent, you have a shot. Just like their peer firms, they look for people who seem sharp and interested, would work hard and aren't pricks.

Like the others said, there are plenty of valid reasons to choose another firm over Cravath, regardless of whether your goal is corp, lit, or whatever else. There are pros and cons to all of these firms. Cravath has many things that are different than other places, but selectivity isn't one of them. You'll learn more about firms and the interview process as your hiring season actually gets closer.

[Anonymous User]

Echoing what everyone said so far.

Getting a job at CSM isn't as difficult as it appears for a CN grad.

You need above median grades (though CSM does has been known to dip down to median in certain cases), be a decent interviewer, and be able to articulate why Cravath.

To dispel the aura surrounding the firm: It's mathematically not that selective among the T6. Many, many people who get offers from CN decline to go to peer firms like S&C/DPW/STB/Clearly etc. Some people who get callbacks to Cravath don't accept that invitation. Many top students who worked 1L SAs at peer firms don't bother interviewing with CSM. A number of people who summer at CSM do not go through the OCI process, so they wouldn't appear in your OCS placement numbers.

Cravath has a unique assignment system (rotation program) that is highly unappealing to many people (and quite appealing to some). It also works on largely similar corporate matters as other V10 NYC Biglaw firms and is known to have higher average billable hours for junior associates than peers. Therefore, it competes largely for the same students as the before-mentioned firms.

[Anonymous User]

CLS student confirming + offering tidbits.

-Yield is not 50%; it is often lower.
-People drop out before callbacks sometimes, so that decreases the number of students with jobs.
-Many people do not like certain features of Cravath, such as the rotation system.
-Cravath is known--rightly or wrongly--for having Wachtell hours for standard BL pay. There is thus no comparative advantage to Cravath over peer BL firms or Wachtell.

To offer myself as an example, I had no interest in Wachtell or Cravath and did not even bid them despite being extremely competitive on paper. I applied to S&C because of its lit practice, which actually has higher grade requirements for CLS students that Cravath, and few other BL firms. The Cravath "prestige" here is more of a joke than anything else in my experience. It is certainly not more selective than peer firms.

[Anonymous User]

Another CLS student, recently got a Cravath offer FWIW. I echo what's already been said — CSM is not any more grade-selective than its NY peers, and is acknowledged to be less grade-selective than S&C, for example. Having looked at the data, I will say that CSM has somewhat higher yield (on offers) at CLS OCI. But I'm not sure how meaningful the delta is (like +5 to +10 percentage points vs. peer firms), nor could I pinpoint where it comes from. It could be the extra little sheen that that the CSM name carries (idk), or it could be that the candidate pool for CSM is a bit more self-selecting from the outset (due to bad-hours reputation, wonky rotational system, etc.).

As to "what is needed to get hired," I think they look for candidates who can convey a specific, articulable interest in a practice area. I found that other top firms I interviewed with were pretty forgiving on this point, and seemed to even encourage a bit of waffling and experimentation. The questions I got at CSM, however, were much more probing ("No, really, why actually are you interested in X?").

But yes, I'd advise you to take Cravath off the pedestal. There's so much randomness in this process (not to mention legitimate questions of fit), that setting your heart on any one single firm doesn't make much sense.

[Anonymous User]

Jenner and Block comp may also come from people gunning for SCOTUS/Appellate Lit. Any prominent SCOTUS/Appellate Lit practice in DC will be ultra competitive and probably require similar or greater credentials to top tier NY.

It's not unique to appellate, good DC firms are more selective than good NY firms across the board. The same for California and Chicago. NYC biglaw minus Wachtell really isn't that selective. Appellate groups are insanely selective even compared to normal DC biglaw or Wachtell and nowhere near the selectivity of Cravath.

[Anonymous User]

Jenner and Block comp may also come from people gunning for SCOTUS/Appellate Lit. Any prominent SCOTUS/Appellate Lit practice in DC will be ultra competitive and probably require similar or greater credentials to top tier NY.

It's not unique to appellate, good DC firms are more selective than good NY firms across the board. The same for California and Chicago. NYC biglaw minus Wachtell really isn't that selective. Appellate groups are insanely selective even compared to normal DC biglaw or Wachtell and nowhere near the selectivity of Cravath.

This. Cravath will dip to median/lower than median at some schools for the right candidate. Some DC offices/practice groups won't touch you if they don't you think you are competitive for a good clerkship. Many satellite offices are also more selective than NY firms/HQs because of the # of apps they get per summer position.

