TX v. NY for biglaw Forum

[Anonymous User]

What's the difference in quality of life, hours worked, etc between TX (houston/dallas) and NYC?
What would draw someone to one place over another (besides firm fit)?
Are exit options better in one region? Specifically, would you have an advantage lateraling in TX from one firm to another or from NYC to TX?

[Anonymous User]

The answer, as always, is it depends.

I think the biggest considerations that we also need are (please answer these)

1) Student loans? see http://www.nalp.org/buying_power_index_class_of_2010
2) Desire to stay in TX/NY; for both the long term and short term
3) What practice area?
4) Firm range you are looking at?

[Anonymous User]

The answer, as always, is it depends.

I think the biggest considerations that we also need are (please answer these)

1) Student loans? see http://www.nalp.org/buying_power_index_class_of_2010
2) Desire to stay in TX/NY; for both the long term and short term
3) What practice area?
4) Firm range you are looking at?

Good chart for #1 - thank you.

2. Probably a long-term desire to stay in TX. I think NY would be very enjoyable in the short-run, both in terms of work and culture. However, I think TX is much more affordable in the long-run and I'm very used to the comfortable lifestyle.

3. Corporate/transactional

4. TX firm - one of the big 3. NY firms - mostly highly international, corporate-focused firms (V30-50).

[Anonymous User]

NY is significantly better for transactional work. The $ difference is significant though. Also, if you want to be in TX why not just start there?

[DMXdawg]

In terms of energy work, especially a big 3 in Houston ( I am assuming V&E or BB), the transactional work will be as cutting edge as V10 corporate firms.

A significant portion of opposing counsel for energy deals for a V&E will be the skaddens, STB, clearys of the world. The deals that they work on are multi-billion deals, and the dealflow is comparable.

In your case, I would lean towards Texas. The work will be as sophisticated as the V30-V50 in NY, the COL is better, and it is where you want to end up. Why not start building your book of business/ties/contacts early?

I have a good friend who choose a Texas firm over a V3,and it was almost a no-brainer.

[wcarlwilson]

That chart is pretty damn accurate. I've lived in Texas all my life, but have spent a lot of time in NYC. I've a lot of friends that live in NYC, so I feel like I have strong idea of what its like to "live" and not just to visit.

I'm not going to comment really about the legal aspects because it sounds like no matter what you will be at a good career building firm.

My advice is to look at what your housing is going to be like. Figure out a budget and what you would be able to spend on living space then look what that will get you in both locations. Renting or buying a $200K townhouse in Houston will get you about a 700sqft apartment in Morningside Heights in NYC (125th and Broadway). Most of those buildings don't have elevators. From experience there is nothing worse than having to climb six flights of stairs (steep stairs) after a night of drinking. And if you have a dog--forget it, you'll have to let the dog crap indoors.

I love NYC but I will stay in Texas thank you. Plus all the big boys have NY offices, I'm sure you can catch a case up there every now and then.

[fish52]

Just be sure you want to stay in Texas if you take the TX job.

Also, outside of energy, the type of work handled by the Big3 is noticeably lower tier.

[Stanford4Me]

I was born and raised in Texas, came to NYU for law school, and plan to return to work in Texas post graduation. Feel free to PM me if you want information.

[Anonymous User]

Did some interviews in TX. Everyone seems to have an inferiority complex when NYC biglaw is brought up. There's also much less job security (lots of SAs get no offered; lots of juniors get canned).

That said, lack of state income tax and cheap real estate are pretty cool.

[Anonymous User]

The answer, as always, is it depends.

I think the biggest considerations that we also need are (please answer these)

1) Student loans? see http://www.nalp.org/buying_power_index_class_of_2010
2) Desire to stay in TX/NY; for both the long term and short term
3) What practice area?
4) Firm range you are looking at?

Good chart for #1 - thank you.

