Top Law Schools

romothesavior wrote:Cp, you started out with such promise ITT. Don't go all herp derp on us now.

Dude is just mad he has zero credibility at this point.

Earlier in the thread, I think someone posted Cravath's 2006 bonus levels as being like $30k+ for 1st year associates? Is this serious? Was it truly models and bottles back then? Good grief.

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:

MrKappus wrote:^ +1 to this (and to Anonymous above it). Firms will pay Cravath's scale this year (or less), it will not result in a biglaw exodus, and we'll all get to have this conversation again next year.

From a descriptive standpoint, I agree. The more interesting questions, to me at least, are (1) whether there will be a repeat of the spring bonus phenomenon, perhaps along the "check raise" lines suggested by Elie, and (2) how much of an impact the decreasing bonus (as a % of PPP) trend has on NYC biglaw vs. other major markets. On (2), large bonuses are the primary justification for the longer hours and higher COL faced by NYC associates. But if bonuses remain stagnant and (relatively) small, the smart money will continue to lie elsewhere, for instance in markets like Atlanta and Houston.

Or Chicago. Kirkland associates are balling with $160k + 2x Cravath bonus in a city where a fancy 1BR in a high-rise in downtown runs you $1750/month.

In any case, weak bonuses are no surprise. Corporate was slow in 2011, especially after the debt-ceiling fiasco.

I would like to point out that no lawyer is "balling." Not a one. Not SCOTUS clerks, not biglaw partners, not in-house 9-5ers... not any.

IAFG wrote:I would like to point out that no lawyer is "balling." Not a one. Not SCOTUS clerks, not biglaw partners, not in-house 9-5ers... not any.

It's relative. I'd say that lawyers are balling in Atlanta, certainly, where "finance" means $70k at Bank of America.

Forgot about the rappers. Also: high-school football players.

rayiner wrote:

IAFG wrote:I would like to point out that no lawyer is "balling." Not a one. Not SCOTUS clerks, not biglaw partners, not in-house 9-5ers... not any.

It's relative. I'd say that lawyers are balling in Atlanta, certainly, where "finance" means $70k at Bank of America.

Ballers = guys who play a playground game professionally, make $$$ doing it, then fuck models.

Lawyers = upper-middle class comma jockeys who fuck prostitutes or law shrews then cry themselves to sleep.

IAFG wrote:I would like to point out that no lawyer is "balling." Not a one. Not SCOTUS clerks, not biglaw partners, not in-house 9-5ers... not any.

I beg to differ:

Ballin & Associates

IAFG wrote:I would like to point out that no lawyer is "balling." Not a one. Not SCOTUS clerks, not biglaw partners, not in-house 9-5ers... not any.

Dear IAFG, though usually a poster straight and true, I have to call bullshit on this one. This guy has a football field named after him and everything: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Jamail

Veyron wrote:

IAFG wrote:I would like to point out that no lawyer is "balling." Not a one. Not SCOTUS clerks, not biglaw partners, not in-house 9-5ers... not any.

Dear IAFG, though usually a poster straight and true, I have to call bullshit on this one. This guy has a football field named after him and everything: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Jamail

but he's still just a fucking lawyer, now isn't he?

IAFG wrote:

Veyron wrote:

IAFG wrote:I would like to point out that no lawyer is "balling." Not a one. Not SCOTUS clerks, not biglaw partners, not in-house 9-5ers... not any.

Dear IAFG, though usually a poster straight and true, I have to call bullshit on this one. This guy has a football field named after him and everything: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Jamail

but he's still just a fucking lawyer, now isn't he?

Joe Jamail is just a lawyer the same way that I'm just a poster. He could probably pay Tom Brady to ball for him.

.

Veyron wrote:

IAFG wrote: but he's still just a fucking lawyer, now isn't he?

Joe Jamail is just a lawyer the same way that I'm just a poster. He could probably pay Tom Brady to ball for him.

But would Giselle Bundchen (enthusiastically) fuck him?

IAFG wrote:

Veyron wrote:

IAFG wrote: but he's still just a fucking lawyer, now isn't he?

Joe Jamail is just a lawyer the same way that I'm just a poster. He could probably pay Tom Brady to ball for him.

But would Giselle Bundchen (enthusiastically) fuck him?

Prolly not, but she wouldn't fuck Ray Lewis either.

IAFG wrote:

Veyron wrote:

IAFG wrote: but he's still just a fucking lawyer, now isn't he?

Joe Jamail is just a lawyer the same way that I'm just a poster. He could probably pay Tom Brady to ball for him.

But would Giselle Bundchen (enthusiastically) fuck him?

This video may answer that question for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEc8Xzn1WqU

REMINDER: if you make any more than 60k per year, you are NOT increasing your experiential happiness. What matters most is spending time with quality people and doing something meaningful with your life (other than serving your corporate overlords).

Cosigned, Daniel Kahneman - Father of Behavioral Economics (http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahnema ... emory.html)

Now, continue striving.

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:REMINDER: if you make any more than 60k per year, you are NOT increasing your experiential happiness. What matters most is spending time with quality people and doing something meaningful with your life (other than serving your corporate overlords).

Cosigned, Daniel Kahneman - Father of Behavioral Economics (http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahnema ... emory.html)

Now, continue striving.

I hate this saying with a passion, but I really think it applies here:

Cool story, bro.

Veyron wrote:

IAFG wrote:

Veyron wrote:

IAFG wrote: but he's still just a fucking lawyer, now isn't he?

Joe Jamail is just a lawyer the same way that I'm just a poster. He could probably pay Tom Brady to ball for him.

