Georgetown Law/1L

<p>

</p>

<p>-I have trouble believing 70% got BIGLAW. Perhaps 55% got offers (including 60k ID offers). And my guess is a decent percentage of that got rescinded, etc. Harvard only placed 58% at OCI and that’s including midlaw, biggov, etc. I have trouble believing CCN did any better. CCN’s numbers were quite skewed. Yes, it could be perceived that it was 70%, but in reality the way they played with the numbers was this. ALL OFFERS/# of 2L’s. Split summers will show up twice, multiple offers, etc.Median or less was more like a 25%-50% at any type of offer.</p>

<p>This idea that CCN median will put you in biglaw is just a hoax. In reality, you need top third. But for the sake of argument, I’ll play your game. </p>

<p>-I don’t think its HYS or bust for BIGLAW. But the farther down the chain you go, the lower your chances of an offer. Lets just say median gets biglaw (in reality its 33%, but again…playing your game) at CCN, that’s a 1 and 2 chance. Is it worth 250k of SL debt to have a 50% chance? Let’s move our way down to MVP and that’s probably a 35%-40% (in reality its top quarter) chance at best. Once you hit Duke and da’ Center, you’re looking at 20% or less. 250k of SL debt is not worth a 1 and 5 chance at biglaw. With that said, there are a couple things that can shift your chances (i.e banking pre-LS, HYP ug, div 1 athlete, tech background for IP, etc.)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>1) Split summers are less likely ITE, since people don’t want to take chances. And people doing 2 weeks at their 1L summer firm don’t show up on the CLS offer sheet.
2) Read the xo thread you just started on this matter.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I really think it’s around 60-70%. If that’s the worst case scenario (and it is, because it was bottom for ITE), then I think the CCN bet is worth it. But people weigh risk differently, so reasonable minds can disagree.</p>

<p>^^^</p>

<p>It seemed like most agreed that CCN was from from 70%.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>What is your opinion regarding lower T14 for BigLaw placement? (Cornell, Duke, Gtown) Would you advise someone set on BigLaw to take the chance? Just curious about what you might think on this.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No, I wouldn’t. But I would also advise against Michigan, Berkeley, and UVA for the same reason.</p>

<p>But keep in mind that it all depends on how risk averse you are. Additionally, when one says, “I want to work in biglaw,” I always sort of chuckle to myself. Getting a biglaw job, while certainly an accomplishment in this economy, is not necessarily a blessing. The next question becomes, “What kind of biglaw job did you get?” Are you going to be a summer associate at Wachtell, or did you accept an offer at Howrey? If the former, congratulations. If the latter, then I apologize because there’s a strong likelihood that you will never be a summer associate at Howrey, which is dissolving in a few weeks.</p>

<p>The prestige of the firm matters, in my opinion. Tippity-top law schools don’t just provide better placement into big firms, some of them also provide better placement into the most elite firms.</p>

<p>^</p>

<p>Thanks for your input. Btw, congrats on your V5 offer, you must be a heck of a law student.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Aside from prestige benefits of elite firms, do you think exit opps are considerably better if you come from a V5 or V10 firm? </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I am sure many law students would kill for a BigLaw gig now, despite its poor working conditions…</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Do you know what grade range you need to be comfortably safe for BigLaw coming from Michigan or UVA? (assuming you are a decent interviewer) I would like to know the general range for NYC BigLaw. Have some friends considering UVA and UMich, and they all seem to have BigLaw or bust mentality.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>There are many factors that determine one’s options out of these firms. Namely, not all V5s and V10s are created equal. Some firms outside the V10 are, or have departments that are, much stronger than V5s and V10s. On average, the options are better. But, of course, it all depends on the state of the market, one’s plans, the resume one has built, etc.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes. I think it’s rather sad that law students would kill for a job at Stroock.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“Comfortably safe?” Top 30%. Top half is pushing it. Again, I’m risk-averse. To me, one is never safe and should go gangbusters until one has an offer in hand.</p>

<p>It was interesting – sallyawp actually suggested that one’s odds of making partner might lower as you rose up the rankings, which is of course logical. You then pointed out that the odds of making partner at a second firm were easier than if you’d attended lower down, which is also logical.</p>

<p>But I don’t know which effect is stronger. It’s an interesting, if somewhat academic, question.</p>

<p>I think Sally is certainly right on that point.</p>

<p>The higher ranked firms tend to have higher PPPs, which I believe increases the barrier to entry for partnership. Simply put, you need to generate more business to justify becoming partner at a V5 than say at a random V100 with significantly lower PPP.</p>

<p>But then there are huge barriers to rainmaking at a top firm too. Top firms tend to have many large, institutional clients. It’s hard to bring in business when most of your potential clients are conflicted out. </p>

<p>I also think that gunning for partner at a top NYC firm is basically a nonsense proposition at this point. As far as I know, at each of the top NYC firms, only one or two associates actually made partner in NYC this year. The rest of the partners came from the firms’ international offices. I think that’s a sign.</p>

<p>just got my daily fix from TLS and saw an interesting item from the National Law Journal re: 1st year associate placement and the “50 Go-to Law Schools” –
quick response is Georgetown places # 13 with placement of 242 grads as 1st year associates in NLJ 250 firms. ( Percentage placement is 37.58). </p>

<p>Focusing on percentage placement-- the top 3 schools with highest % is
University of Chicago: 58.97
Cornell 58.33
Columbia 55.20<br>
Comparing with HYS–
Harvard 49.74
Stanford 41.62
Yale 33.84</p>

<p>Focusing on # of associates placed–</p>

<h1>1 Harvard – 287 associates placed</h1>

<h1>2 Georgetown 242 "</h1>

<h1>3 Columbia 239 "</h1>

<p>as one should never underestimate the power of networking and alumni connections, I personally believe Georgetown still remains to be a solid choice. </p>

<p>Just throwing this info out to further the discussion. Sometimes the bottom T-14, get little respect on these boards. IMO- Cornells % of placement is pretty impressive too!!</p>

<p>That chart is useless.</p>

<p>Thanks Flowerhead. You must be right as always.</p>

<p>NLJ250? I’d like to see V100.</p>

<p>More precisely, you’d also need to add in a clerkship correction. Doing so gets you much more sensible numbers. You can pull the 2007 numbers here:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.bcgsearch.com/pdf/BCG_Law_School_Guide_2009.pdf[/url]”>http://www.bcgsearch.com/pdf/BCG_Law_School_Guide_2009.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Adding the 50% clerkship correction to Yale, for example, makes much more sense.</p>

<p>That’s one obvious problem. Another is that we could use some more recent clerkship statistics.</p>

<p>Yeah. I’m betting there’s a 2011 BCG guide or something; it strikes me as an annual publication.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It seems there is a major drop in BigLaw prospects after CCN-tier? Do you think there is a noticeable difference for BigLaw prospects between CLS and UVA/Mich? Can median or below-median folks at NYU/CLS still expect to snatch a big firm gig in this economy?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Know plenty who did, but it’s not something one can “expect.”</p>