I'm currently in the process of writing
Skadden's application and the question I'm focusing on is: "Why are you applying for a training contract at
Skadden and why do you believe you are suited to the firm?"
Generally, I know that it's best to have three points in a "why the firm" answer, but I was wondering if it was a bad idea to only go with 2 points in further detail? I'm focusing on the international nature of the firm and their focus on pro bono, and then am tying both of these into why I believe I'm well suited to the firm.
Would it be better to try and make these points more concise and get a third in or is sticking with only two fine?