Remember when sticker at T10 seemed like a good idea?

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
thelawyler
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:00 pm

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

Postby thelawyler » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:38 pm

I wonder if this is information that our OCS offices should have.

User avatar
Bronck
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:28 pm

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

Postby Bronck » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:07 pm

Thanks for the info kappycaft1. Truly incredible stuff to know.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8448
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 7:30 pm

Attrition rates can be ballparked as follows:

X = number of summer associates per year
Y = total number of associates at the firm
Z = is the firm expanding

Unless Z = true (and it's usually not) then every year the firm hires X summers, and doesn't grow, so it's safe to ballpark attrition at X / Y.

This isn't right for a few reasons, chiefly lateral hiring. It'll be damn near spot on for the biggest firms that thump their chest about not hiring laterals, but possibly very inaccurate for firms who rely on hiring laterals from those firms. Still, it's a place to start.

Tim0thy222 wrote: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?


Sure. It's mildly dishonest, but IMO a pretty good strategy. You can even watch how sincere you are when you tell firm A you wanna do deals and tell firm B you wanna kick ass in court.

NB that some big firms have large enough classes + departments you can even express ambivalence and get away with it.

User avatar
Bronck
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:28 pm

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

Postby Bronck » Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:47 pm

Tim0thy222 wrote: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


How true is this with the big firms in NYC? Sounds too good to be true lol.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8448
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 7:52 pm

Bronck wrote:
Tim0thy222 wrote: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


How true is this with the big firms in NYC? Sounds too good to be true lol.


While it can vary year to year, it was EXTREMELY true when I went through the process.

Tons of 1Ls never bother figuring out what transactional law is, and tons of transactional lawyers are grumpy about how law school doesn't expose you to it at all. Match made in heaven.

Fun fact: I asked a Cravath partner once why he went into corporate, and he answered "because after a year of law school I knew I would hate litigation?"

User avatar
mindarmed
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:16 pm

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

Postby mindarmed » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:00 pm

tag for future use, thanks TSL and kappycaft1

User avatar
NoodleyOne
Posts: 2358
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 7:32 pm

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

Postby NoodleyOne » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:25 pm

thesealocust wrote:
Bronck wrote:
Tim0thy222 wrote: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


How true is this with the big firms in NYC? Sounds too good to be true lol.


While it can vary year to year, it was EXTREMELY true when I went through the process.

Tons of 1Ls never bother figuring out what transactional law is, and tons of transactional lawyers are grumpy about how law school doesn't expose you to it at all. Match made in heaven.

Fun fact: I asked a Cravath partner once why he went into corporate, and he answered "because after a year of law school I knew I would hate litigation?"

So how could you sell that in an interview? I know UVA has a transactional clinic in cooperation with the business school... talk about that and stuff?

User avatar
Bronck
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:28 pm

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

Postby Bronck » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:27 pm

NoodleyOne wrote:So how could you sell that in an interview? I know UVA has a transactional clinic in cooperation with the business school... talk about that and stuff?


Let me just reference another TSL post: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 8#p4061387

User avatar
banjo
Posts: 1345
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:00 pm

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

Postby banjo » Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:38 pm

Bronck wrote:
NoodleyOne wrote:So how could you sell that in an interview? I know UVA has a transactional clinic in cooperation with the business school... talk about that and stuff?


Let me just reference another TSL post: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=148258#p4061387


^Wow, amazing post. Follow up question: do litigators tend to be more grade-snobbish at OCI than transactional lawyers? I don't know where I got that idea, but I'd love to see if it's true.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8448
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 11:05 pm

banjo wrote:
Bronck wrote:
NoodleyOne wrote:So how could you sell that in an interview? I know UVA has a transactional clinic in cooperation with the business school... talk about that and stuff?


Let me just reference another TSL post: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 8#p4061387


^Wow, amazing post. Follow up question: do litigators tend to be more grade-snobbish at OCI than transactional lawyers? I don't know where I got that idea, but I'd love to see if it's true.


