Is STB the next Dewey?

(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: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Feb 27, 2015 12:35 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I will never understand why a forum for lawyers is so hostile to legal work.


LOL. A perplexing mystery indeed!

"Sorry honey, Joe Boomer's internal deadline for moving those commas around is COB tomorrow. Maybe next anniversary."


But your job is to move those commas, for the first two years or so. And they pay you a shitton of money to do it. And then you never move commas again. It's like a marine complaining about having to go through basic training. They TELL YOU IN ADVANCE. And still people complain.


Yeah, it is like the Marines. That's the point. People are unhappy in a job that can reasonably be compared to being in the fucking Marines, if only Annapolis cost $250k in addition to whatever you paid for an undergrad degree. Do you still not get why a lawyer might hate his/her job?

Also, "you signed up for this" is not a reason to be happy. A healthy proportion leave the instant their loans are paid; some earlier than that. Precisely zero people who go in house go on and on about how much they want to be back in Biglaw. And even the ones that are swayed by the money aren't thinking "You know, I really shouldn't be so hostile to legal work!" when it's 1 AM, they still have to review 500 more documents, and they're staring out a window wondering how hard they'd have to throw themselves at it for it to break.


I think that's an insanely negative point of view. First off, only idiots take on that much educational debt, so that's like saying law sucks because 25 year olds are too short-sighted to understand how much it sucks to pay off loans. I'm down to a relatively nominal amount of debt (which I could pay off tomorrow, but incurs interest at such a low rate that its almost not worth bothering) - same as most of the folks I work with. The folks who are working to pay off debt 5 years out from school are mostly miserable because they have much less disposable income and feel trapped in their jobs. It almost doesn't matter if the job is good or not in that scenario - feeling like an indentured servant makes any job oppressive. But that's not inherent to the job, its inherent to certain 25 year olds being idiots.

Then you have to consider what's baked into your perspective. There's a first order question - do you want to shoot for a well-compensated/powerful/prestigious job? It's not obvious that its worth it. Making a decent living with a 40 hour week is really freaking attractive. You can grow tomatoes in your backyard and coach your kids sports teams and stuff.

If you don't want to have a gunner professional life, then biglaw is generally not for you.

But if you want that job, then biglaw is a pretty sweet deal. My doctor friends make much less and have worked like dogs for 15 years. They say it gets easier from now on, but, damn, up until 30 its a brutal career. My banker friends work just as hard or harder, do way more travel (subtle perk of law is minimal travel which is great if you have kids) and have shitty job security. Their comp is better but its not worlds better - maybe 30-50% more at equivalent seniority? And you need to be saving like an animal because you never know when the axe will fall. Traders and other hedge fund folks make much more money and have better hours but their job security is zero. PE guys make a bit more than the bankers and have lawyer-like job security, but that job is MUCH tougher to get than biglaw - if you're a superstar at HBS then maybe you have a chance at it, have fun with that. You ever lived with a consultant? Their hours are brutal and the travel soul crushing. And their comp is worse than biglaw, even at MBB. You can go work for your buddy's startup but the risk is astronomical and if you think law hours are grueling and unpredictable then you're in for a surprise when you start your entrepreneurial career.

Also, its not like our skills or interests necessarily port to the other high earning professions. I'm really good at legal work - near the top of my LS class, survived for a long time at my firm and enjoy work. Would I be a great banker or trader? Maybe, but the risk of crashing and burning is HUGE. Would I like it? Who the hell knows?

I think I'm insanely lucky to be paid $300k/yr to do something that I happen to be good at and like doing. It's just random luck - I could've been a killer carpenter and then I'd make $75k. But my skill happens to be well compensated and I enjoy doing it. So I thank the spaghetti monster in the sky for making it so and I sure as hell don't bitch about how much it sucks to work till midnight on a Wednesday, because that is a high class problem if there ever was one.

Cogburn87
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 11:26 pm

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Cogburn87 » Fri Feb 27, 2015 4:25 pm

The problem with your schtick is you don't sound like someone who has actually worked in biglaw. Maybe let someone else run this flame?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:53 am

Re Mayer Brown:

The senior partner and the associate are both gone.

Mayer Brown has a Supervisor of UCC Compliance who signed off.

A UCC Specialist also signed off.

The paralegal behind the search was known as the God of the paralegals. Inexperienced? What percentage of the facts in opinions is complete bull?

