Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273361
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 12, 2014 9:25 pm

I spent two years as a banking analyst at GS/MS/JPM so hopefully I can shed some light here.

If you're an M&A/Capital Markets associate at a firm, you'd likely transition over as an associate or a VP. Where you transition makes a pretty big impact on your career, as associates and VPs tend to differ in terms of the skillset required. As an associate you'll need to have a good grasp of numbers and financial concepts - you need to be able to understand a model and the underlying economics of a business. Most of your work will be making presentation materials and helping analysts build models, so it's important to build those skills. You're going to need to take it on yourself to study finance outside of work and demonstrate an interest in the financial side of dealmaking. Firms are always looking for new associates (they probably have the highest burnout rate), so while the transition will be tough, it's definitely possible, especially if you're at a well-regarded firm that works closely with different banks (Wachtell, S&C, DPW and STB might be your best bets).

As a VP, you're much more client facing and your job is more to manage deals on the larger scale than the associates so a deep knowledge of the numbers isn't as important. I don't have any direct knowledge, but it seems to me that although the skills of a VP mesh much more closely with the skills of a legal associate, it's much harder to lateral in at that level as VPs seem like they add the least value (at least in comparison to how much they get paid) of anyone at the bank. Most groups that I know of have very few VPs and most of them were rockstar associates that are on the track for further promotion. It would help if you had a portable book of business, which is unlikely because it would make more sense to stay in law if that were true.

You'll also want to ask yourself why you want to do banking over law. The pay is comparable at the associate level (and much more volatile, with >50% in the form of bonus, which is often deferred or paid non-cash). The pay is also much more meritocratic, with bonuses tied largely to performance and differences as large as $50k between people at the same level. Pay as a managing director might outpace pay as a partner, but it's significantly more volatile, and, as I said above, largely deferred and non-cash. The hours are worse in an absolute basis, but may or may not be worse to work because you're not billing hourly. Also, at least at the analyst level, more time is spent sitting around and shooting the shit with your coworkers than at law firms, which you may or may not like (I personally do, but whatever). This may be different for associates who are more consistently busy.

Finally, both careers are about the same in terms of stability and exit opps. Bankers are more likely to get laid off than lawyers, but I've seen more people linger around the VP / Director level longer than as senior associates at firms. Exit opps tend to be in house positions at clients for both, and these jobs tend to be very similar in pay, prestige and hours so you'll likely end up in the same place. The glamorous exit opps you hear about from banking are largely left to the analysts, not the associates although it's not unheard of associates to end up at PE funds or hedge funds (still highly unlikely).

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Old Gregg » Sun Jul 13, 2014 12:20 pm

Loving this artificial "V3" distinction.

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby 2014 » Sun Jul 13, 2014 4:28 pm

zweitbester wrote:Loving this artificial "V3" distinction.

I know if I wanted to go into banking I'd hate to work at STB or DPW

User avatar
Hipster but Athletic
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:15 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Hipster but Athletic » Sun Jul 13, 2014 5:55 pm

bankers are getting super fucked right now. it's impossible to make money with no volatility. don't go into banking.

El_Bee_Oh
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby El_Bee_Oh » Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:08 pm

Hipster but Athletic wrote:bankers are getting super fucked right now. it's impossible to make money with no volatility. don't go into banking.


Banking =/= trading

M&A bankers are making a killing right now... as are M&A lawyers.

Chrstgtr
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:53 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Chrstgtr » Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:12 pm

Would it be better to get a JD and then try to transition into IBD possibly by getting an MBA or would you be better off getting an JD-MBA and then trying to transition?

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby PDaddy » Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:22 pm

meshtdagn wrote:Why, if you wanted to become an investment banker, did you go to school to become a lawyer? Are there not more straitforward paths? I'm genuinely curious---I've seen lot's of people talk about this ITT and it never made sense to me.