[Anonymous User]

Former Cravath associate here. Cravath is no more selective than its peer firms and in many ways less so. Its prestige comes from a bygone era, 50-100 years ago, when the firm actually had some mega cases. The market is a lot more competitive now, so a lot of the firms in V20-30 range all have the same clients, same cases, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Former Cravath associate here. Cravath is no more selective than its peer firms and in many ways less so. Its prestige comes from a bygone era, 50-100 years ago, when the firm actually had some mega cases. The market is a lot more competitive now, so a lot of the firms in V20-30 range all have the same clients, same cases, etc.

Yep. The market for complex legal work has dramatically grown over the last century to sustain 2,000 lawyer outfits at places like Skadden and Kirkland. You just can't monopolize the coolest work anymore. Litigation boutiques have also given a viable prestigious and small to handle top-of-the-market litigation. Cravath's client base also just isn't sexy anymore. PE/VC/startups are all the rage, and Cravath is out there repping companies that are much closer to IBM or [insert generic big bank]. Of course, their partnership structure has also made them prey to losing top talent (and therefore work) to other more aggressive shops. Cravath might remain prestigious for the rest of my life - who is to know - but its current standing and outlook aren't any different than any of the other top 20 or 25 firms in the country.

FWIW, I got and turned down an offer at Cravath for a V10. Took me all of 5 seconds. I had zero concerns about not getting top tier work. Several years later and no regrets. Work across from CSM enough to know that I'm not missing out.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

A pulse and median grades or above from a T14.

[Anonymous User]

Former Cravath associate here. Cravath is no more selective than its peer firms and in many ways less so. Its prestige comes from a bygone era, 50-100 years ago, when the firm actually had some mega cases. The market is a lot more competitive now, so a lot of the firms in V20-30 range all have the same clients, same cases, etc.

Yep. The market for complex legal work has dramatically grown over the last century to sustain 2,000 lawyer outfits at places like Skadden and Kirkland. You just can't monopolize the coolest work anymore. Litigation boutiques have also given a viable prestigious and small to handle top-of-the-market litigation. Cravath's client base also just isn't sexy anymore. PE/VC/startups are all the rage, and Cravath is out there repping companies that are much closer to IBM or [insert generic big bank]. Of course, their partnership structure has also made them prey to losing top talent (and therefore work) to other more aggressive shops. Cravath might remain prestigious for the rest of my life - who is to know - but its current standing and outlook aren't any different than any of the other top 20 or 25 firms in the country.

FWIW, I got and turned down an offer at Cravath for a V10. Took me all of 5 seconds. I had zero concerns about not getting top tier work. Several years later and no regrets. Work across from CSM enough to know that I'm not missing out.

I mean, CSM doesn’t really do work for IBM or big banks very much anymore either. Those big IBM cases left CSM with some of its partners, and big banks use about 20 different firms for their matters. It’s a little unclear what Cravath is known for now that all their star M&A partners left...

[Anonymous User]

Former Cravath associate here. Cravath is no more selective than its peer firms and in many ways less so. Its prestige comes from a bygone era, 50-100 years ago, when the firm actually had some mega cases. The market is a lot more competitive now, so a lot of the firms in V20-30 range all have the same clients, same cases, etc.

Yep. The market for complex legal work has dramatically grown over the last century to sustain 2,000 lawyer outfits at places like Skadden and Kirkland. You just can't monopolize the coolest work anymore. Litigation boutiques have also given a viable prestigious and small to handle top-of-the-market litigation. Cravath's client base also just isn't sexy anymore. PE/VC/startups are all the rage, and Cravath is out there repping companies that are much closer to IBM or [insert generic big bank]. Of course, their partnership structure has also made them prey to losing top talent (and therefore work) to other more aggressive shops. Cravath might remain prestigious for the rest of my life - who is to know - but its current standing and outlook aren't any different than any of the other top 20 or 25 firms in the country.

FWIW, I got and turned down an offer at Cravath for a V10. Took me all of 5 seconds. I had zero concerns about not getting top tier work. Several years later and no regrets. Work across from CSM enough to know that I'm not missing out.

I mean, CSM doesn’t really do work for IBM or big banks very much anymore either. Those big IBM cases left CSM with some of its partners, and big banks use about 20 different firms for their matters. It’s a little unclear what Cravath is known for now that all their star M&A partners left...

Former Cravath associate here, who posted once earlier. I want to make it clear that Cravath is very much a peer firm of the others (plenty of good reasons to go elsewhere) and everything that's been said with regard to selectivity is true, but let's not pretend it's a dumpster.

There's some misinformation in your post.