2. Probably a long-term desire to stay in TX. I think NY would be very enjoyable in the short-run, both in terms of work and culture. However, I think TX is much more affordable in the long-run and I'm very used to the comfortable lifestyle.

3. Corporate/transactional

4. TX firm - one of the big 3. NY firms - mostly highly international, corporate-focused firms (V30-50).

I am in the same exact position as you for this one.

[Anonymous User]

Did some interviews in TX. Everyone seems to have an inferiority complex when NYC biglaw is brought up. There's also much less job security (lots of SAs get no offered; lots of juniors get canned).

While you are right on the inferiority complex, you are completely wrong on the job security issue. NYC is king of the junior canning and V&E and BB have had >90% offer rates for last year

[Anonymous User]

Also, outside of energy, the type of work handled by the Big3 is noticeably lower tier.

Could you expand on this point? Doesn't a NYC V30 still have its fare share of lower tier work?

[Anonymous User]

Did some interviews in TX. Everyone seems to have an inferiority complex when NYC biglaw is brought up. There's also much less job security (lots of SAs get no offered; lots of juniors get canned).

While you are right on the inferiority complex, you are completely wrong on the job security issue. NYC is king of the junior canning and V&E and BB have had >90% offer rates for last year

The big three are all pretty good about it, but most NYC places have much higher than 90% offer rates (many have 100%). But aside from the big three, a lot of firms are in shaky financial positions and all too many kids get no offered.

[Anonymous User]

Did some interviews in TX. Everyone seems to have an inferiority complex when NYC biglaw is brought up. There's also much less job security (lots of SAs get no offered; lots of juniors get canned).

While you are right on the inferiority complex, you are completely wrong on the job security issue. NYC is king of the junior canning and V&E and BB have had >90% offer rates for last year

I think both V&E and BB had < 90% offer rates this past summer

[Stanford4Me]

Did some interviews in TX. Everyone seems to have an inferiority complex when NYC biglaw is brought up. There's also much less job security (lots of SAs get no offered; lots of juniors get canned).

While you are right on the inferiority complex, you are completely wrong on the job security issue. NYC is king of the junior canning and V&E and BB have had >90% offer rates for last year

The big three are all pretty good about it, but most NYC places have much higher than 90% offer rates (many have 100%). But aside from the big three, a lot of firms are in shaky financial positions and all too many kids get no offered.

NALP director would disagree, but I do know of at least one firm that is pretty bad re: offers.

[Anonymous User]

Did some interviews in TX. Everyone seems to have an inferiority complex when NYC biglaw is brought up. There's also much less job security (lots of SAs get no offered; lots of juniors get canned).

While you are right on the inferiority complex, you are completely wrong on the job security issue. NYC is king of the junior canning and V&E and BB have had >90% offer rates for last year

The big three are all pretty good about it, but most NYC places have much higher than 90% offer rates (many have 100%). But aside from the big three, a lot of firms are in shaky financial positions and all too many kids get no offered.

That's patently false. LL, AK, B&G are all quite strong firms and have 85%+ offer. It's true that the NYC firms tend to offer a slightly higher %, but to say that the Texas firms, aside from the Big 3, are in shaky financial position is to lie.

[Anonymous User]

Did some interviews in TX. Everyone seems to have an inferiority complex when NYC biglaw is brought up. There's also much less job security (lots of SAs get no offered; lots of juniors get canned).

While you are right on the inferiority complex, you are completely wrong on the job security issue. NYC is king of the junior canning and V&E and BB have had >90% offer rates for last year

The big three are all pretty good about it, but most NYC places have much higher than 90% offer rates (many have 100%). But aside from the big three, a lot of firms are in shaky financial positions and all too many kids get no offered.

That's patently false. LL, AK, B&G are all quite strong firms and have 85%+ offer. It's true that the NYC firms tend to offer a slightly higher %, but to say that the Texas firms, aside from the Big 3, are in shaky financial position is to lie.