You took the words right out of my mouth! Too many students are pursuing law degrees simply to say they have law degrees. There's nothing shameful in wanting to make a boatload of money. If you like money, go work with money and make money. There's no way I'd pursue a law degree in my 20's in today's market...no way!

Anonymous User wrote:Hey everyone,

If I ultimately have a strong interest in being on the business side of an i-bank, does it make sense for me to start out at a V3 firm? Would this set me up for i-banking as a viable exit opp?


Chrstgtr wrote:Would it be better to get a JD and then try to transition into IBD possibly by getting an MBA or would you be better off getting an JD-MBA and then trying to transition?


Don't overthink this whole thing. If you want to be an investment banker or another type of business professional, go work in banking for a few years, get an MBA/Executive MBA, move up through the chain, and make your transitions that way. Get your law degree later.

Banks and firms have programs to put you on track. The key is to get in and strategically move towards your goal. You can start as a personal banker, sales & service rep or a financial advisor in-training with BOA, Chase, Wells, SB, Ameriprise, or some other bank/firm (closer to the wealth management track, right?), and after 3-5 years on the job get your MBA/Executive MBA via their tuition reimbursement program.

I have recently spoken with recruiters at BOA and Wells about taking that exact path, and they say that it's the way to go...easier than trying to transition from law.

Get the JD sometime AFTER that or concurrently with the MBA. Either way you will be much better positioned to go into corporate business or wealth management. The best thing about all of this is that you will gain valuable experience that puts a lot of money in your pocket, and it will make you a better candidate for b-school, law school, or both.

Don't waste your time or money on law school right now, especially with the job market being what it is. If you want the money, go to the money!

Work and get an MBA.
Last edited by PDaddy on Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:32 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby PDaddy » Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:23 pm

Hipster but Athletic wrote:bankers are getting super fucked right now. it's impossible to make money with no volatility. don't go into banking.


Not necessarily true. It all depends on some of the same factors that affect law careers, training provided, geography, timing, aptitude, and whether one has a good mentor to guide him through.
Last edited by PDaddy on Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby PDaddy » Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I spent two years as a banking analyst at GS/MS/JPM so hopefully I can shed some light here.

If you're an M&A/Capital Markets associate at a firm, you'd likely transition over as an associate or a VP. Where you transition makes a pretty big impact on your career, as associates and VPs tend to differ in terms of the skillset required. As an associate you'll need to have a good grasp of numbers and financial concepts - you need to be able to understand a model and the underlying economics of a business. Most of your work will be making presentation materials and helping analysts build models, so it's important to build those skills. You're going to need to take it on yourself to study finance outside of work and demonstrate an interest in the financial side of dealmaking. Firms are always looking for new associates (they probably have the highest burnout rate), so while the transition will be tough, it's definitely possible, especially if you're at a well-regarded firm that works closely with different banks (Wachtell, S&C, DPW and STB might be your best bets).

As a VP, you're much more client facing and your job is more to manage deals on the larger scale than the associates so a deep knowledge of the numbers isn't as important. I don't have any direct knowledge, but it seems to me that although the skills of a VP mesh much more closely with the skills of a legal associate, it's much harder to lateral in at that level as VPs seem like they add the least value (at least in comparison to how much they get paid) of anyone at the bank. Most groups that I know of have very few VPs and most of them were rockstar associates that are on the track for further promotion. It would help if you had a portable book of business, which is unlikely because it would make more sense to stay in law if that were true.

You'll also want to ask yourself why you want to do banking over law. The pay is comparable at the associate level (and much more volatile, with >50% in the form of bonus, which is often deferred or paid non-cash). The pay is also much more meritocratic, with bonuses tied largely to performance and differences as large as $50k between people at the same level. Pay as a managing director might outpace pay as a partner, but it's significantly more volatile, and, as I said above, largely deferred and non-cash. The hours are worse in an absolute basis, but may or may not be worse to work because you're not billing hourly. Also, at least at the analyst level, more time is spent sitting around and shooting the shit with your coworkers than at law firms, which you may or may not like (I personally do, but whatever). This may be different for associates who are more consistently busy.