Here's who signed off at Mayer Brown:

senior partner
associate
Supervisor of UCC Compliance who does nothing but Revised Article 9
UCC Specialist who does nothing but Revised Article 9
the God of the paralegals

Some say Mayer Brown can't be held liable. We'll see. Barkley Clark holds open the possibility. And no one thought the unsecured creditors were going to win their appeal.

User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Monochromatic Oeuvre » Sat Feb 28, 2015 12:21 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
I think that's an insanely negative point of view. First off, only idiots take on that much educational debt, so that's like saying law sucks because 25 year olds are too short-sighted to understand how much it sucks to pay off loans. I'm down to a relatively nominal amount of debt (which I could pay off tomorrow, but incurs interest at such a low rate that its almost not worth bothering) - same as most of the folks I work with. The folks who are working to pay off debt 5 years out from school are mostly miserable because they have much less disposable income and feel trapped in their jobs. It almost doesn't matter if the job is good or not in that scenario - feeling like an indentured servant makes any job oppressive. But that's not inherent to the job, its inherent to certain 25 year olds being idiots.

Then you have to consider what's baked into your perspective. There's a first order question - do you want to shoot for a well-compensated/powerful/prestigious job? It's not obvious that its worth it. Making a decent living with a 40 hour week is really freaking attractive. You can grow tomatoes in your backyard and coach your kids sports teams and stuff.

If you don't want to have a gunner professional life, then biglaw is generally not for you.

But if you want that job, then biglaw is a pretty sweet deal. My doctor friends make much less and have worked like dogs for 15 years. They say it gets easier from now on, but, damn, up until 30 its a brutal career. My banker friends work just as hard or harder, do way more travel (subtle perk of law is minimal travel which is great if you have kids) and have shitty job security. Their comp is better but its not worlds better - maybe 30-50% more at equivalent seniority? And you need to be saving like an animal because you never know when the axe will fall. Traders and other hedge fund folks make much more money and have better hours but their job security is zero. PE guys make a bit more than the bankers and have lawyer-like job security, but that job is MUCH tougher to get than biglaw - if you're a superstar at HBS then maybe you have a chance at it, have fun with that. You ever lived with a consultant? Their hours are brutal and the travel soul crushing. And their comp is worse than biglaw, even at MBB. You can go work for your buddy's startup but the risk is astronomical and if you think law hours are grueling and unpredictable then you're in for a surprise when you start your entrepreneurial career.

Also, its not like our skills or interests necessarily port to the other high earning professions. I'm really good at legal work - near the top of my LS class, survived for a long time at my firm and enjoy work. Would I be a great banker or trader? Maybe, but the risk of crashing and burning is HUGE. Would I like it? Who the hell knows?

I think I'm insanely lucky to be paid $300k/yr to do something that I happen to be good at and like doing. It's just random luck - I could've been a killer carpenter and then I'd make $75k. But my skill happens to be well compensated and I enjoy doing it. So I thank the spaghetti monster in the sky for making it so and I sure as hell don't bitch about how much it sucks to work till midnight on a Wednesday, because that is a high class problem if there ever was one.


1. Telling prospective students to "just get a T14 full ride bro, that'll limit your debt while still giving you a reasonable chance at Biglaw" is not productive advice for most people.

2. Being an indentured servant is inherent to the job. There are very few industries where average debt levels are so astronomically high that people literally could not leave a position without defaulting on their debt. When nobody (at least at the junior level) can leave, it gives those in power carte blanche to treat everyone like shit. Partners can do anything they want, and they know the indentured servants will still bill the minimum not to get fired.

3. If your point is "Every job where you can make $200k by 30 sucks in some way," then yeah, I don't disagree. But even if making that kind of money is an opportunity rather than a requirement for someone, it doesn't make the day better. It's just being well-paid for doing something awful. And all the lawyers forced into therapy and alcoholism aren't going to see it your way when you tell them their perspective is "insanely negative."

Anonymous User
Posts: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Feb 28, 2015 6:58 pm

.

mvp99
Posts: 1384
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:00 pm

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby mvp99 » Sat Feb 28, 2015 7:10 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
I think that's an insanely negative point of view. First off, only idiots take on that much educational debt, so that's like saying law sucks because 25 year olds are too short-sighted to understand how much it sucks to pay off loans. I'm down to a relatively nominal amount of debt (which I could pay off tomorrow, but incurs interest at such a low rate that its almost not worth bothering) - same as most of the folks I work with. The folks who are working to pay off debt 5 years out from school are mostly miserable because they have much less disposable income and feel trapped in their jobs. It almost doesn't matter if the job is good or not in that scenario - feeling like an indentured servant makes any job oppressive. But that's not inherent to the job, its inherent to certain 25 year olds being idiots.

