Law School Discussion

Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!

bloomlaw

  • ****
  • 723
  • Welcome to the Monkey House
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #30 on: October 17, 2008, 12:24:45 AM »
A '07 study from the National Law Journal has GULC placing about 10-15% deeper into it's class than Vandy for biglaw.


Link?

Link Schmink. This board is about talking out of our ass, and convincing people who need advice that we know what we are talking about.

Not that Nealric was doing this or anything.

Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #31 on: October 17, 2008, 12:31:21 AM »
He is overstating his position.

bloomlaw

  • ****
  • 723
  • Welcome to the Monkey House
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #32 on: October 17, 2008, 12:33:43 AM »
JNSL, while we are here, can you answer this question...

I'm applying to vandy, and I mailed in my app. Is it worth to fill out all tehse merit aid questions and send it in so they have those essays when they look at my app for acceptance? Or will it not matter?

nealric

  • ****
  • 2248
  • a.k.a. Miguel Sanchez
    • View Profile
Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #33 on: October 17, 2008, 06:33:49 AM »
Quote

Link Schmink. This board is about talking out of our ass, and convincing people who need advice that we know what we are talking about.

Not that Nealric was doing this or anything.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1207904889529

If you add clerkships its a bit over 10%

I thought that one was common knowledge.


The only LSD tradition more hallowed than talking about things you are ignorant of is telling people that everyone on LSD is talking about things they are ignorant of.  ;D

Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #34 on: October 17, 2008, 08:22:33 AM »
Wasn't there a really awesome chart that was floating around the boards last year?

It was posted after I had committed and stopped caring.  Could someone re-link?

Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #35 on: October 17, 2008, 11:09:51 AM »
Firms have to hire from top schools in order to keep their prestige level high.  This is life.  I don't see why we need to debate the nuances of this position (or whether it's reasonable), unless people really want to.

The question is whether the T14 schools are considered top over the T18.  I think that, to an extent, GULC and Cornell are more prestigious than the next batch, but I don't know how much of a psychological difference this is.  Did Yellow Brick Road's partner say "top" schools and mean UVa and up?  Harvard and Yale?  BU and up?  This is the million dollar question.

Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #36 on: October 17, 2008, 11:56:18 AM »
Firms have to hire from top schools in order to keep their prestige level high.  This is life.  I don't see why we need to debate the nuances of this position (or whether it's reasonable), unless people really want to.

I disagree but again, I'm fine with not debating it if no one is interested.

On what basis do you disagree?  I thought this was obvious.  Why are most firms (we're not talking about Wachtell) willing to take basically anyone from HLS and YLS, but more discriminating with kids from Tier-II schools (i.e., requiring publication, Law Review, and high grades)? 

Or perhaps you disagree that they need top kids to keep their prestige levels high, which I thought was too self-evident to address.

lisak

Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #37 on: October 17, 2008, 12:36:38 PM »
I am sorry, but this sounds like you just aren't great at interviewing, or only participated in OCI and didn't look beyond that.   If you had realistic expectations, and did something other than go to class at school, you should be employed.  You should consider expanding your idea of what types of jobs you are looking at.

Are you looking for 2L summer?  You need to get going on some networking ASAP.

Going to a school just because it's ranked a few spots higher won't help if you come across as unpolished in interviews.  Do some mock interviews with career services and hone those skills.  You are probably better off doing that than posting ridiculously untrue comments on the internet.

This year is nothing like last year...

Exactly!  Check out http://abovethelaw.com/2008/10/accept_offers_or_lose_offers.php#more where even UPenn Law School (definitely a T14 school) sent around a letter to students today, urging them to make a decision if they have multiple offers (partially because it is good form and will free up spots for other people who don't have multiple offers and partially because of self-interest...an offer can be rescinded and that has apparently happened already to at least 1 UPenn student).

So, make no mistake about it, the economy is not good right now (it is NOT limited to just the financial sector because the financial sector and the ability to get credit is at the heart of the free-market economy that Western democracies embrace).  And IMHO the economy will NOT be getting better for a pretty long time (at least 1 year, probably closer to 2 years).  I work in the legal profession (and have for over 10 years), and I can say that I do not think that this is a good time to be looking for a job as a 1st Year Associate or a Summer Hire.  Most law firms have NO IDEA how this financial meltdown is going to play out so there is unprecedented uncertainty in all markets (including the legal market), and since attorneys tend to be cautious people by nature, they are likely risk averse in hiring (i.e.  they only will hire the bare minimum that they think they will need and hire temps and paralegals to fill in the gaps since they don't want to have to layoff staff except as a very last resort). 

Until we get a new President and the market assumes some semblence of normalcy, I think that law firms will continue to hold off on their normal hiring trends.

I mean VC money is drying up - e.g.  one of the major VC firms just had a meeting with its startups to tell them to trim costs / presume that they are not going to get additional rounds of financing for a while - and since law firms work very closely with venture capitalists, this hurts many law firms' bottom lines.  Similarly, the IPO market has all but dried up / closed...yet again, something that will affect firms that do a lot of transactional work.  And while it is true that certain aspects of legal work has business up (like bankruptcy), I would caution that even in that field there is so-o-o-o much uncertainty in the market as to how bankruptcies and foreclosures are going to be handled by the government (read: regulations) that I don't think this will necessarily be a boon for lawyers in the short-term.  And in litigation, some lawsuits that would have been filed may be delayed because companies realize that they don't want those litigation costs (which are quite high) to impact their bottom-line in a severe recession (which is what we are in and / or headed for).  The stock market will likely be very harsh in punishing companies for missing earnings targets and litigation costs could be a cause for companies missing earnings targets...I mean having extremely large litigation costs is an above the line adjustment that affects short-term profitability with the prospect of long-term benefits (and many companies will be cutting back on discretionary spending and litigation costs, unless the litigation is essential to the companies' well-being to defend and / or has a huge upside potential to prosecute IMHO).  So, I think many companies will likely delay extraneous litigations that they might otherwise have pursued in a "normal economy".