Finally, both careers are about the same in terms of stability and exit opps. Bankers are more likely to get laid off than lawyers, but I've seen more people linger around the VP / Director level longer than as senior associates at firms. Exit opps tend to be in house positions at clients for both, and these jobs tend to be very similar in pay, prestige and hours so you'll likely end up in the same place. The glamorous exit opps you hear about from banking are largely left to the analysts, not the associates although it's not unheard of associates to end up at PE funds or hedge funds (still highly unlikely).


So you are saying, "Do what feels right...both paths have positives and negatives."

El_Bee_Oh
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby El_Bee_Oh » Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:44 pm

Chrstgtr wrote:Would it be better to get a JD and then try to transition into IBD possibly by getting an MBA or would you be better off getting an JD-MBA and then trying to transition?


If JD/MBA is an option, why even get the JD? The MBA is sufficient for most IBD jobs and its highly unlikely the JD will add any value. Unless you have a very specific reason, it's not worth the extra $ to get the JD if you don't need it.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby PDaddy » Sun Jul 13, 2014 6:50 pm

El_Bee_Oh wrote:
Chrstgtr wrote:Would it be better to get a JD and then try to transition into IBD possibly by getting an MBA or would you be better off getting an JD-MBA and then trying to transition?


If JD/MBA is an option, why even get the JD? The MBA is sufficient for most IBD jobs and its highly unlikely the JD will add any value. Unless you have a very specific reason, it's not worth the extra $ to get the JD if you don't need it.


I know, right? Nobody wants to try to prove himself anymore. A teller at a community bank is closer to being an I-Banker than is a 1A at Cravath, Skadden, etc. with little work experience, no finance background and no MBA.

I can't help but think that, over the past 15 years or so, too many law students have pursued law degrees just for the sake of calling themselves lawyers. It hurts people who really want to be lawyers and have the potential to be very good if not great ones!

The fact that you have good grades and a high LSAT score does not justify going to law school, nor is either factor sufficient to predict success as a lawyer. If you are pursuing law school simply for the prestige of having a law degree, skip it!

MBA's can do everything lawyers can do except litigate cases on behalf of others. They draft and negotiate contracts (sometimes with the assistance of attorneys), close M & A's, practice real estate, serve as CEO's of Fortune-500 companies, work as sports agents, work high-level jobs in the entertainment industry, etc.. Although a JD has flexibility, an MBA is a more transportable degree than is a JD.

A JD might help OP down the road, but it isn't necessary to his career development right now.
Last edited by PDaddy on Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Chrstgtr
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:53 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Chrstgtr » Sun Jul 13, 2014 7:13 pm

PDaddy wrote:
El_Bee_Oh wrote:
Chrstgtr wrote:Would it be better to get a JD and then try to transition into IBD possibly by getting an MBA or would you be better off getting an JD-MBA and then trying to transition?


If JD/MBA is an option, why even get the JD? The MBA is sufficient for most IBD jobs and its highly unlikely the JD will add any value. Unless you have a very specific reason, it's not worth the extra $ to get the JD if you don't need it.


I know, right? Nobody wants to try to prove himself anymore. A teller at a community bank is closer to being an I-Banker than is a 1A at Cravath, Skadden, etc. with little work experience and no finance background, and no MBA.


If someone ultimately wanted to become an I-Banker I would completely agree. But for the person who is trying to hedge their bets and potentially have the option of exiting into business which option would be considered the most advisable.

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Old Gregg » Sun Jul 13, 2014 7:56 pm

Would it be better to get a JD and then try to transition into IBD possibly by getting an MBA or would you be better off getting an JD-MBA and then trying to transition?


Jesus just get an MBA.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby PDaddy » Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:14 pm

Chrstgtr wrote:
PDaddy wrote:
El_Bee_Oh wrote:
Chrstgtr wrote:Would it be better to get a JD and then try to transition into IBD possibly by getting an MBA or would you be better off getting an JD-MBA and then trying to transition?