Then you have to consider what's baked into your perspective. There's a first order question - do you want to shoot for a well-compensated/powerful/prestigious job? It's not obvious that its worth it. Making a decent living with a 40 hour week is really freaking attractive. You can grow tomatoes in your backyard and coach your kids sports teams and stuff.

If you don't want to have a gunner professional life, then biglaw is generally not for you.

But if you want that job, then biglaw is a pretty sweet deal. My doctor friends make much less and have worked like dogs for 15 years. They say it gets easier from now on, but, damn, up until 30 its a brutal career. My banker friends work just as hard or harder, do way more travel (subtle perk of law is minimal travel which is great if you have kids) and have shitty job security. Their comp is better but its not worlds better - maybe 30-50% more at equivalent seniority? And you need to be saving like an animal because you never know when the axe will fall. Traders and other hedge fund folks make much more money and have better hours but their job security is zero. PE guys make a bit more than the bankers and have lawyer-like job security, but that job is MUCH tougher to get than biglaw - if you're a superstar at HBS then maybe you have a chance at it, have fun with that. You ever lived with a consultant? Their hours are brutal and the travel soul crushing. And their comp is worse than biglaw, even at MBB. You can go work for your buddy's startup but the risk is astronomical and if you think law hours are grueling and unpredictable then you're in for a surprise when you start your entrepreneurial career.

Also, its not like our skills or interests necessarily port to the other high earning professions. I'm really good at legal work - near the top of my LS class, survived for a long time at my firm and enjoy work. Would I be a great banker or trader? Maybe, but the risk of crashing and burning is HUGE. Would I like it? Who the hell knows?

I think I'm insanely lucky to be paid $300k/yr to do something that I happen to be good at and like doing. It's just random luck - I could've been a killer carpenter and then I'd make $75k. But my skill happens to be well compensated and I enjoy doing it. So I thank the spaghetti monster in the sky for making it so and I sure as hell don't bitch about how much it sucks to work till midnight on a Wednesday, because that is a high class problem if there ever was one.


1. Telling prospective students to "just get a T14 full ride bro, that'll limit your debt while still giving you a reasonable chance at Biglaw" is not productive advice for most people.

2. Being an indentured servant is inherent to the job. There are very few industries where average debt levels are so astronomically high that people literally could not leave a position without defaulting on their debt. When nobody (at least at the junior level) can leave, it gives those in power carte blanche to treat everyone like shit. Partners can do anything they want, and they know the indentured servants will still bill the minimum not to get fired.

3. If your point is "Every job where you can make $200k by 30 sucks in some way," then yeah, I don't disagree. But even if making that kind of money is an opportunity rather than a requirement for someone, it doesn't make the day better. It's just being well-paid for doing something awful. And all the lawyers forced into therapy and alcoholism aren't going to see it your way when you tell them their perspective is "insanely negative."


More important tho, do you think he imagined the whole thing or society is simply really that messed up?

User avatar
bearsfan23
Posts: 1522
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 11:19 pm

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby bearsfan23 » Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:02 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
I think that's an insanely negative point of view. First off, only idiots take on that much educational debt, so that's like saying law sucks because 25 year olds are too short-sighted to understand how much it sucks to pay off loans. I'm down to a relatively nominal amount of debt (which I could pay off tomorrow, but incurs interest at such a low rate that its almost not worth bothering) - same as most of the folks I work with. The folks who are working to pay off debt 5 years out from school are mostly miserable because they have much less disposable income and feel trapped in their jobs. It almost doesn't matter if the job is good or not in that scenario - feeling like an indentured servant makes any job oppressive. But that's not inherent to the job, its inherent to certain 25 year olds being idiots.

Then you have to consider what's baked into your perspective. There's a first order question - do you want to shoot for a well-compensated/powerful/prestigious job? It's not obvious that its worth it. Making a decent living with a 40 hour week is really freaking attractive. You can grow tomatoes in your backyard and coach your kids sports teams and stuff.

If you don't want to have a gunner professional life, then biglaw is generally not for you.