Wow, I'm actually impressed with how much I still agree with my old post there :D

I never got the sense litigators were grade snobbier. More insufferable, worse looking, smellier, etc. sure. But not noticeably grade snobbier.

User avatar
TripTrip
Posts: 2740
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:52 am

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

Postby TripTrip » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:40 am

Bronck wrote:
NoodleyOne wrote:So how could you sell that in an interview? I know UVA has a transactional clinic in cooperation with the business school... talk about that and stuff?


Let me just reference another TSL post: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=148258#p4061387

That was awesome. It was actually a really good answer to the question I asked earlier in this thread to BLA. Maybe I just need to search thesealocust's post history and read everything...

User avatar
Sheffield
Posts: 411
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:07 am

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

Postby Sheffield » Tue Apr 16, 2013 3:08 am

This thread rages endlessly on between T14 is a good idea to it’s too perilous. Maybe I am skimming too much but it seems like those attending T14s are a lot more positive than those who are down the food chain or just considering LS.

Below is a link that I use to help figure out what the future might hold financially. I put all my debt on line one and then fill out lines 6-8 (for simplicity I skip lines 2-5). For those in the $200K debt range earning $100K to $125K or more, this should help calm your stress (if you can survive on $5K a month after taxes & tuition).

Click Here

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

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

Postby Clearly » Tue Apr 16, 2013 4:14 am

This thread is so win.

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 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:01 am

Sheffield wrote:This thread rages endlessly on between T14 is a good idea to it’s too perilous. Maybe I am skimming too much but it seems like those attending T14s are a lot more positive than those who are down the food chain or just considering LS.


thesealocust wrote: I want to start there because it's really hard to generalize. M&A associate in NYC at Skadden is in a different world than real estate lawyer at a midlaw firm in texas. And it becomes very individualized, and down to what people want and try to do - no more OCI means getting data and doing studies just isn't feasible anymore.


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


Not everyone at a T14 goes to work for Skadden and certainly not everyone will find the fit that TSL find. The conclusion is that your mileage may vary. Sticker may be justifiable in some circumstances but you should always think twice before you take on 200k of loans.

User avatar
kingjones59
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:28 pm

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

Postby kingjones59 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 11:53 am

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.



This is great stuff and essentially debunks a lot of recycled myths on TLS, mainly:
1) 20% of your BigLaw Class will be gone in 3 years
2) There are little to no (good) exit options for early-year big law associates
3) You most likely will not stay in a high paying firm job long enough to pay down $200K in debt

This type of factual information is welcomed- TLS lately has been a doom and gloom bidding war, i.e. "T14 is good at sticker!", "No T6 is only good at sticker!" "HYS is only good at sticker!" "Only 50% of your big law class will be around for 3 years!" "No, only 40%!" "No, only 30%!"

People love to make themselves feel better about their decision to attend/not attend law school and other shitty about their decisions to attend/not attend. Look at all the factual information available to you and make an informed decision, thats all you need to do.

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 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 11:56 am

kingjones59 wrote:1) 20% of your BigLaw Class will be gone in 3 years

He said a quarter will be gone in 3 years.

And its still possible some of the people leaving are going to shitlaw firms. Probably not many, but who knows.

User avatar
kingjones59
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:28 pm

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

Postby kingjones59 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 12:05 pm

ChampagnePapi wrote:
kingjones59 wrote:1) 20% of your BigLaw Class will be gone in 3 years

He said a quarter will be gone in 3 years.

And its still possible some of the people leaving are going to shitlaw firms. Probably not many, but who knows.


Typo on my part, I meant the conventional TLS "wisdom" was that only 20% would be left after 3 years

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

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

Postby bk1 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 12:40 pm

kingjones59 wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:
kingjones59 wrote:1) 20% of your BigLaw Class will be gone in 3 years

He said a quarter will be gone in 3 years.

And its still possible some of the people leaving are going to shitlaw firms. Probably not many, but who knows.