But would Giselle Bundchen (enthusiastically) fuck him?

This video may answer that question for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEc8Xzn1WqU

Well that answers the question of whether you would fuck him...

bjsesq wrote:

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:REMINDER: if you make any more than 60k per year, you are NOT increasing your experiential happiness. What matters most is spending time with quality people and doing something meaningful with your life (other than serving your corporate overlords).

Cosigned, Daniel Kahneman - Father of Behavioral Economics (http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahnema ... emory.html)

Now, continue striving.

I hate this saying with a passion, but I really think it applies here:

Cool story, bro.

That saying applies to like 99% of posts on this site.

Well that answers the question of whether you would fuck him...

My love can be bought.

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:

bjsesq wrote:

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:REMINDER: if you make any more than 60k per year, you are NOT increasing your experiential happiness. What matters most is spending time with quality people and doing something meaningful with your life (other than serving your corporate overlords).

Cosigned, Daniel Kahneman - Father of Behavioral Economics (http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahnema ... emory.html)

Now, continue striving.

I hate this saying with a passion, but I really think it applies here:

Cool story, bro.

That saying applies to like 99% of posts on this site.

Yeah, but your post has that little extra something. Something the french call, I don't know what.

bjsesq wrote:

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:

bjsesq wrote:

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:REMINDER: if you make any more than 60k per year, you are NOT increasing your experiential happiness. What matters most is spending time with quality people and doing something meaningful with your life (other than serving your corporate overlords).

Cosigned, Daniel Kahneman - Father of Behavioral Economics (http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahnema ... emory.html)

Now, continue striving.

I hate this saying with a passion, but I really think it applies here:

Cool story, bro.

That saying applies to like 99% of posts on this site.

Yeah, but your post has that little extra something. Something the french call, I don't know what.

ty, i try very hard

rayiner wrote:

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:

MrKappus wrote:^ +1 to this (and to Anonymous above it). Firms will pay Cravath's scale this year (or less), it will not result in a biglaw exodus, and we'll all get to have this conversation again next year.

From a descriptive standpoint, I agree. The more interesting questions, to me at least, are (1) whether there will be a repeat of the spring bonus phenomenon, perhaps along the "check raise" lines suggested by Elie, and (2) how much of an impact the decreasing bonus (as a % of PPP) trend has on NYC biglaw vs. other major markets. On (2), large bonuses are the primary justification for the longer hours and higher COL faced by NYC associates. But if bonuses remain stagnant and (relatively) small, the smart money will continue to lie elsewhere, for instance in markets like Atlanta and Houston.

Or Chicago. Kirkland associates are balling with $160k + 2x Cravath bonus in a city where a fancy 1BR in a high-rise in downtown runs you $1750/month.

In any case, weak bonuses are no surprise. Corporate was slow in 2011, especially after the debt-ceiling fiasco.

Or Texas.....where a fancy 1BR in a high-rise downton runs you $900/month.

: )

emkay625 wrote:

rayiner wrote:

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:

MrKappus wrote:^ +1 to this (and to Anonymous above it). Firms will pay Cravath's scale this year (or less), it will not result in a biglaw exodus, and we'll all get to have this conversation again next year.

From a descriptive standpoint, I agree. The more interesting questions, to me at least, are (1) whether there will be a repeat of the spring bonus phenomenon, perhaps along the "check raise" lines suggested by Elie, and (2) how much of an impact the decreasing bonus (as a % of PPP) trend has on NYC biglaw vs. other major markets. On (2), large bonuses are the primary justification for the longer hours and higher COL faced by NYC associates. But if bonuses remain stagnant and (relatively) small, the smart money will continue to lie elsewhere, for instance in markets like Atlanta and Houston.

Or Chicago. Kirkland associates are balling with $160k + 2x Cravath bonus in a city where a fancy 1BR in a high-rise in downtown runs you $1750/month.

In any case, weak bonuses are no surprise. Corporate was slow in 2011, especially after the debt-ceiling fiasco.

Or Texas.....where a fancy 1BR in a high-rise downton runs you $900/month.

: )

The difference is, that unlike Houston or Dallas Chicago is an actual urban metropolis and not a glorified suburb. I'd make an exception for Austin, but what law jobs are in Austin?

Veyron wrote:

Eco wrote:I wasn't saying that they want to hire me or anything. I'm just saying, for someone at a school like GW where even with good grades big law is still tough to get, those who got the jobs we all want can be at least happy they are getting a bonus.

Thats just the point, I DON'T want the Cravath gig at the current pay levels and a lot of other talented people with other options don't either. It doesn't make much sense to work so much more for so little extra money.

rayiner wrote: In any case, weak bonuses are no surprise. Corporate was slow in 2011, especially after the debt-ceiling fiasco.

Depends on the firm. I know a few V5s, including S&C, that are practically dead in M&A at the moment (which is I find the whole "S&C will double" meme kind of hilarious). My V10, and one other V5 that I know, are extremely busy, though I really have no gauge as to how long that will last.

Aside from all this, Cravath has been in a weird decline for the last few years. Yes, I know its PPP is still super high, but it's pretty well known that they are no longer a clear second to WLRK in NYC. And in my mind, S&C has probably taken its spot. Anyhow, it's pretty well known that some V10s didn't come out of the recession in good shape: Cravath, Skadden, Weil, and Debevoise (I regard Debevoise as a V10). My point is: so yes, it was expected that Cravath would low ball. It just isn't expected that the rest of the V10 are doing just as badly and that they also have to lowball. But they will, thanks to Cravath. The only marginal hope of increase is via S&C. None of the V10s matches Kirkland, so what they do doesn't matter.