Turning down a V30 for a V90 Forum

[Anonymous User]

Am I crazy to do it? Both are in NYC. Both seem like nice places to work. By Chambers' standards, the V90 is considerably stronger in the practice group I think I want to join. I don't have any sweeping ambitions at the moment; I'd simply like to start practicing law at a relatively pleasant firm doing high-level work. I'm not concerned about prestige except to the extent that it actually affects my career. I figure the V90 is well known enough that most people (especially in NYC) are going to know they do good work -- but I still worry about exit options.

[Omerta]

Am I crazy to do it? Both are in NYC. Both seem like nice places to work. By Chambers' standards, the V90 is considerably stronger in the practice group I think I want to join. I don't have any sweeping ambitions at the moment; I'd simply like to start practicing law at a relatively pleasant firm doing high-level work. I'm not concerned about prestige except to the extent that it actually affects my career. I figure the V90 is well known enough that most people (especially in NYC) are going to know they do good work -- but I still worry about exit options.

You're silly.

[kahechsof]

You can always move from V30 to V90. But the other way is considerably harder.

[desertlaw]

EXIT OPTIONS! Like how I exit this forum when I see that you are silly for considering V90 over a V30.

[ResIpsa21]

Seriously, go where you'll be happy. Enough of the prestige whoring, TLS!!

[Anonymous User]

Depends on the firms. I would probably take Patterson Belknap over Paul Hastings NY, for example. Might make even more sense to do something like that when you start talking about branch offices (e.g. Akin Gump NY, Mayer Brown NY, OMM NY)

[Anonymous User]

Depends on the firms. I would probably take Patterson Belknap over Paul Hastings NY, for example. Might make even more sense to do something like that when you start talking about branch offices (e.g. Akin Gump NY, Mayer Brown NY, OMM NY)

OP here. Both firms have their biggest office in NYC, where I'd work. Why would you take Patterson over PH, may I ask?

[Anonymous User]

Depends on the firms. I would probably take Patterson Belknap over Paul Hastings NY, for example. Might make even more sense to do something like that when you start talking about branch offices (e.g. Akin Gump NY, Mayer Brown NY, OMM NY)

OP here. Both firms have their biggest office in NYC, where I'd work. Why would you take Patterson over PH, may I ask?

I haven't done enough research on either to give a very educated opinion. A lot of what I've heard about Patterson comes from here and other law students, but it certainly seems to have a good rep:

I have a professor who summered with Paul Weiss, but immediately left for Patterson Belknap and said his experience at Patterson was SO much better

Patterson tends to attract a lot of clerks. They have a very interesting, but specialized practice. They have a reputation for having very interesting work and great quality of life

It's a good place for aspiring commercial litigators, and if that's what you want to do I'd at least consider it alongside other firms (including the V10).

Vault rankings are very new york and corporate-centric. So firms like W&C, Irell, MTO, and Patterson Belknap give exit options significantly above their rank.

There have been countless times I've heard people rave about Patterson's QOL. Paul Hastings seems pretty bland and nothing special, tbh. Then again, though, maybe that's just because I haven't done my research.

[Anonymous User]

Depends on the firms, and your goals. There are a lot of things to consider.

First, if a particular practice area interests you, the Chambers ranking is much more important than the Vault ranking--but are you sure you want to be in that practice area, and how easy will it be to join that practice area at the V90? Some lower-ranked firms have particular practice areas that are truly elite, but the problem is, often many summers know it and will want to end up in that area.

Second, if you're going to be doing corporate work in New York, Vault rankings are most relevant for that. If you're hoping to land an in-house position, the difference between the firms could be significant (but not nearly as significant as between a V10 and a V90). If you're doing litigation and your desired career path is make partner (in a dream scenario) or work at a smaller firm, the Vault rankings won't matter as much.

Third, how financially healthy is the V90? Vault rankings are somewhat correlated with financial health, and you obviously don't want to be at a financially unstable firm.

[Anonymous User]

I'm in a similar position - deciding between Hughes Hubbard and Milbank and looking to do corporate. I really liked Hughes and it appears very stable but I know Milbank has a better regarded corporate practice and it's hard not to think about the rankings disparity even though I know it's somewhat dumb to think in those terms and that I should probably go where I think I would be happiest, which would be Hughes Hubbard. For these firms specifically, do you think it would be a bad decision to not take Milbank?

[IAFG]

OH MY GOD SOMEONE ISN'T LIVING AND DYING BY VAULT!?!?!

Make sure to tell people often that you had the opportunity to go to a better firm (and use air quotes as you say "better") but that you decided to pick a firm where you just really liked the people.

[Unitas]

Your resume must say:

"V90 May-August 2012
Summer Associate

V30 May-August 2012
Offered Summer Associate"


Otherwise you are wasting your life.