Cravath still does a ton of work for IBM, including a ton of M&A. The big banks do use about 20 different firms for their matters but the firm has more than enough of it to keep them as busy as it wants. And while M&A partners did leave, they were hardly the stars. The only real notable partner loss, in my mind, was a litigation partner.

Edit: Recalling one M&A "star" partner who did go, now. That said, good riddance he left. It's his new firm's loss.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Wow, really appreciate all the insight! So it sounds like grades above median at CN (New York) should be the floor for Cravath? I guess that's around a 3.33? Honestly seems a bit low lol, but I'm more than happy to believe you guys (would take a lot of pressure off of me, academically, this semester ). Also, once you're above median, is there a difference (for Cravath and similar firms) between, say, a 3.4 or a 3.6?

To the extent anyone has worked at Cravath (or know someone who works there), what is the culture like? I think people on here say it is tangibly more intense and old school than even S&C or Davis Polk. Is that still true, and is it changing? I saw that they recently elected this massive class of partners, adding some diversity to leadership. I'm guessing that's a good sign of the firm adapting to changing external forces?

[Anonymous User]

Former Cravath associate here. Cravath is no more selective than its peer firms and in many ways less so. Its prestige comes from a bygone era, 50-100 years ago, when the firm actually had some mega cases. The market is a lot more competitive now, so a lot of the firms in V20-30 range all have the same clients, same cases, etc.

Yep. The market for complex legal work has dramatically grown over the last century to sustain 2,000 lawyer outfits at places like Skadden and Kirkland. You just can't monopolize the coolest work anymore. Litigation boutiques have also given a viable prestigious and small to handle top-of-the-market litigation. Cravath's client base also just isn't sexy anymore. PE/VC/startups are all the rage, and Cravath is out there repping companies that are much closer to IBM or [insert generic big bank]. Of course, their partnership structure has also made them prey to losing top talent (and therefore work) to other more aggressive shops. Cravath might remain prestigious for the rest of my life - who is to know - but its current standing and outlook aren't any different than any of the other top 20 or 25 firms in the country.

FWIW, I got and turned down an offer at Cravath for a V10. Took me all of 5 seconds. I had zero concerns about not getting top tier work. Several years later and no regrets. Work across from CSM enough to know that I'm not missing out.

I mean, CSM doesn’t really do work for IBM or big banks very much anymore either. Those big IBM cases left CSM with some of its partners, and big banks use about 20 different firms for their matters. It’s a little unclear what Cravath is known for now that all their star M&A partners left...

Former Cravath associate here, who posted once earlier. I want to make it clear that Cravath is very much a peer firm of the others (plenty of good reasons to go elsewhere) and everything that's been said with regard to selectivity is true, but let's not pretend it's a dumpster.

There's some misinformation in your post.

Cravath still does a ton of work for IBM, including a ton of M&A. The big banks do use about 20 different firms for their matters but the firm has more than enough of it to keep them as busy as it wants. And while M&A partners did leave, they were hardly the stars. The only real notable partner loss, in my mind, was a litigation partner.

Edit: Recalling one M&A "star" partner who did go, now. That said, good riddance he left. It's his new firm's loss.

Yeah, Kirkland looted Cravath back in 2017 and 2018, I think - Goldstein for Litigation and Davis and Schiele (is that the "star partner" you're referring to above LOL) for M&A. Kirkland's just been on a spree. Didn't they poach Edward Lee from Wachtell last year? That was pretty crazy, like who leaves Wachtell?? I'm curious as to what current or ex-Cravathians - or any one, really - think about Cravath's outlook, especially given the rise in PE work. Is Cravath worried at all about being left out? Or is it still sitting plum on its M&A practice? They weren't really involved in any of the big deals last year. Not sure if that's a COVID anomaly or the beginning of a trend. Their antitrust practice seems to be top-notch though. Snagging that Epic lawsuit will probably foot some bills in the short term lol.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, CSM is obviously no dumpster fire, but it's doing work that you can find at any of the V25 to some degree or another. Obviously, if your schtick is exclusively public M&A, CSM is probably still the 2nd best firm to be at outside of Wachtell or at least solidly in the top 5 or however big Band 1 for elite M&A is these days.

