Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
Ruxin1
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby Ruxin1 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:09 am

kingjones59 wrote:
Ruxin1 wrote:Yeah funny thing is, when I am working I don't like to pay my rent with 7.9% loans.


kingjones59 wrote:If you have some money saved up to cover first year COL, and you cross your fingers for a 2L SA that will pay for a majority of your 3L COL, you are still looking at <200K at sticker for a T10.


kingjones59 wrote:Taking out loans just to live exasberates the problem.


cool

Master Tofu
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:43 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby Master Tofu » Mon Apr 15, 2013 12:11 pm

thesealocust wrote:Oh it's not that bad! I mean, I'm happy?

Now, uh, maybe don't ask me if my graduating class is happy as a whole. Or whether the people I know as first year associates from my graduating class or others are happy. Because look sometimes ignorance is bliss.

But I'm doing alright guys :D


I won't ask about them. Let's talk about you. What makes you happy? I think that might be helpful to know for the hell-bound. Maybe if they identify your characteristics/outlook in themselves, they will know if they are more likely to be happy or otherwise.

You're doing great work by the way - glad you're around.

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby timbs4339 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 12:23 pm

Great post by TSC. I have friends with six months in biglaw who already have non-biglaw exit options if they want them. People lateral, go to government and then back, clerk and go back. Too often the extreme elements of the reform movement push the narrative that every third-year is taken out behind the woodshed and never heard from again. I know senior associates who worked at three or four biglaw firms over a decade.

That being said, there is a point where the sticker debt is so goddamn high that, psychologically, it is a turn off. From a robotic cost-benefit perspective you probably will make money on the investment, but people are not machines. Some people simply do not want to spend their late 20s/early 30s with that much debt hanging over their heads. And paying off 50K or more of debt per year is an optimistic assumption.

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby rad lulz » Mon Apr 15, 2013 12:38 pm

Ruxin1 wrote:
kingjones59 wrote:TBF, I never really understood why people calculate COL into the total cost of law school. Yes, if you are coming out of undergrad and broke as a joke you are going to have to take loans out just to live. But for any non parent's-basement-dweller-till-26 person, you have to pay to live on your own once you graduate undergrad anyways. If you have some money saved up to cover first year COL, and you cross your finders for a 2L SA that will pay for a majority of your 3L COL, you are still looking at <200K at sticker for a T10. Taking out loans just to live exasberates the problem. With the Federal Clerkship+Big Law average around 66% for the C/O 2012 for the T10 and evidence pointing toward an increase in this for the C/O 2013, is it a great bet? No, absolutely not. But if you work hard to minimize your loans, there is still a good possibility of a favorable outcome.


Yeah funny thing is, when I am working I don't like to pay my rent with 7.9% loans.

lol'd

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8442
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby thesealocust » Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:02 pm

Master Tofu wrote:I won't ask about them. Let's talk about you. What makes you happy? I think that might be helpful to know for the hell-bound. Maybe if they identify your characteristics/outlook in themselves, they will know if they are more likely to be happy or otherwise.


I spent a lot of time meditating on the kind of firm/practice area I would enjoy, and some combination of luck, introspection, and obsessiveness got me there. I found a line of work I have a nerdy fascination with comprised of a great team to work with.

I also knew - as well as anybody could - exactly what I was getting into. The brutality of life as an associate at a big firm was on my radar before I decided to take the LSAT.

I'm also a masochist, and have thrived/sought out intensity and pressure elsewhere in my life. This is more intense and higher pressure in many ways, but in others it's not so different. Directing or stage managing a theatrical production is a lot like coordinating the execution of a deal, just with less applause... and a few billion more dollars at risk?

User avatar
Rahviveh
Posts: 2271
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby Rahviveh » Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:16 pm

Sealocust, would you recommend people opt for the transactional route just for better job security? I would prefer litigation (at this time) but I also don't want to be SOL when it comes to exit options.

Master Tofu
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:43 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby Master Tofu » Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:28 pm

thesealocust wrote:
I spent a lot of time meditating on the kind of firm/practice area I would enjoy, and some combination of luck, introspection, and obsessiveness got me there. I found a line of work I have a nerdy fascination with comprised of a great team to work with.

I also knew - as well as anybody could - exactly what I was getting into. The brutality of life as an associate at a big firm was on my radar before I decided to take the LSAT.

I'm also a masochist, and have thrived/sought out intensity and pressure elsewhere in my life. This is more intense and higher pressure in many ways, but in others it's not so different. Directing or stage managing a theatrical production is a lot like coordinating the execution of a deal, just with less applause... and a few billion more dollars at risk?


