BruceWayne wrote:LOL it's pretty common knowledge pal (and just so you know that's Camron, he's a NYC homie so he probably knows it too)
When you look at the leverage ratios at the big NYC firms it's pretty obvious (especially in conjunction with the well known up or out policies of these firms) that your chances of building a long term career out of a spot at say, Skadden NYC is pretty slim. On top of that the sort of work that you generally end up doing as an associate at a big NYC firm (at least in your first few years) isn't going to be all that substantive and hands on. I don't know if you realized this, but most people who start out as associates at the big NYC firms don't last very long. Often they have to move out into non law jobs or into house positions. NYC is basically the toughest market for someone who is looking to actually make firm work a long term career move because so many firms there follow the "hire a ton of associates, work them hard for a few years and get rid of them" model. Basically that bwv812 said was what I was talking about when I made the post, and he's dead on.
You're a clown for a dozen reasons in this single post alone, and I don't have the energy to point them all out.
bwv812: Like I said, I agree that leverage isn't meaningless. And whether taking a gig at a big, highly leveraged firm is the best way to start a career is a matter of personal opinion. My beef with what BW keeps saying is the idea that all those hundreds of associates from Cravath et al that are the "out" in the up-or-out system "often have to move out into non law jobs"--that's just plain crazy to say.