From my experience both at CSM and two other white shoe NY firms, CSM is still very old school, but I don't think it's more so than most of the other white shoe firms. The environment is very serious, but I thought people were friendly enough.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, Kirkland looted Cravath back in 2017 and 2018, I think - Goldstein for Litigation and Davis and Schiele (is that the "star partner" you're referring to above LOL) for M&A. Kirkland's just been on a spree. Didn't they poach Edward Lee from Wachtell last year? That was pretty crazy, like who leaves Wachtell?? I'm curious as to what current or ex-Cravathians - or any one, really - think about Cravath's outlook, especially given the rise in PE work. Is Cravath worried at all about being left out? Or is it still sitting plum on its M&A practice? They weren't really involved in any of the big deals last year. Not sure if that's a COVID anomaly or the beginning of a trend. Their antitrust practice seems to be top-notch though. Snagging that Epic lawsuit will probably foot some bills in the short term lol.

Goldstein's a loss. I am not referring to Schiele as the "star" partner. I couldn't care less that Schiele and Davis left.

I still don't understand why you're so certain that Cravath is struggling. It's not. You seem a little pretentious.

[Sackboy]

Yeah, Kirkland looted Cravath back in 2017 and 2018, I think - Goldstein for Litigation and Davis and Schiele (is that the "star partner" you're referring to above LOL) for M&A. Kirkland's just been on a spree. Didn't they poach Edward Lee from Wachtell last year? That was pretty crazy, like who leaves Wachtell?? I'm curious as to what current or ex-Cravathians - or any one, really - think about Cravath's outlook, especially given the rise in PE work. Is Cravath worried at all about being left out? Or is it still sitting plum on its M&A practice? They weren't really involved in any of the big deals last year. Not sure if that's a COVID anomaly or the beginning of a trend. Their antitrust practice seems to be top-notch though. Snagging that Epic lawsuit will probably foot some bills in the short term lol.

Goldstein's a loss. I am not referring to Schiele as the "star" partner. I couldn't care less that Schiele and Davis left.

I still don't understand why you're so certain that Cravath is struggling. It's not. You seem a little pretentious.

S/he might be a bit more doom and gloom than is warranted. If you pull up the league tables, it's clear Cravath is not struggling. That being said, I think there are a couple fair points in there. Cravath is poorly positioned for PE work. It's "a feature, not a bug" to them, though. Agree that the loss of Davis is whatever. Hard to care too much about losing a 1st year partner. Goldstein was obviously a very big loss, but I don't know why you're laughing off Schiele. Guy came over to Kirkland and landed the $63 billion Abbvie and $74 billion Bristol-Myers Squibb acquisitions about a year later.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Wow, really appreciate all the insight! So it sounds like grades above median at CN (New York) should be the floor for Cravath? I guess that's around a 3.33? Honestly seems a bit low lol, but I'm more than happy to believe you guys (would take a lot of pressure off of me, academically, this semester ). Also, once you're above median, is there a difference (for Cravath and similar firms) between, say, a 3.4 or a 3.6?

To the extent anyone has worked at Cravath (or know someone who works there), what is the culture like? I think people on here say it is tangibly more intense and old school than even S&C or Davis Polk. Is that still true, and is it changing? I saw that they recently elected this massive class of partners, adding some diversity to leadership. I'm guessing that's a good sign of the firm adapting to changing external forces?

Your reply strongly suggests that you still have Cravath on a pedestal, but median grades are a bit low (unless you are an exceptional candidate for diversity, W/E, other reasons). At CLS, nearly 100% of Cravath offers are made to students with Stone honors (>3.4, top ~40% of the class). As you hinted, I think GPA is not simply a hurdle to clear — a 3.6 student is not a shoe-in (nobody is), but may have to be less convincing and special than the 3.4 student.

To the culture point, that’s definitely the stereotype, but I don’t have first- or second-hand experience. My dad, a lawyer who practiced NY biglaw in the 1970s-80s, always jokes: Cravath are intense WASPs, Davis Polk are country club WASPs, and SullCrom are mean WASPs. Obviously his intel is about 50 years out of date, and these firms are no longer WASP institutions, but some aspect of those reputations have persisted.

[Anonymous User]

Just my two cents: a mentor of mine worked incredibly hard at CN (top 10%) to get Cravath, got it, immediately hated it, and then lateraled very quickly to a peer firm where they actually cared about his interests. So, like, a bit silly to care about prestige (especially when it's prestige of prestige in the case of Cravath) so much when you're considering how to spend every day of your life for multiple years.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, Kirkland looted Cravath back in 2017 and 2018, I think - Goldstein for Litigation and Davis and Schiele (is that the "star partner" you're referring to above LOL) for M&A. Kirkland's just been on a spree. Didn't they poach Edward Lee from Wachtell last year? That was pretty crazy, like who leaves Wachtell?? I'm curious as to what current or ex-Cravathians - or any one, really - think about Cravath's outlook, especially given the rise in PE work. Is Cravath worried at all about being left out? Or is it still sitting plum on its M&A practice? They weren't really involved in any of the big deals last year. Not sure if that's a COVID anomaly or the beginning of a trend. Their antitrust practice seems to be top-notch though. Snagging that Epic lawsuit will probably foot some bills in the short term lol.