Makes sense. Do you see yourself practicing in the same area of law 10 years from now? In other words, are you happy because you've found a career in law or is it you're happy with where you currently are relative to the alternatives?

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8442
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby thesealocust » Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:51 pm

ChampagnePapi wrote:Sealocust, would you recommend people opt for the transactional route just for better job security? I would prefer litigation (at this time) but I also don't want to be SOL when it comes to exit options.


I'd argue that might be strategically smart, yes. Litigation is undergoing a sea change right now - its model is being flip turned upside down in a way that's operating independently of the general economic cycle.

If you're good at what you do and work hard, you can (and will be able to) have a great career in either though. And transactional can be much more limiting - New York is where it's at, plus a few other hubs. And there basically is not such thing as a small/boutique corporate transactional firm, while there are many in litigation, which is worth keeping in mind.

Master Tofu wrote:Makes sense. Do you see yourself practicing in the same area of law 10 years from now? In other words, are you happy because you've found a career in law or is it you're happy with where you currently are relative to the alternatives?


10 years? I don't have a 10-day plan much less a 10 year one. I dig on it, but I'm trying to be open to serendipity and the flow of the universe. I could be a barrista in 10 years, I could be a partner, I could be a jailhouse lawyer... I really don't know. But this (broadly speaking, I had amorphous goals starting law school too) is where I wanted to land afterward, at least for the near term.

20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby 20141023 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:33 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
WokeUpInACar
Posts: 5513
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:11 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby WokeUpInACar » Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:35 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:Well, I finally got my hands on The NALP Foundation’s “2012 Update on Associate Attrition for Calendar Year 2011,” and I even made some kick-ass Google spreadsheets from the data, but I was denied access to share them by NALP. So… I am going to have to simply state points that I thought were interesting here. Before that, however, I would highly recommend that anyone who is considering going to law school read their report as it is literally a goldmine of information; it shows what percentage of associates (broken down into categories of new-hires, lateral hires, male, female, minority, etc.) leave what size firms and after how many years, as well as why they leave and where they end up going.

Synopsis:
Biglaw firms lost roughly 69% of their entry-level associates within the first 5 years, but only a quarter within the first 3 years. Apparently only about a quarter of the associate departures were desired by the law firms, whereas roughly half of the departures were unwanted (the remaining attrition was viewed neutrally). As for where the entry-level associates ended up after leaving their firms, slightly less than half moved to associate positions at other legal firms, and one-fifth of them moved in house with corporate counsels. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell how many of these associates that lateraled into other law firms went to a smaller firm (biglaw to midlaw, midlaw to shitlaw, etc.). Additionally, only 2% of departing associates went to judicial clerkships, and NALP doesn’t break this down into “type” of clerkship, so there is no way to tell how many of these were AIII clerkships, although we know it is a max of 2%. In conclusion, it looks like roughly 31% of entry-level associates are still with their firms after 5 years when it comes to the largest firms (501+ attorneys); this number is slightly higher for other large firms (101-250 attorneys). Of the 69% that leave, approximately 73% end up in decent legal employment such as law firm associate, law firm partner, judicial clerk, other governmental legal job, and corporate in-house counsel. Accordingly, 31% + 50% (73% of 69%) = 81% of entry-level associates are still in some sort of (presumably) decent legal position at the end of year 5.

What the fuck? Also thanks a lot, this is great information man!

User avatar
Tim0thy222
Posts: 341
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 12:57 am

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby Tim0thy222 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:22 pm

Well this thread has turned into a huge success, thanks in large part to thesealocust and kappycaft1, but also everyone contributing.

Sealocust, to add on to your point about transactional vs litigation, can you just be one or the other for different interviews? For example, I spoke with a partner at a big firm recently who said that people who express interest in transactional are far more likely to get callbacks, so I could tell them I want to do transactional, then tell lit boutiques that I want to do lit.

I mean, I really could see myself doing either at this point, but maybe that's because I'm a 0L.

Is this a good or a bad idea?

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby sinfiery » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:23 pm

Awesome. Thank you for that sir! Really backs up what TSL post said about associates leaving their firms but staying within the biglaw machine to a large degree.

User avatar
untar614
Posts: 646
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 1:01 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby untar614 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:34 pm

sinfiery wrote:Awesome. Thank you for that sir! Really backs up what TSL post said about associates leaving their firms but staying within the biglaw machine to a large degree.

Yeah, really nice to know. Makes things seem a little more positive in the long term.