If JD/MBA is an option, why even get the JD? The MBA is sufficient for most IBD jobs and its highly unlikely the JD will add any value. Unless you have a very specific reason, it's not worth the extra $ to get the JD if you don't need it.


I know, right? Nobody wants to try to prove himself anymore. A teller at a community bank is closer to being an I-Banker than is a 1A at Cravath, Skadden, etc. with little work experience and no finance background, and no MBA.


If someone ultimately wanted to become an I-Banker I would completely agree. But for the person who is trying to hedge their bets and potentially have the option of exiting into business which option would be considered the most advisable.


BOTH job markets are such that "hedging" = wasting time. If you want flexibility/transportability, get the MBA.

As a first graduate/professional degree, a JD is for people who are excited about practicing law...people who can see themselves doing it long-term. Work for 3-5 years and go get the MBA, or just get the MBA and then work your way up.

If you find later than a JD will give you a specific skill-set that advances your career then go get it. You don't need it now.

The MBA is the way to go.

User avatar
hellojd
Posts: 411
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:29 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby hellojd » Mon Jul 14, 2014 9:08 pm

PDaddy wrote:
El_Bee_Oh wrote:
Chrstgtr wrote:Would it be better to get a JD and then try to transition into IBD possibly by getting an MBA or would you be better off getting an JD-MBA and then trying to transition?


If JD/MBA is an option, why even get the JD? The MBA is sufficient for most IBD jobs and its highly unlikely the JD will add any value. Unless you have a very specific reason, it's not worth the extra $ to get the JD if you don't need it.


I know, right? Nobody wants to try to prove himself anymore. A teller at a community bank is closer to being an I-Banker than is a 1A at Cravath, Skadden, etc. with little work experience, no finance background and no MBA.

I can't help but think that, over the past 15 years or so, too many law students have pursued law degrees just for the sake of calling themselves lawyers. It hurts people who really want to be lawyers and have the potential to be very good if not great ones!

The fact that you have good grades and a high LSAT score does not justify going to law school, nor is either factor sufficient to predict success as a lawyer. If you are pursuing law school simply for the prestige of having a law degree, skip it!

MBA's can do everything lawyers can do except litigate cases on behalf of others. They draft and negotiate contracts (sometimes with the assistance of attorneys), close M & A's, practice real estate, serve as CEO's of Fortune-500 companies, work as sports agents, work high-level jobs in the entertainment industry, etc.. Although a JD has flexibility, an MBA is a more transportable degree than is a JD.

A JD might help OP down the road, but it isn't necessary to his career development right now.


I agree with the general sentiment that if you want IB, then a top 10 MBA is better than a JD, but this post is overstating the case a bit. A teller at a community bank has nothing to do with the path to IB, especially BB IB, since they will never get into a good MBA program. Also, I know alum of my school that worked at a V5 and transitioned into IB, at Goldman and Morgan specifically among others, not to mention top tier consultancies like McKinsey recruit from the top law schools.

Is the path easy and linear from a top law firm to IB? No. But like anything else, if you have the pedigree (which you probably do if you land a top-tier law firm), the drive to learn finance / sell-side on your free time, network, and are a little lucky with your market timing, it can certainly be done. Whether the transition makes sense for some of the reasons listed by other posters is a different question, but I never understood why everyone is so preachy about this point. Anyone who is currently contemplating pursuing a corporate lawyer life at a top firm should be considering where they can exit at the end, since there's an overwhelming chance they WILL exit by the time year 4 or 5 comes around. If posters are curious about exiting to non-law options, then good for them for broadening their outlook. The credited response is that they should have gone to a good MBA program if they wanted to go directly into banking, but a lot of people are already in school and mulling over offers, so give them a break for not being delusional and thinking they'll 100% love corporate law and become a partner at their v10 firm.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby PDaddy » Thu Jul 17, 2014 1:52 am

Your point in the post above is well-taken. I would still get the MBA before going to law school.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273361
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 17, 2014 11:10 am

Former NYC bulge bracket i-banker here.