AK no offered 2/17 in Houston and 1/5 in Dallas. BG Houston was 6/25. LL Houston was 2/12.

I would rather not play Russian Roulette with my career, even if my chance of survival is 80%.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know how FJ Houston has fared and what their offer numbers look like?

[IAFG]

I would rather not play Russian Roulette with my career, even if my chance of survival is 80%.

I agree with the sentiment. Of the people I know who got no-offered in the past 2 years, only 1 seemed to really have it coming.

[BruceWayne]

FYI many firms include "cold" offers in their nalp as actual offers. Frankly, ITE there are no guarantees period. Things are VERY bad out here right now. People who want jobs at Stanford are striking out.

[de5igual]

I would rather not play Russian Roulette with my career, even if my chance of survival is 80%.

I agree with the sentiment. Of the people I know who got no-offered in the past 2 years, only 1 seemed to really have it coming.

+1

It seems every year, 2Ls start drinking the firm kool-aid and think they'll be immune from no-offers. just wait till next august.

[Aberzombie1892]

You cannot really compare the two types of markets without more information, like cold offer percentages, whether students that split their summer that were no offered at one firm received an offer from the other firm (split summers is far more common in TX than NY), etc.

What you can do, however, is choose the firm you want for and make sure to go out of your way to outperform many of the other summer associates (fewer mistakes, network a little more, volunteer for various things, etc.). For many firms in the modern legal market, the competition does not end when you receive a summer offer -> it ends when you receive a permanent one.

[Anonymous User]

You cannot really compare the two types of markets without more information, like cold offer percentages, whether students that split their summer that were no offered at one firm received an offer from the other firm (split summers is far more common in TX than NY), etc.

What you can do, however, is choose the firm you want for and make sure to go out of your way to outperform many of the other summer associates (fewer mistakes, network a little more, volunteer for various things, etc.). For many firms in the modern legal market, the competition does not end when you receive a summer offer -> it ends when you receive a permanent one.

Well, then you want to keep your job. I think in this respect, TX is more stable than NY in that midlevels might not be pushed out as quickly.

[IrwinM.Fletcher]

I will reiterate something that I'm sure has been mentioned at some point in other threads-

It is obviously more common to split in Texas than in most other markets (although this has become increasingly difficult in recent years). When you see, for instance, a firm no-offering 2 out of 23 summers in Texas, the split often plays a large part in this.

For instance, I personally know of two individuals who had different firms for their first and second half and received an offer from only 1 of the 2. They both readily admit that the reason they did not receive an offer from one of the firms was that they'd spent their first 6 weeks at a "better/more prestigious" firm, received an offer (or had been promised one unofficially by partners), then totally mailed it in during the second half and did basically no work.

These situations definitely do not explain all, or even the majority of no-offers in Texas NALP firms, but I'm convinced this type of scenario plays out somewhat commonly in split-friendly markets. After all, if you like Firm A better and they gave out offers on the last day of the first half of the summer, why strive at Firm B?

[Anonymous User]

I will reiterate something that I'm sure has been mentioned at some point in other threads-

It is obviously more common to split in Texas than in most other markets (although this has become increasingly difficult in recent years). When you see, for instance, a firm no-offering 2 out of 23 summers in Texas, the split often plays a large part in this.

For instance, I personally know of two individuals who had different firms for their first and second half and received an offer from only 1 of the 2. They both readily admit that the reason they did not receive an offer from one of the firms was that they'd spent their first 6 weeks at a "better/more prestigious" firm, received an offer (or had been promised one unofficially by partners), then totally mailed it in during the second half and did basically no work.

These situations definitely do not explain all, or even the majority of no-offers in Texas NALP firms, but I'm convinced this type of scenario plays out somewhat commonly in split-friendly markets. After all, if you like Firm A better and they gave out offers on the last day of the first half of the summer, why strive at Firm B?

Very good point that I didn't consider.

So is there a consensus? Where is there a better chance of getting a full-time offer?