User avatar
Justin Genious
Posts: 271
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby Justin Genious » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:34 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:Synopsis:
Biglaw firms lost roughly 69% of their entry-level associates within the first 5 years, but only a quarter within the first 3 years. Apparently only about a quarter of the associate departures were desired by the law firms, whereas roughly half of the departures were unwanted (the remaining attrition was viewed neutrally). As for where the entry-level associates ended up after leaving their firms, slightly less than half moved to associate positions at other legal firms, and one-fifth of them moved in house with corporate counsels. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell how many of these associates that lateraled into other law firms went to a smaller firm (biglaw to midlaw, midlaw to shitlaw, etc.). Additionally, only 2% of departing associates went to judicial clerkships, and NALP doesn’t break this down into “type” of clerkship, so there is no way to tell how many of these were AIII clerkships, although we know it is a max of 2%. In conclusion, it looks like roughly 31% of entry-level associates are still with their firms after 5 years when it comes to the largest firms (501+ attorneys); this number is slightly higher for other large firms (101-250 attorneys). Of the 69% that leave, approximately 73% end up in decent legal employment such as law firm associate, law firm partner, judicial clerk, other governmental legal job, and corporate in-house counsel. Accordingly, 31% + 50% (73% of 69%) = 81% of entry-level associates are still in some sort of (presumably) decent legal position at the end of year 5.

Wow, thanks for sharing!

Image

SportsFan
Posts: 722
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:26 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby SportsFan » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:44 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:Well, I finally got my hands on The NALP Foundation’s “2012 Update on Associate Attrition for Calendar Year 2011,” and I even made some kick-ass Google spreadsheets from the data, but I was denied access to share them by NALP. So… I am going to have to simply state points that I thought were interesting here. Before that, however, I would highly recommend that anyone who is considering going to law school read their report as it is literally a goldmine of information; it shows what percentage of associates (broken down into categories of new-hires, lateral hires, male, female, minority, etc.) leave what size firms and after how many years, as well as why they leave and where they end up going.

Synopsis:
Biglaw firms lost roughly 69% of their entry-level associates within the first 5 years, but only a quarter within the first 3 years. Apparently only about a quarter of the associate departures were desired by the law firms, whereas roughly half of the departures were unwanted (the remaining attrition was viewed neutrally). As for where the entry-level associates ended up after leaving their firms, slightly less than half moved to associate positions at other legal firms, and one-fifth of them moved in house with corporate counsels. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell how many of these associates that lateraled into other law firms went to a smaller firm (biglaw to midlaw, midlaw to shitlaw, etc.). Additionally, only 2% of departing associates went to judicial clerkships, and NALP doesn’t break this down into “type” of clerkship, so there is no way to tell how many of these were AIII clerkships, although we know it is a max of 2%. In conclusion, it looks like roughly 31% of entry-level associates are still with their firms after 5 years when it comes to the largest firms (501+ attorneys); this number is slightly higher for other large firms (101-250 attorneys). Of the 69% that leave, approximately 73% end up in decent legal employment such as law firm associate, law firm partner, judicial clerk, other governmental legal job, and corporate in-house counsel. Accordingly, 31% + 50% (73% of 69%) = 81% of entry-level associates are still in some sort of (presumably) decent legal position at the end of year 5.

Part I bolded is definitely much different than I expected. Somewhat reassuring, tbh.

20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby 20141023 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:50 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby sinfiery » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:52 pm

Do they have a category for employees who were canned vs those who left on their own?

SportsFan
Posts: 722
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:26 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby SportsFan » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:52 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:
SportsFan wrote:Part I bolded is definitely much different than I expected. Somewhat reassuring, tbh.

Actually, I need to make a correction: The entry-level associate departure rate for firms with 501+ attorneys within 5 years was 64%, whereas it was 69% for firms with 251-500 attorneys, 59% for firms with 101-250 attorneys, and 68% for firms with 2-100 attorneys.

Ah. Still, only a quarter gone within 3 years is a lot better than the "20% of your class leaves each year" stuff that I'd read on here before.

User avatar
Elston Gunn
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby Elston Gunn » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:53 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:Well, I finally got my hands on The NALP Foundation’s “2012 Update on Associate Attrition for Calendar Year 2011,” and I even made some kick-ass Google spreadsheets from the data, but I was denied access to share them by NALP. So… I am going to have to simply state points that I thought were interesting here. Before that, however, I would highly recommend that anyone who is considering going to law school read their report as it is literally a goldmine of information; it shows what percentage of associates (broken down into categories of new-hires, lateral hires, male, female, minority, etc.) leave what size firms and after how many years, as well as why they leave and where they end up going.