Degrees
The loose hierarchy in associate-hiring in IBD is: MBA, JD/MBA, JD. Aside from “critical thinking skills,” the JD adds (or is perceived to add) no value in banking. Plus they teach critical thinking in b-school anyway. JD/MBAs are ranked lower because bankers think you couldn’t make up your mind about going into finance. Not that I condone it, but bankers want to see this one-track finance mind and an extra degree says to them that you got distracted and fell off the bandwagon. There’s also a stereotype in finance that JDs are weird and nerdy - blame it on the alpha male mentality on Wall Street. When my bank was hiring, we would much rather take an analyst-promote (no MBA, usually) than a law firm lateral. With that said, one of our top VPs only has a JD, but his brilliance made up for the lack of a MBA.

When I announced I was leaving the group to go to law school, a couple of MDs came out of the woodwork and were like, “we went to that law school! Why didn’t you come talk to us earlier?!” Some of the senior people had only JDs because they came into finance 30+ years ago when MBAs weren’t that legit.

Law Firms
That is not to say lateraling into IBD now is impossible. We had a few lateral associate hires from Cravath, Cleary, and Skadden. Some MDs also once worked at V10 firms. I think the V3 vs. V10 debate is a little misguided. It’s not about what firms you worked at, it’s about what deals you worked on and what deals your firm is associate with. If you worked at Crowell and Moring and happened to consistently get staffed with the partner who was friends with Pfizer’s GC and advised on every Pfizer M&A deal, then banks are willing to talk to you. Because they use an array of outside counsel, a lot of F500 GCs have very close relationship with at least ONE partner at lower tiered firm. If, at Cravath, you got sucked into a regulatory sinkhole and have only seen the PSA for a sub $500mm deal, no one wants to look at you.

Obviously if you go too far outside of V25, your firm might not have the client relationship to give you experience on mega-deals. So in that sense, you want to be at an elite firm for the CHANCE to put these transactional experiences on your resume. For the longest time I thought Wachtell was over-hyped. Then I looked back at my deal sheet and realized they were on at least 60% of my deals, either as a co-advisor, counterparty, or advisor to the Board. Banks value these deal experiences at law firms and will give you a boost in recruiting.

Compensation
If you think you will be a top-performing investment banker, comp is much better on the finance side. Top analysts in my group made up to 130k in the first year and 165k in the second year. Do keep in mind that bonuses are taxed at roughly 40%. All incoming associates had a 50k signing bonus, bringing their all-in comp to 200k+, as a FIRST YEAR associate. It’s another story if you end up becoming a low-performing associate. We were giving year-end bonuses of 25k, a huge insult, to some second and third-year associates in an attempt to push them out (which is so odd to think about when you’re outside of Wall Street). The increase is much bigger y-o-y compared to the lockstep system in biglaw. All of my friends in banking still make fun of me for taking the huge pay cut to go into law (I’m more of a lit person so they couldn’t pay me enough to run deals).

Hope that helps.
S

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby 09042014 » Thu Jul 17, 2014 11:31 am

Only hires good grades from elite schools ---> pretends they aren't nerdy ---> is weird as fuck

Anonymous User
Posts: 273361
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 17, 2014 2:32 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Former NYC bulge bracket i-banker here.

Degrees
The loose hierarchy in associate-hiring in IBD is: MBA, JD/MBA, JD. Aside from “critical thinking skills,” the JD adds (or is perceived to add) no value in banking. Plus they teach critical thinking in b-school anyway. JD/MBAs are ranked lower because bankers think you couldn’t make up your mind about going into finance. Not that I condone it, but bankers want to see this one-track finance mind and an extra degree says to them that you got distracted and fell off the bandwagon. There’s also a stereotype in finance that JDs are weird and nerdy - blame it on the alpha male mentality on Wall Street. When my bank was hiring, we would much rather take an analyst-promote (no MBA, usually) than a law firm lateral. With that said, one of our top VPs only has a JD, but his brilliance made up for the lack of a MBA.

