if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals. Forum
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 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.
- Old Gregg
- Posts: 5409
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm
if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
image says it all:
- Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
To Wall Street: Don't be pussies, Fed is basically giving away money for you do it.zweitbester wrote:image says it all:
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 428520
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
I don't think it economically follows to claim that less firms will lead to higher wages...
I am curious as to what people think the chances are for NYC to go to 190.
I am curious as to what people think the chances are for NYC to go to 190.
- sublime
- Posts: 17385
- Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm
-
- Posts: 428520
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
You're arguing that with less firms in the market, wages will rise? Wouldn't it be the opposite? More firms means more competition, means the need for higher wages.sublime wrote:What?Anonymous User wrote:I don't think it economically follows to claim that less firms will lead to higher wages...
I am curious as to what people think the chances are for NYC to go to 190.
And not high enough to worry about.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- sublime
- Posts: 17385
- Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm
- WhirledWorld
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:04 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
Interesting coincidence. Doesn't change the fact that revenues and profits are higher than in 2006/07, even after adjusting for inflation.
-
- Posts: 428520
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
Do a lot of law firms make money off of first years? First years at some firms aren't profitable for those firms, first years at most firms probably are profitable, right?
- Cobretti
- Posts: 2593
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
I think the biggest thing pushing wages up long term is the decline in law school applicants. When it gets to a point that firms become legitimately concerned about the still deteriorating talent pool coming out of law school to the extent that they think it will negatively affect their own long term stability, they will feel pressure to increase wages to attract more people away from going into other careers.
In a system where everyone is lockstep there are a lot of internal pressures to not start a new salary war among the usual suspects, so I don't see internal competition among firms for existing/near-term future prospects as playing much of a factor.
And of course a big LOL at profitability alone ever being sufficient to throw more money to the worker bees.
In a system where everyone is lockstep there are a lot of internal pressures to not start a new salary war among the usual suspects, so I don't see internal competition among firms for existing/near-term future prospects as playing much of a factor.
And of course a big LOL at profitability alone ever being sufficient to throw more money to the worker bees.
- 84651846190
- Posts: 2198
- Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
Okay, get on it, you transactional shitheads.
*puts feet up and reviews documents for 12 hours*
*puts feet up and reviews documents for 12 hours*
- Avian
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 9:04 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
There are two reasons I don't think this will have as big of an effect as you think. First, the decline in law school applicants is in response to the overall health of the legal market. So while there are fewer overall graduates, there are also fewer jobs available than there used to be. Second, and perhaps more importantly as far as biglaw salaries are concerned, the big firms are drawing the top students from the top schools. This means that even if the bottom third of students attending T1s were to drop out right now, there would still be enough people to hire for biglaw.Cobretti wrote:I think the biggest thing pushing wages up long term is the decline in law school applicants.
- Cobretti
- Posts: 2593
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
I meant the perceived drop in quality of applicants moreso than the warm body count.Avian wrote:There are two reasons I don't think this will have as big of an effect as you think. First, the decline in law school applicants is in response to the overall health of the legal market. So while there are fewer overall graduates, there are also fewer jobs available than there used to be. Second, and perhaps more importantly as far as biglaw salaries are concerned, the big firms are drawing the top students from the top schools. This means that even if the bottom third of students attending T1s were to drop out right now, there would still be enough people to hire for biglaw.Cobretti wrote:I think the biggest thing pushing wages up long term is the decline in law school applicants.
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 9:40 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
Quality of summers is certainly dropping quite drastically. You're talking when firms used to be getting a bunch of 3.85/172 kids now they're getting a bunch of 3.78/166 kids
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Old Gregg
- Posts: 5409
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
Yes because 6 points on the LSAT means you have the ability to move more commas...GOATlawman wrote:Quality of summers is certainly dropping quite drastically. You're talking when firms used to be getting a bunch of 3.85/172 kids now they're getting a bunch of 3.78/166 kids
I'll assume you were being sarcastic.
- Old Gregg
- Posts: 5409
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
k lemme go out and get some deals. My MacBook came with a number to call if I have problems. I'll ask the rep if apple would be interested in doing some dealsBiglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Okay, get on it, you transactional shitheads.
*puts feet up and reviews documents for 12 hours*
Wish me luck tyty
- Old Gregg
- Posts: 5409
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
Also chart above is all M&A, not law firm mergers.
To the dumbass who thought otherwise.
To the dumbass who thought otherwise.
-
- Posts: 3436
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
11,000 law firm mergers in 2014 sounds plausible
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- Old Gregg
- Posts: 5409
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
yeah i looked at the chart and was wondering if was possibly misleading, but no whoever posted that post is just mind blowingly stupid.dixiecupdrinking wrote:11,000 law firm mergers in 2014 sounds plausible
-
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:03 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
If every associate in NYC just did one more deal per year we could hit 190
-
- Posts: 12612
- Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
Wait.911 crisis actor wrote:If every associate in NYC just did one more deal per year we could hit 190
WAIT JUST A SECOND.
Did you say, NYC TO 190??????
- Robb
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:21 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
I'm taking a class with a partner where we often don't actually do the work assigned to the class but he tells us all about his tips for surviving at a firm. Wonderful class. He gave us a whole lecture about how first years are the most profitable. His reasoning was that there is an asymmetry between the increase in price/hour to the client, the time it takes to do a task, and the pay employees receive as they gain experience. That is, first years might take 10x as long to do the same task, but they probably only bill about 1/5 the rate of a partner, for example. So they bring in twice as much while getting paid about 1/20th as much.Anonymous User wrote:Do a lot of law firms make money off of first years? First years at some firms aren't profitable for those firms, first years at most firms probably are profitable, right?
But it also did seem like a bit of a recruiting spiel for his firm, because of course they're the one among the many who don't take advantage of you, so that could be it.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Old Gregg
- Posts: 5409
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
questionable whether firms make that much money from first years, from writing off time to additional training and clients who don't want first years on their matters.
but thats not the point of this thread. the point of this thread is that you should be doing more deals so NYC to 190k.
so stop posting here AND DO SOME MOTHERFUCKIN DEALS.
but thats not the point of this thread. the point of this thread is that you should be doing more deals so NYC to 190k.
so stop posting here AND DO SOME MOTHERFUCKIN DEALS.
-
- Posts: 12612
- Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
!!!!!!zweitbester wrote:NYC to 190k.
- Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
Nah we need actual corp bros to do less deals. Bill 1700 hours and stop.911 crisis actor wrote:If every associate in NYC just did one more deal per year we could hit 190
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 12:07 am
Re: if u want NYC to 190, u need to do more deals.
You need to look at inflation adjusted salaries. There was a good article in AmLaw a couple of weeks ago. Revenue may be flat, but PPP is up, generally. Associates' salaries have been stagnant for a while. Not saying 190K is justified, but the push for an increased starting salary makes sense.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login