Munger Tolles or Gibson Dunn

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
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.

which is more prestigous?

Munger Tolles
35
63%
Gibson Dunn
21
38%
 
Total votes: 56

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

Re: Munger Tolles or Gibson Dunn

Postby thesealocust » Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:21 pm

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:The non-DC/LA offices of Gibson Dunn are not nearly as selective as MTO or other ultra-selective firms (which probably explains why the law review kids on TLS don't give it any love), but it seems like a pretty stable, well-run place (no layoffs, deferrals, or salary freezes due to ITE). And then there's this:

http://www.jdjournal.com/2011/02/28/gibson-dunn-surged-past-several-milestones-in-2010/


GDC is an absolutely incredible firm. Like any firm, you could point out flaws (historically they don't make offers to all of their summers, for example), but it's obviously well managed, profitable, and from everything I've heard has a great reputation.

There are more reasons than I could count why somebody would rationally go to GDC - even in NYC or CA - over Munger. But if you're asking on a message board and providing no context about your goals, interests, background, or desires - then Munger is more elitier. Basically you get more prestige points per year (whether those prestige points are redeemable for fabulous cash prizes or not is another matter).

If somebody came to this website and said "Should I go to Wachtell or S&C?" then a chorus would say Wachtell, and they would be right. If the person who asked happened to want to do securities work, however, the chorus would be dead wrong.

User avatar
Julio_El_Chavo
Posts: 803
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:09 pm

Re: Munger Tolles or Gibson Dunn

Postby Julio_El_Chavo » Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:50 pm

thesealocust wrote:
Julio_El_Chavo wrote:The non-DC/LA offices of Gibson Dunn are not nearly as selective as MTO or other ultra-selective firms (which probably explains why the law review kids on TLS don't give it any love), but it seems like a pretty stable, well-run place (no layoffs, deferrals, or salary freezes due to ITE). And then there's this:

http://www.jdjournal.com/2011/02/28/gibson-dunn-surged-past-several-milestones-in-2010/


GDC is an absolutely incredible firm. Like any firm, you could point out flaws (historically they don't make offers to all of their summers, for example), but it's obviously well managed, profitable, and from everything I've heard has a great reputation.

There are more reasons than I could count why somebody would rationally go to GDC - even in NYC or CA - over Munger. But if you're asking on a message board and providing no context about your goals, interests, background, or desires - then Munger is more elitier. Basically you get more prestige points per year (whether those prestige points are redeemable for fabulous cash prizes or not is another matter).

If somebody came to this website and said "Should I go to Wachtell or S&C?" then a chorus would say Wachtell, and they would be right. If the person who asked happened to want to do securities work, however, the chorus would be dead wrong.


I agree with your assessment of the current holistic prestige levels of both firms. But I think PPP, Revenue, number of SAs hired, number of deferrals, layoffs, etc. can provide a hint as to whether a given firm's prestige is likely to improve or worsen in the near future. This is true for several reasons. For one, attorneys at other firms know which firms are doing well and which are struggling and this can affect perceptions of prestige. Likewise, Vault rankings tend to improve and are more or less directly correlated with PPP/Revenue/layoffs. The perceived improvement in prestige is amplified by the fact that GDC has more of a national reputation than MTO. And you can't forget the obvious: law students who get worried if the economy falls on hard times again (see e.g. the DOW performance today) are going to use layoff counts during 2008-2009 as tiebreakers for which firms to choose, leaving GDC with slightly more prestigious/capable SAs.

Granted, if OP wants to practice in California, MTO wins. But if you're thinking about keeping your options open about working elsewhere, a firm like GDC leaves almost every door open that MTO would leave open if not many more.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.