Synopsis:
Biglaw firms lost roughly 69% of their entry-level associates within the first 5 years, but only a quarter within the first 3 years. Apparently only about a quarter of the associate departures were desired by the law firms, whereas roughly half of the departures were unwanted (the remaining attrition was viewed neutrally). As for where the entry-level associates ended up after leaving their firms, slightly less than half moved to associate positions at other legal firms, and one-fifth of them moved in house with corporate counsels. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell how many of these associates that lateraled into other law firms went to a smaller firm (biglaw to midlaw, midlaw to shitlaw, etc.). Additionally, only 2% of departing associates went to judicial clerkships, and NALP doesn’t break this down into “type” of clerkship, so there is no way to tell how many of these were AIII clerkships, although we know it is a max of 2%. In conclusion, it looks like roughly 31% of entry-level associates are still with their firms after 5 years when it comes to the largest firms (501+ attorneys); this number is slightly higher for other large firms (101-250 attorneys). Of the 69% that leave, approximately 73% end up in decent legal employment such as law firm associate, law firm partner, judicial clerk, other governmental legal job, and corporate in-house counsel. Accordingly, 31% + 50% (73% of 69%) = 81% of entry-level associates are still in some sort of (presumably) decent legal position at the end of year 5.

Thanks, man. Does it say anything about what the other 19% do? Are they all cider farmers or doc reviewers?

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby sinfiery » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:54 pm

Elston Gunn wrote:Thanks, man. Does it say anything about what the other 19% do? Are they all cider farmers or doc reviewers?

:lol: :lol:

User avatar
WokeUpInACar
Posts: 5513
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:11 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby WokeUpInACar » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:55 pm

sinfiery wrote:Do they have a category for employees who were canned vs those who left on their own?

kappycaft1 wrote:
Synopsis:
Biglaw firms lost roughly 69% of their entry-level associates within the first 5 years, but only a quarter within the first 3 years. Apparently only about a quarter of the associate departures were desired by the law firms, whereas roughly half of the departures were unwanted (the remaining attrition was viewed neutrally). As for where the entry-level associates ended up after leaving their firms, slightly less than half moved to associate positions at other legal firms, and one-fifth of them moved in house with corporate counsels. Unfortunately, there is no way to tell how many of these associates that lateraled into other law firms went to a smaller firm (biglaw to midlaw, midlaw to shitlaw, etc.). Additionally, only 2% of departing associates went to judicial clerkships, and NALP doesn’t break this down into “type” of clerkship, so there is no way to tell how many of these were AIII clerkships, although we know it is a max of 2%. In conclusion, it looks like roughly 31% of entry-level associates are still with their firms after 5 years when it comes to the largest firms (501+ attorneys); this number is slightly higher for other large firms (101-250 attorneys). Of the 69% that leave, approximately 73% end up in decent legal employment such as law firm associate, law firm partner, judicial clerk, other governmental legal job, and corporate in-house counsel. Accordingly, 31% + 50% (73% of 69%) = 81% of entry-level associates are still in some sort of (presumably) decent legal position at the end of year 5.

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby sinfiery » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:59 pm

Does that have equal firing or just a summary report after the person left with something like: Do you miss John? [] Yes [] No [] Maybe

I wonder..

User avatar
WokeUpInACar
Posts: 5513
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:11 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby WokeUpInACar » Mon Apr 15, 2013 4:59 pm

sinfiery wrote:Does that have equal firing or just a summary report after the person left with something like: Do you miss John? [] Yes [] No [] Maybe

I wonder..

:lol: :lol: :lol:

20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby 20141023 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:01 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
WokeUpInACar
Posts: 5513
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 11:11 pm

Re: Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

Postby WokeUpInACar » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:04 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:
SportsFan wrote:
kappycaft1 wrote:
SportsFan wrote:Part I bolded is definitely much different than I expected. Somewhat reassuring, tbh.

Actually, I need to make a correction: The entry-level associate departure rate for firms with 501+ attorneys within 5 years was 64%, whereas it was 69% for firms with 251-500 attorneys, 59% for firms with 101-250 attorneys, and 68% for firms with 2-100 attorneys.

Ah. Still, only a quarter gone within 3 years is a lot better than the "20% of your class leaves each year" stuff that I'd read on here before.

Well, despite my post above, both the mean and median annual attrition rates are actually about twenty percent for firms with more than 251 attorneys; it is slightly less for firms with 101-250 attorneys (it actually states this in NALP's report). The ranges are crazy too; some firms only have rates of like 13%, whereas others are as high as 29% in the 501+ category. :shock:

Damn this would be nice information to have lol




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dannyswo, splitterfromhell, zakset and 5 guests