[monkey85]

I'm in a similar position - deciding between Hughes Hubbard and Milbank and looking to do corporate. I really liked Hughes and it appears very stable but I know Milbank has a better regarded corporate practice

I would encourage you to dig deeper into what "corporate" means at each of the firms to decide where you go. For example, Milbank is hardly known for M&A - they do deals, but nothing headline - but rather known for Project Finance. As for HHR - I have no idea. That extra bit of research should help you find what you are really looking for in a "corporate" practice.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Why is this so shocking? I thought the consensus was that "rankings" among law firms mattered much less and you should really go where you are most happy.

[Grizz]

Why is this so shocking? I thought the consensus was that "rankings" among law firms mattered much less and you should really go where you are most happy.

Bro, this is TLS. Ranking ALWAYS matters.

[rayiner]

Depends on the firms, and your goals. There are a lot of things to consider.

First, if a particular practice area interests you, the Chambers ranking is much more important than the Vault ranking--but are you sure you want to be in that practice area, and how easy will it be to join that practice area at the V90? Some lower-ranked firms have particular practice areas that are truly elite, but the problem is, often many summers know it and will want to end up in that area.

Second, if you're going to be doing corporate work in New York, Vault rankings are most relevant for that. If you're hoping to land an in-house position, the difference between the firms could be significant (but not nearly as significant as between a V10 and a V90). If you're doing litigation and your desired career path is make partner (in a dream scenario) or work at a smaller firm, the Vault rankings won't matter as much.

Third, how financially healthy is the V90? Vault rankings are somewhat correlated with financial health, and you obviously don't want to be at a financially unstable firm.

+1.

It's not bad to take lifestyle/practice area over prestige. But make sure those things are real not imaginary. Take claims about getting "substantive work" and simple measurements like size of the group with a grain if salt.

[Omerta]

Why is this so shocking? I thought the consensus was that "rankings" among law firms mattered much less and you should really go where you are most happy.

I'd like to think people are mocking the OP for asking such an insecure, ridiculous question. "Exit options" is this mythical TLS-exclusive phenomenon. It's nothing more than students trying to surreptitiously hinge their decision on yet another set of rankings rather than make a decision on their own for once.

I mean, look again at how the OP worded his or her post.

[Anonymous User]

Why is this so shocking? I thought the consensus was that "rankings" among law firms mattered much less and you should really go where you are most happy.

I'd like to think people are mocking the OP for asking such an insecure, ridiculous question. "Exit options" is this mythical TLS-exclusive phenomenon. It's nothing more than students trying to surreptitiously hinge their decision on yet another set of rankings rather than make a decision on their own for once.

I mean, look again at how the OP worded his or her post.

um can you link me to the exit options "set of rankings"?

[Anonymous User]

If this is Patterson, then I would just say the following: I am waiting to hear from them but would seriously consider them over a current V15 option, for litigation. FWIW.

[Anonymous User]

Why is this so shocking? I thought the consensus was that "rankings" among law firms mattered much less and you should really go where you are most happy.

I'd like to think people are mocking the OP for asking such an insecure, ridiculous question. "Exit options" is this mythical TLS-exclusive phenomenon. It's nothing more than students trying to surreptitiously hinge their decision on yet another set of rankings rather than make a decision on their own for once.

I mean, look again at how the OP worded his or her post.

um can you link me to the exit options "set of rankings"?

vault.com

[RVP11]

You can always move from V30 to V90.

This is one of the dumbest, and most prevalent myths on TLS.

[Grizz]

You can always move from V30 to V90.

This is one of the dumbest, and most prevalent myths on TLS.

[underdawg]

Why is this so shocking? I thought the consensus was that "rankings" among law firms mattered much less and you should really go where you are most happy.

perhaps, but choosing where you will be most happy based on the 4-6 people you meet at the firm during interviews is a pretty huge crapshoot

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Why is this so shocking? I thought the consensus was that "rankings" among law firms mattered much less and you should really go where you are most happy.

perhaps, but choosing where you will be most happy based on the 4-6 people you meet at the firm during interviews is a pretty huge crapshoot

Yeah, I should have qualified the original post with the firm that will make you most happy can be based on practice areas, reputation at that office (from online/previous SA's at your school, etc), fit among people you meet there, etc. Obviously basing the whole decision off of how you connect with your interviewers is a big risk. I think if that's just one of the factors to consider, it can be useful though.

[Machine Spirit]

Will the day ever come where TLS understands how "exit options" actually work, in the real world?

TS, I had a choice similar to your's, and I chose the lower ranked firm. Why? Because I liked the people, the environment, and the practice group was precisely what I was interested in. The pay is the same, the benefits are the same, so frankly, who cares about "prestige."

If you want to make a career of this, go where you'll at least have a slight chance of being happy, or pursuing what you're genuinely interested in. The degree to which TLS emphasizes rankings or "exit options" is almost embarrassingly asinine.