Goldstein's a loss. I am not referring to Schiele as the "star" partner. I couldn't care less that Schiele and Davis left.

I still don't understand why you're so certain that Cravath is struggling. It's not. You seem a little pretentious.

I mean, a bunch of the posts above seemed to hint at gloom and doom (e.g. prevalence of "hot" PE/VC work that Cravath isn't a leader in, loss of "traditional" clients like IBM), so I was just curious lol. Didn't mean to be pretentious.

[Anonymous User]

Former Cravath associate here. Cravath is no more selective than its peer firms and in many ways less so. Its prestige comes from a bygone era, 50-100 years ago, when the firm actually had some mega cases. The market is a lot more competitive now, so a lot of the firms in V20-30 range all have the same clients, same cases, etc.

Yep. The market for complex legal work has dramatically grown over the last century to sustain 2,000 lawyer outfits at places like Skadden and Kirkland. You just can't monopolize the coolest work anymore. Litigation boutiques have also given a viable prestigious and small to handle top-of-the-market litigation. Cravath's client base also just isn't sexy anymore. PE/VC/startups are all the rage, and Cravath is out there repping companies that are much closer to IBM or [insert generic big bank]. Of course, their partnership structure has also made them prey to losing top talent (and therefore work) to other more aggressive shops. Cravath might remain prestigious for the rest of my life - who is to know - but its current standing and outlook aren't any different than any of the other top 20 or 25 firms in the country.

FWIW, I got and turned down an offer at Cravath for a V10. Took me all of 5 seconds. I had zero concerns about not getting top tier work. Several years later and no regrets. Work across from CSM enough to know that I'm not missing out.

I mean, CSM doesn’t really do work for IBM or big banks very much anymore either. Those big IBM cases left CSM with some of its partners, and big banks use about 20 different firms for their matters. It’s a little unclear what Cravath is known for now that all their star M&A partners left...

Former Cravath associate here, who posted once earlier. I want to make it clear that Cravath is very much a peer firm of the others (plenty of good reasons to go elsewhere) and everything that's been said with regard to selectivity is true, but let's not pretend it's a dumpster.

There's some misinformation in your post.

Cravath still does a ton of work for IBM, including a ton of M&A. The big banks do use about 20 different firms for their matters but the firm has more than enough of it to keep them as busy as it wants. And while M&A partners did leave, they were hardly the stars. The only real notable partner loss, in my mind, was a litigation partner.

Edit: Recalling one M&A "star" partner who did go, now. That said, good riddance he left. It's his new firm's loss.

Anon who pointed out loss of IBM work — I was referring to the litigation side. When was the last time you saw an IBM litigation matter like that gigantic one against DOJ?

Also the star this post is referring to is Barshay, and since his arrival at PW, PW’s corporate side is seeing a big boom. Coincidence or causation?

Goldstein was a really, really big loss on the litigation side, and along with her many star associates left too (either with her, later, to competitors, etc).

I’m not saying Cravath is dumpster fire. It’s just nothing close to what it used to be. Sort of an end of an era.

ETA: since Barshay went over to PW, PW handled the Redhat merger for IBM, FYI (public info, on the news).

ETA2: Ex CSM commenting on the outlook. I don't know much about corporate side, to be clear. The business is clearly shifting away from M&A after the loss of the partners, the change in the market, etc. Because the model is to promote from within (exceptions exist but this is still largely the case), CSM will have a hard time entering into new market quickly because you need to make lateral hire for moves like this. I think CSM is growing (or was always big? unclear) in the antitrust space with Varney hire and all that, and trying to grow IP space with Kappos hire (note that both of these are lateral partner hire moves). It's a little unclear to be how successful they are in either respect, but CSM is definitely facing an increasing amount of competition, and it is in serious need for a revamp. None of the following helps: rotation system, hierarchical structure, slow moving culture, no lateral hire, lockstep compensation.

[Anonymous User]

A pulse and median grades or above from a T14.

Doesn't seem OP took your post serious, but want to clarify that it's very inaccurate.

I have a similar GPA to OP and from what OP has posted I went to the same or a very similar school, and it was enough to get into Cravath. But I have plenty of classmates who had median or higher grades and failed to get into Cravath. And as someone else referenced, there are plenty of T14 grads who want biglaw at Cravath or elsewhere but never make it.