But if you want that job, then biglaw is a pretty sweet deal. My doctor friends make much less and have worked like dogs for 15 years. They say it gets easier from now on, but, damn, up until 30 its a brutal career. My banker friends work just as hard or harder, do way more travel (subtle perk of law is minimal travel which is great if you have kids) and have shitty job security. Their comp is better but its not worlds better - maybe 30-50% more at equivalent seniority? And you need to be saving like an animal because you never know when the axe will fall. Traders and other hedge fund folks make much more money and have better hours but their job security is zero. PE guys make a bit more than the bankers and have lawyer-like job security, but that job is MUCH tougher to get than biglaw - if you're a superstar at HBS then maybe you have a chance at it, have fun with that. You ever lived with a consultant? Their hours are brutal and the travel soul crushing. And their comp is worse than biglaw, even at MBB. You can go work for your buddy's startup but the risk is astronomical and if you think law hours are grueling and unpredictable then you're in for a surprise when you start your entrepreneurial career.

Also, its not like our skills or interests necessarily port to the other high earning professions. I'm really good at legal work - near the top of my LS class, survived for a long time at my firm and enjoy work. Would I be a great banker or trader? Maybe, but the risk of crashing and burning is HUGE. Would I like it? Who the hell knows?

I think I'm insanely lucky to be paid $300k/yr to do something that I happen to be good at and like doing. It's just random luck - I could've been a killer carpenter and then I'd make $75k. But my skill happens to be well compensated and I enjoy doing it. So I thank the spaghetti monster in the sky for making it so and I sure as hell don't bitch about how much it sucks to work till midnight on a Wednesday, because that is a high class problem if there ever was one.


1. Telling prospective students to "just get a T14 full ride bro, that'll limit your debt while still giving you a reasonable chance at Biglaw" is not productive advice for most people.

2. Being an indentured servant is inherent to the job. There are very few industries where average debt levels are so astronomically high that people literally could not leave a position without defaulting on their debt. When nobody (at least at the junior level) can leave, it gives those in power carte blanche to treat everyone like shit. Partners can do anything they want, and they know the indentured servants will still bill the minimum not to get fired.

3. If your point is "Every job where you can make $200k by 30 sucks in some way," then yeah, I don't disagree. But even if making that kind of money is an opportunity rather than a requirement for someone, it doesn't make the day better. It's just being well-paid for doing something awful. And all the lawyers forced into therapy and alcoholism aren't going to see it your way when you tell them their perspective is "insanely negative."


Answer my question, aren't you a 2L? If so, why are you giving advice on BigLaw like you actually are an attorney? Also, why are you comparing BigLaw to the Marines, when you've done neither?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Mar 11, 2015 2:02 am

Anonymous User wrote:
zweitbester wrote:
and then you never have to move commas again


LOLOLOLOL who the fuck are you???????


I'm a sixth year transactional associate, and I cannot imagine how you can be reasonably senior and still "moving commas". Maybe if you do straight cap markets but that's not a feature of being a transactional associate, that's a feature of being the moron who picks cap markets as their practice group.


Just out of curiosity, as an incoming summer associate this summer (not in NY) considering capital markets, why do you say this? I've heard many positives when compared to the general corporate securities transactional route. I'm genuinely interested in whatever you (even though you seem like a dick) or anyone else here have to say.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Mar 11, 2015 2:17 am

I think that's an insanely negative point of view. First off, only idiots take on that much educational debt, so that's like saying law sucks because 25 year olds are too short-sighted to understand how much it sucks to pay off loans. I'm down to a relatively nominal amount of debt (which I could pay off tomorrow, but incurs interest at such a low rate that its almost not worth bothering) - same as most of the folks I work with. The folks who are working to pay off debt 5 years out from school are mostly miserable because they have much less disposable income and feel trapped in their jobs. It almost doesn't matter if the job is good or not in that scenario - feeling like an indentured servant makes any job oppressive. But that's not inherent to the job, its inherent to certain 25 year olds being idiots.

Then you have to consider what's baked into your perspective. There's a first order question - do you want to shoot for a well-compensated/powerful/prestigious job? It's not obvious that its worth it. Making a decent living with a 40 hour week is really freaking attractive. You can grow tomatoes in your backyard and coach your kids sports teams and stuff.

If you don't want to have a gunner professional life, then biglaw is generally not for you.