When I announced I was leaving the group to go to law school, a couple of MDs came out of the woodwork and were like, “we went to that law school! Why didn’t you come talk to us earlier?!” Some of the senior people had only JDs because they came into finance 30+ years ago when MBAs weren’t that legit.

Law Firms
That is not to say lateraling into IBD now is impossible. We had a few lateral associate hires from Cravath, Cleary, and Skadden. Some MDs also once worked at V10 firms. I think the V3 vs. V10 debate is a little misguided. It’s not about what firms you worked at, it’s about what deals you worked on and what deals your firm is associate with. If you worked at Crowell and Moring and happened to consistently get staffed with the partner who was friends with Pfizer’s GC and advised on every Pfizer M&A deal, then banks are willing to talk to you. Because they use an array of outside counsel, a lot of F500 GCs have very close relationship with at least ONE partner at lower tiered firm. If, at Cravath, you got sucked into a regulatory sinkhole and have only seen the PSA for a sub $500mm deal, no one wants to look at you.

Obviously if you go too far outside of V25, your firm might not have the client relationship to give you experience on mega-deals. So in that sense, you want to be at an elite firm for the CHANCE to put these transactional experiences on your resume. For the longest time I thought Wachtell was over-hyped. Then I looked back at my deal sheet and realized they were on at least 60% of my deals, either as a co-advisor, counterparty, or advisor to the Board. Banks value these deal experiences at law firms and will give you a boost in recruiting.

Compensation
If you think you will be a top-performing investment banker, comp is much better on the finance side. Top analysts in my group made up to 130k in the first year and 165k in the second year. Do keep in mind that bonuses are taxed at roughly 40%. All incoming associates had a 50k signing bonus, bringing their all-in comp to 200k+, as a FIRST YEAR associate. It’s another story if you end up becoming a low-performing associate. We were giving year-end bonuses of 25k, a huge insult, to some second and third-year associates in an attempt to push them out (which is so odd to think about when you’re outside of Wall Street). The increase is much bigger y-o-y compared to the lockstep system in biglaw. All of my friends in banking still make fun of me for taking the huge pay cut to go into law (I’m more of a lit person so they couldn’t pay me enough to run deals).

Hope that helps.
S


Would you not come in as a roughly first yr associate after lateraling from a law firm? A third yr associate at Wachtell makes in the $375-400K range before taxes - their counterparts at another V10 in the $240-250K range - how is that a pay cut in the short term going into finance (even if you're given some comparable class credit?)

Unless you're actually at Goldman (I was an analyst too but not there, so I won't claim personal knowledge of their higher pay scale), most NY fresh analysts make $70-75k + bonus, which means you have to be ridiculously valued in post-2008 to hit the figures you're citing (near 100% bonus).

Eta: also if you do lit at the best shops i.e. boies schiller, susman, KVN, your bonus will still pull you well over your avg post-mba banking associate.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273361
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 17, 2014 3:59 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Would you not come in as a roughly first yr associate after lateraling from a law firm? A third yr associate at Wachtell makes in the $375-400K range before taxes - their counterparts at another V10 in the $240-250K range - how is that a pay cut in the short term going into finance (even if you're given some comparable class credit?)

Unless you're actually at Goldman (I was an analyst too but not there, so I won't claim personal knowledge of their higher pay scale), most NY fresh analysts make $70-75k + bonus, which means you have to be ridiculously valued in post-2008 to hit the figures you're citing (near 100% bonus).

Eta: also if you do lit at the best shops i.e. boies schiller, susman, KVN, your bonus will still pull you well over your avg post-mba banking associate.