In general, I think, like most businesses, law firms are having a wait and see attitude about how this financial meltdown will unfold. 

Also, another thing to think about is that a lot of law firms have pretty significant turnover after about 2-3 years (many lawyers decide they want to go in-house for a better work-life balance after paying their dues at a big firm), but since companies are not hiring as much, there will be less of this turnover from seasoned Associates and, hence, possibly less open slots for greener 1Ls to replace those Associates who in a normal market would have left voluntarily.

This is just my opinion (but I have a feeling that people who are used to getting multiple offers may have less to choose from in the next year or 2).  Also, based on supply and demand, I project that salaries may fall a bit (or at least not escalate like they have been in recent years for 1Ls).  This is not as bad as it seems though because 1L salaries have been increasing like crazy (far exceeding inflation and B-School grad salaries), and IMHO starting salaries of 1Ls at big firms are pretty excessive and out-of-line compared with other high-demand professions (e.g.  engineering, consulting, etc). 

And I just saw on http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chicago-lawfirm-layoffs-oct16,0,2059582.story that "Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal let go of about 24 lawyers out of 680, the second round of dismissals this year, and Katten Muchin Rosenman laid off 21out of 650, the firms confirmed Thursday", which further backs up my theory that hiring will not be very strong for the next year or 2.

So, I have a feeling that this economic downturn is definitely affecting and will continue to affect the legal market for at least 1-2 years.  I know I am being pessimistic but that is how I see things.  ;)

Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #38 on: October 17, 2008, 09:50:17 PM »
JNSL, while we are here, can you answer this question...

I'm applying to vandy, and I mailed in my app. Is it worth to fill out all tehse merit aid questions and send it in so they have those essays when they look at my app for acceptance? Or will it not matter?

I would say yes as long as you can put together a great, polished product relatively soon. There were lots of splitters (such as yourself if your GPA is accurate) waitlisted last year who, to quote admissions, "were dying to come here." You obviously want to separate yourself as best you can in as many places as you can. While it won't hurt you to do those essays later, it could feasibly help you too. For what it's worth, I didn't send any of them in ever (didn't think I had a shot at the named scholarships...which was probably spot-on).


Wasn't there a really awesome chart that was floating around the boards last year?

It was posted after I had committed and stopped caring.  Could someone re-link?

Before clicking on the image, examine it small. Where do the cutoffs really seem to be? Pick that spot and then see what schools it groups together.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2207/2432556220_6952654518_o.gif

This image is ordered by the aggergate of clerkships and NLJ 250 from 2005.

Quote

Link Schmink. This board is about talking out of our ass, and convincing people who need advice that we know what we are talking about.

Not that Nealric was doing this or anything.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1207904889529

If you add clerkships its a bit over 10%

I thought that one was common knowledge.


The only LSD tradition more hallowed than talking about things you are ignorant of is telling people that everyone on LSD is talking about things they are ignorant of.  ;D


Let's be clear here. You said, "A '07 study from the National Law Journal has GULC placing about 10-15% deeper into it's class than Vandy for biglaw."

The article you link to suggests an 8.2% difference in actual placement. However, I do dispute Vanderbilt's percentage (I have the Class of 2007 statistics in hand - the same ones you've seen plastered all over this site - and they suggest that 12 more Vandy students worked as first year associates at NLJ 250 firms. This amounts to about a 5.5% improvement over what the NLJ study suggests).

Two comments on this:
1) We don't know how badly (or if at all) they messed up GULC's reported numbers. It could be none at all. It could be that a similar percentage were missed. It depends on which firms didn't report correctly. If they were Texas firms, for instance, it might not affect the % much for GULC as much as it did for Vandy.

2) I said you overstated your position. I mean to imply that you were mistaken about what you said with respect to what you should know. I'm still evaluating your original comment in relation to the 8.2%.

Vanderbilt had 27 clerks from the class of 2007, which amounts to 12.3% (220 graduates...which, for what it's worth, is not what it usually is. I have no idea what happened.). I agree that adding the %s together is helpful because of how competitive clerkships are.

Using the flawed Vandy %, this brings us to 52.6%.
Using GULC's % (which may or may not be demonstrably flawed), their clerkship numbers (10% http://www.law.georgetown.edu/admissions/QuickFacts.htm) put the total percentage at 58.5%.

I'm not a math major, but I think 58.5% - 52.6% is 5.9%. And this is with Vandy's flawed numbers.


Like I said, nealric overstated his position. Saying 10% - 15% isn't justified, as used, unless you double the percentages provided for by the study he linked to + GULC's self-reported clerkship %s.

Re: Go to a T14 IN THIS ECONOMY!
« Reply #39 on: October 17, 2008, 10:28:19 PM »
http://www.leiterrankings.com/jobs/2008job_biglaw.shtml

GULC KILLS Vandy there. How bout them apples, JSNL?

His chart does show a key difference of the T14 - and that is not simply that it improves your chance of earning market, but it improves your chances of landing the most sought after jobs.  While the T15-18 may only place slightly fewer students in 160k gigs, they are much less represented in the top vault firms.