Typo on my part, I meant the conventional TLS "wisdom" was that only 20% would be left after 3 years

That's not actually TLS CW. The TLS CW is that it is 50% left after 3 years and 20% left after 5 years. Which apparently doesn't seem far off from the truth.

User avatar
Sheffield
Posts: 411
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:07 am

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

Postby Sheffield » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:19 pm

Not offing an opinion here, only asking a question. What normally happens after the hammer drops in 3 years?

Using my calculator (noted earlier) your $200K debt is now $115K. If after BL you land on your feet with a $90K salary, your (after debt/taxes) monthly net take home is $4,260. On a scale of 1-10 is this scenario reasonable?

After thought: if you are married the $4,260 likely becomes +$6,260. If you land on your feet at $110K (I think reasonable) as a single person you net $5,800 and married it is likely around $7,800. Still no Mercedes in the driveway, but your meals are not always in a fast food bag.
Last edited by Sheffield on Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

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

Postby 20141023 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:21 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:35 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
kingjones59
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:28 pm

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

Postby kingjones59 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:22 pm

bk1 wrote:
kingjones59 wrote:
ChampagnePapi wrote:
kingjones59 wrote:1) 20% of your BigLaw Class will be gone in 3 years

He said a quarter will be gone in 3 years.

And its still possible some of the people leaving are going to shitlaw firms. Probably not many, but who knows.


Typo on my part, I meant the conventional TLS "wisdom" was that only 20% would be left after 3 years

That's not actually TLS CW. The TLS CW is that it is 50% left after 3 years and 20% left after 5 years. Which apparently doesn't seem far off from the truth.


You think 75% left after 3 years and 31% left after 5 years isnt far off from 50% and 20%, respectively?

Those are extremely different numbers, and atleast some of those who left went to another BigLaw firm and are still making around the same salary.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8448
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

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

Postby thesealocust » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:25 pm

Sheffield wrote:Not offing an opinion here, only asking a question. What normally happens after the hammer drops in 3 years?

Using my calculator (noted earlier) your $200K debt is now $115K. If after BL you land on your feet with a $90K salary, your (after debt/taxes) monthly net take home is $4,260. On a scale of 1-10 is this scenario reasonable?

After thought: if you are married the $4,260 likely becomes +$6,260. If you land on your feet at $110K (I think reasonable) as a single person you net $5,800 and married it is likely around $7,800. Still no Mercedes in the driveway, but your meals are not always in a fast food bag.


Your job after biglaw will probably pay as follows:

Another firm: As much or more as your first firm
Another smaller firm: small haircut, so probably still around or over $200K
In house counsel: At least 100K, but varies depending on industry
Gummit: probably in the 70-90K range
Public interest: lol who knows

Unsurprisingly, what you do and when you do it will likely depend in no small part on your debt.

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 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:27 pm

thesealocust wrote:
Sheffield wrote:Not offing an opinion here, only asking a question. What normally happens after the hammer drops in 3 years?

Using my calculator (noted earlier) your $200K debt is now $115K. If after BL you land on your feet with a $90K salary, your (after debt/taxes) monthly net take home is $4,260. On a scale of 1-10 is this scenario reasonable?

After thought: if you are married the $4,260 likely becomes +$6,260. If you land on your feet at $110K (I think reasonable) as a single person you net $5,800 and married it is likely around $7,800. Still no Mercedes in the driveway, but your meals are not always in a fast food bag.


Your job after biglaw will probably pay as follows:

Another firm: As much or more as your first firm
Another smaller firm: small haircut, so probably still around or over $200K
In house counsel: At least 100K, but varies depending on industry
Gummit: probably in the 70-90K range
Public interest: lol who knows

Unsurprisingly, what you do and when you do it will likely depend in no small part on your debt.


Do smaller firms have better hours/lifestyle? Or if you do litigation are you going to be a slave the rest of your life unless you go into govt (since there aren't as many in-house options)?

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

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

Postby 20141023 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:37 pm

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:35 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 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 1:44 pm

kappycaft1 was there any correlation between geography and attrition rate?




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mhr, Snuffles1 and 3 guests