Bonuses of 60k for top first years and 80k for top second year analysts have been standard for the top BB's in recent years. My bank was above street so our analysts actually got more than that. My sources are my paychecks and my friends/colleagues at various banks on the Street. You can confirm on Dealbook as well. I do know a couple places that got scrwed, with 50k capping the highest bonuses (*ahem* unnamed German and Australian banks).

I'm curious about your 240-250k range for V10 associates. I was under the impression it was 160k base + 10k bonus for first years. So third years are getting 180k + 30k, if all goes according to plan. Where did the 240-250k come from? Hoping you could verify so I can delight in this higher than expected comp.

-S

User avatar
koval
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 12:19 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby koval » Thu Jul 17, 2014 4:25 pm

Why are so many people posting anonymously, especially OP?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273361
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 17, 2014 4:30 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Would you not come in as a roughly first yr associate after lateraling from a law firm? A third yr associate at Wachtell makes in the $375-400K range before taxes - their counterparts at another V10 in the $240-250K range - how is that a pay cut in the short term going into finance (even if you're given some comparable class credit?)

Unless you're actually at Goldman (I was an analyst too but not there, so I won't claim personal knowledge of their higher pay scale), most NY fresh analysts make $70-75k + bonus, which means you have to be ridiculously valued in post-2008 to hit the figures you're citing (near 100% bonus).

Eta: also if you do lit at the best shops i.e. boies schiller, susman, KVN, your bonus will still pull you well over your avg post-mba banking associate.


Bonuses of 60k for top first years and 80k for top second year analysts have been standard for the top BB's in recent years. My bank was above street so our analysts actually got more than that. My sources are my paychecks and my friends/colleagues at various banks on the Street. You can confirm on Dealbook as well. I do know a couple places that got scrwed, with 50k capping the highest bonuses (*ahem* unnamed German and Australian banks).

I'm curious about your 240-250k range for V10 associates. I was under the impression it was 160k base + 10k bonus for first years. So third years are getting 180k + 30k, if all goes according to plan. Where did the 240-250k come from? Hoping you could verify so I can delight in this higher than expected comp.

-S


From ATL (Cravath standard)

Class Year - Base Salary
1 - $160k
2 - $170k
3 - $185k
4 - $210k
5 - $230k
7 - $265k
8 - $280k
http://abovethelaw.com/law-firms/cravath/


Class Year - Bonus
2013 - 10k (pro-rated)
2012 - 10k
2011 - 14k
2010 - 20k
2009 - 27k
2008 - 34k
2007 - 40k
2006 - 50k
2005 - 60k
http://abovethelaw.com/2013/12/breaking ... son-begin/

So if I'm reading it correct, looks like a 4th year would make $210+20k = $230k

Chrstgtr
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:53 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby Chrstgtr » Thu Jul 17, 2014 4:40 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Would you not come in as a roughly first yr associate after lateraling from a law firm? A third yr associate at Wachtell makes in the $375-400K range before taxes - their counterparts at another V10 in the $240-250K range - how is that a pay cut in the short term going into finance (even if you're given some comparable class credit?)

Unless you're actually at Goldman (I was an analyst too but not there, so I won't claim personal knowledge of their higher pay scale), most NY fresh analysts make $70-75k + bonus, which means you have to be ridiculously valued in post-2008 to hit the figures you're citing (near 100% bonus).

Eta: also if you do lit at the best shops i.e. boies schiller, susman, KVN, your bonus will still pull you well over your avg post-mba banking associate.


Bonuses of 60k for top first years and 80k for top second year analysts have been standard for the top BB's in recent years. My bank was above street so our analysts actually got more than that. My sources are my paychecks and my friends/colleagues at various banks on the Street. You can confirm on Dealbook as well. I do know a couple places that got scrwed, with 50k capping the highest bonuses (*ahem* unnamed German and Australian banks).

I'm curious about your 240-250k range for V10 associates. I was under the impression it was 160k base + 10k bonus for first years. So third years are getting 180k + 30k, if all goes according to plan. Where did the 240-250k come from? Hoping you could verify so I can delight in this higher than expected comp.

