WSJ article:The $1,000+ an hour club Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
- MrPapagiorgio
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:36 am
Re: WSJ article:The $1,000+ an hour club
I love how lawyers didn't want to push above $990 in a recession because, you know, $1,000 is so much more than $990. It's like real estate agents listing a house for $995,000 instead of $1,000,000: because it "sounds" cheaper. I'm sure those guys are really worth it though 

-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: WSJ article:The $1,000+ an hour club
Sure, but it's actually a very well documented phenomenon in psychology and behavioral finance that you do actually disproportionately perceive it as cheaper.MrPapagiorgio wrote:I love how lawyers didn't want to push above $990 in a recession because, you know, $1,000 is so much more than $990. It's like real estate agents listing a house for $995,000 instead of $1,000,000: because it "sounds" cheaper. I'm sure those guys are really worth it though
- FlightoftheEarls
- Posts: 859
- Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:50 pm
Re: WSJ article:The $1,000+ an hour club
Are you suggesting that they're not worth it if they're an attorney that needs to deceptively create a discount, or are you suggesting that those fees are far more than an attorney should be charging for his/her services?MrPapagiorgio wrote:I love how lawyers didn't want to push above $990 in a recession because, you know, $1,000 is so much more than $990. It's like real estate agents listing a house for $995,000 instead of $1,000,000: because it "sounds" cheaper. I'm sure those guys are really worth it though
If you're saying the latter, they may be absolutely worth it if you're dealing with bet-the-company litigation with potential damages in the billions of dollars (for example, this decision from yesterday: http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC. ... bbott_Labs). Even in the corporate setting, Marty Lipton could (if WLRK changed their billing structure) charge $5k an hour constructing a pill for your company and his services would be worth every penny.
-
- Posts: 271
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 8:59 pm
Re: WSJ article:The $1,000+ an hour club
I know from doing billing as a LA, that some partners bill a lot more than $1,000 an hour for certain projects. The billing at big firms is ridiculous. As a LA, I was billing at $300 an hour.
-
- Posts: 432428
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: WSJ article:The $1,000+ an hour club
The corresponding spreadsheet is interesting because it shows where and in which practice area the lawyers work:
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/ ... 10223.html
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/ ... 10223.html
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login