But if you want that job, then biglaw is a pretty sweet deal. My doctor friends make much less and have worked like dogs for 15 years. They say it gets easier from now on, but, damn, up until 30 its a brutal career. My banker friends work just as hard or harder, do way more travel (subtle perk of law is minimal travel which is great if you have kids) and have shitty job security. Their comp is better but its not worlds better - maybe 30-50% more at equivalent seniority? And you need to be saving like an animal because you never know when the axe will fall. Traders and other hedge fund folks make much more money and have better hours but their job security is zero. PE guys make a bit more than the bankers and have lawyer-like job security, but that job is MUCH tougher to get than biglaw - if you're a superstar at HBS then maybe you have a chance at it, have fun with that. You ever lived with a consultant? Their hours are brutal and the travel soul crushing. And their comp is worse than biglaw, even at MBB. You can go work for your buddy's startup but the risk is astronomical and if you think law hours are grueling and unpredictable then you're in for a surprise when you start your entrepreneurial career.

Also, its not like our skills or interests necessarily port to the other high earning professions. I'm really good at legal work - near the top of my LS class, survived for a long time at my firm and enjoy work. Would I be a great banker or trader? Maybe, but the risk of crashing and burning is HUGE. Would I like it? Who the hell knows?

I think I'm insanely lucky to be paid $300k/yr to do something that I happen to be good at and like doing. It's just random luck - I could've been a killer carpenter and then I'd make $75k. But my skill happens to be well compensated and I enjoy doing it. So I thank the spaghetti monster in the sky for making it so and I sure as hell don't bitch about how much it sucks to work till midnight on a Wednesday, because that is a high class problem if there ever was one.[/quote]

I think this guy is spot on. I have actually worked as a commodities trader and in business before going to law school (CCN) and entering biglaw - the tradeoffs discussed, particularly regarding banking, trading, and consulting, are spot on from my experience. The medicine point seems right although I have less personal experience there. To make his point even stronger, he overstates even the pay difference in banking and PE - the top performers there certainly make more than the top at biglaw firms, controlling for market, but the middle and bottom end of the pack is much less favorable, and indeed the job security is much worse and hours equally bad or worse as in biglaw. All in all, the model and expectations across these industries is strikingly similar, so the variables like travel, skillsets, etc. should really dictate things, not some idiotic notion that biglaw for some reason incurs more debt - as he said, that's all based on personal decisions and the market. Just like only a small subset of people can become traders or MBB consultants, a small subset only can reasonably make it to a V100 biglaw firm with moderate to little debt, and those are the ones that should go.

For some reason, though, legal careers are more salient and seen as more attainable than those on wallstreet or elsewhere, so dumb asses take on huge debt for a small percentage shot at something they are not qualified (or didn't work hard enough to attain). This is all about personal decisions. Business school is expensive as shit too but we don't see kids who go to the 90th ranked b-school bitching when they don't make it to the top hedgefund as a trader or to Blackstone PE after graduating - that was not expected up front so they plan accordingly. In law, though, people decieve themselves or in some cases in the past may be misled by admissions offices. But that excuse is evaporating the more sites like this get the word out.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:32 pm

OP here again

Just wondering if the recent lawsuits filed against STB and JPMorgan change anything? Will STB still be okay? :(

http://abovethelaw.com/2015/07/simpson-thacher-sued-in-two-class-actions/

Anonymous User
Posts: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:51 pm

Yes. STB has a shitload of insurance for this - actually in the same insurance pool as most of the V10.

User avatar
Desert Fox
Progressively loosing literacy
Posts: 14403
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

DFTHREAD

Postby Desert Fox » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:36 pm

Image
Last edited by Desert Fox on Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:51 pm

Yes, they actually do. As do all the big NY transactional firms. You don't know what you're talking about.

Lord knows I'd love to talk shit about STB, but they are fully insured like everyone else. This is much ado about nothing.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3139
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:52 pm

It's hard to imagine any firm as successful as STB suffering from something as predictable as a malpractice claim in any way that would be visible to a junior associate or summer.

User avatar
Desert Fox
Progressively loosing literacy
Posts: 14403
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

DFTHREAD

Postby Desert Fox » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:54 pm

Image
Last edited by Desert Fox on Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273182
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 04, 2015 1:18 am

Can someone please explain? How sure are we that STB is insured for a billion+, and how sure are we that in these circumstances they're covered via their insurance contract?

Is anyone here in the know for how malpractice insurance actually works for a large law firm like STB, or is this all conjecture?

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9635
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Is STB the next Dewey?

Postby jbagelboy » Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:56 am

Anonymous User wrote:Can someone please explain? How sure are we that STB is insured for a billion+, and how sure are we that in these circumstances they're covered via their insurance contract?

Is anyone here in the know for how malpractice insurance actually works for a large law firm like STB, or is this all conjecture?


troll




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.