-S


I think the poster was talking about Watchell who pays out very very generous bonuses (As high as 100% of base salary during boom years). Not all V10 firms.

spyke123
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:41 am

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby spyke123 » Thu Jul 17, 2014 4:41 pm

Chrstgtr wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Would you not come in as a roughly first yr associate after lateraling from a law firm? A third yr associate at Wachtell makes in the $375-400K range before taxes - their counterparts at another V10 in the $240-250K range - how is that a pay cut in the short term going into finance (even if you're given some comparable class credit?)

Unless you're actually at Goldman (I was an analyst too but not there, so I won't claim personal knowledge of their higher pay scale), most NY fresh analysts make $70-75k + bonus, which means you have to be ridiculously valued in post-2008 to hit the figures you're citing (near 100% bonus).

Eta: also if you do lit at the best shops i.e. boies schiller, susman, KVN, your bonus will still pull you well over your avg post-mba banking associate.


Bonuses of 60k for top first years and 80k for top second year analysts have been standard for the top BB's in recent years. My bank was above street so our analysts actually got more than that. My sources are my paychecks and my friends/colleagues at various banks on the Street. You can confirm on Dealbook as well. I do know a couple places that got scrwed, with 50k capping the highest bonuses (*ahem* unnamed German and Australian banks).

I'm curious about your 240-250k range for V10 associates. I was under the impression it was 160k base + 10k bonus for first years. So third years are getting 180k + 30k, if all goes according to plan. Where did the 240-250k come from? Hoping you could verify so I can delight in this higher than expected comp.

-S


I think the poster was talking about Watchell who pays out very very generous bonuses (As high as 100% of base salary during boom years). Not all V10 firms.

nouseforaname123
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: Wachtell/Cravath/S&C for transition into i-banking

Postby nouseforaname123 » Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:45 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Would you not come in as a roughly first yr associate after lateraling from a law firm? A third yr associate at Wachtell makes in the $375-400K range before taxes - their counterparts at another V10 in the $240-250K range - how is that a pay cut in the short term going into finance (even if you're given some comparable class credit?)

Unless you're actually at Goldman (I was an analyst too but not there, so I won't claim personal knowledge of their higher pay scale), most NY fresh analysts make $70-75k + bonus, which means you have to be ridiculously valued in post-2008 to hit the figures you're citing (near 100% bonus).

Eta: also if you do lit at the best shops i.e. boies schiller, susman, KVN, your bonus will still pull you well over your avg post-mba banking associate.


Bonuses of 60k for top first years and 80k for top second year analysts have been standard for the top BB's in recent years. My bank was above street so our analysts actually got more than that. My sources are my paychecks and my friends/colleagues at various banks on the Street. You can confirm on Dealbook as well. I do know a couple places that got scrwed, with 50k capping the highest bonuses (*ahem* unnamed German and Australian banks).

I'm curious about your 240-250k range for V10 associates. I was under the impression it was 160k base + 10k bonus for first years. So third years are getting 180k + 30k, if all goes according to plan. Where did the 240-250k come from? Hoping you could verify so I can delight in this higher than expected comp.

-S


From ATL (Cravath standard)

Class Year - Base Salary
1 - $160k
2 - $170k
3 - $185k
4 - $210k
5 - $230k
7 - $265k
8 - $280k
http://abovethelaw.com/law-firms/cravath/


Class Year - Bonus
2013 - 10k (pro-rated)
2012 - 10k
2011 - 14k
2010 - 20k
2009 - 27k
2008 - 34k
2007 - 40k
2006 - 50k
2005 - 60k
http://abovethelaw.com/2013/12/breaking ... son-begin/

So if I'm reading it correct, looks like a 4th year would make $210+20k = $230k


You are not reading it correct. On the bonus scale, class of 2013 is a stub year and class of 2012 would be the first year class. Count from there.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.