Top Law Schools

As an objective measure of a firm's health or value, Vault is less than worthless. As an extremely subjective indicator of trending upwards or downwards reputation, it marginally might be worth looking at if, for instance, you are at a firm that is plummeting out of the V10 or rapidly on the rise. Generally extreme movements don't happen for a lot of firms in the V100 so usually it doesn't tell you much about any particular firm.

Capitol_Idea wrote:As an objective measure of a firm's health or value, Vault is less than worthless. As an extremely subjective indicator of trending upwards or downwards reputation, it marginally might be worth looking at if, for instance, you are at a firm that is plummeting out of the V10 or rapidly on the rise. Generally extreme movements don't happen for a lot of firms in the V100 so usually it doesn't tell you much about any particular firm.

I disagree, they're not even directionally meaningful imo.

If there is a legit reason for a firm to plummet or rise in the Vault rankings, by definition that reason would have to be well known already. Vault adds no value.

I ranked my firm 10 and all other firms 1, not kidding that was my metric.

2014 wrote:I ranked my firm 10 and all other firms 1, not kidding that was my metric.

they dont let you rank your own. i do something similar though.

not sure what's more lol worthy: Wachtell isnt #1 with $6M PPP and a fee structure only it can do or K&L gates climbing 8 spots right before bankruptcy.

JohannDeMann wrote:not sure what's more lol worthy: Wachtell isnt #1 with $6M PPP and a fee structure only it can do or K&L gates climbing 8 spots right before bankruptcy.

So you think PPP should be the main consideration?

JohannDeMann wrote:not sure what's more lol worthy: Wachtell isnt #1 with $6M PPP and a fee structure only it can do or K&L gates climbing 8 spots right before bankruptcy.

Eh, Wachtell and Cravath historically traded spots a bunch. I think Wachtell should stay #1 but #2 isn't exactly a fall from grace.

The K&L bump reminds me of a little firm called Dewey that jumped 10 points from 47 to 37 back in 2011.

dixiecupdrinking wrote:

Capitol_Idea wrote:As an objective measure of a firm's health or value, Vault is less than worthless. As an extremely subjective indicator of trending upwards or downwards reputation, it marginally might be worth looking at if, for instance, you are at a firm that is plummeting out of the V10 or rapidly on the rise. Generally extreme movements don't happen for a lot of firms in the V100 so usually it doesn't tell you much about any particular firm.

I disagree, they're not even directionally meaningful imo.

If there is a legit reason for a firm to plummet or rise in the Vault rankings, by definition that reason would have to be well known already. Vault adds no value.

TBF, that information may not be well known to law students. However, the rise of Dewey pre-bankruptcy is a good indication that associates do not always know best.

*I didn't even bother to complete the survey this past year. So, also remember that this survey is completed by associates willing to go and spend their free time ranking law firms (that's a pretty unique subsection of the whole population right there). And, in prior years, I ranked every firm the worst possible ranking, except I gave the best ranking possible to my firm, any firm that I knew paid substantially above market, and all of the firms that I was considering lateraling to at the time.

Munger Tolles? Lol. More like HUNGERED PROLES

Tiago Splitter wrote:

sublime wrote:

Tiago Splitter wrote:

sublime wrote:So do they just give associates a list of like 100+ firms and ask you to rate their prestige from 1 to 5?

It was like 160 firms. I think the scale was 1-10. Then it lets you answer questions about your own firm.

What do you do with firms you haven't heard of? Just give a low rating or not answer?

ETA: Interesting. Thanks AR.

I think I randomly gave ratings to about 20 of them. Left the rest blank.

I know the Vault survey said not to rate firms you hadn't heard of, but I definitely rated every single one. There were a lot of random 1s thrown around.

Startled Rabbit wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:not sure what's more lol worthy: Wachtell isnt #1 with $6M PPP and a fee structure only it can do or K&L gates climbing 8 spots right before bankruptcy.

So you think PPP should be the main consideration?

Probably not PPP, but revenue per lawyer (in the U.S.) I think would match most people's intuition pretty well. Much harder to manipulate that, and is a good indication of how clients view these things at least.

orangecup wrote:

Tiago Splitter wrote:

sublime wrote:

Tiago Splitter wrote:

sublime wrote:So do they just give associates a list of like 100+ firms and ask you to rate their prestige from 1 to 5?

It was like 160 firms. I think the scale was 1-10. Then it lets you answer questions about your own firm.

What do you do with firms you haven't heard of? Just give a low rating or not answer?

ETA: Interesting. Thanks AR.

I think I randomly gave ratings to about 20 of them. Left the rest blank.

I know the Vault survey said not to rate firms you hadn't heard of, but I definitely rated every single one. There were a lot of random 1s thrown around.

Not only that but about halfway through you go "holy shit this list is long" and stop paying attention. There have got to be like 250+ firms on there, most of which there is no reason to have ever heard of. I honestly think that Cravath and Wachtell might be decided by how many people keep doing the survey to the end of the alphabet that year.

Anonymous User wrote:

Startled Rabbit wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:not sure what's more lol worthy: Wachtell isnt #1 with $6M PPP and a fee structure only it can do or K&L gates climbing 8 spots right before bankruptcy.

So you think PPP should be the main consideration?

Probably not PPP, but revenue per lawyer (in the U.S.) I think would match most people's intuition pretty well. Much harder to manipulate that, and is a good indication of how clients view these things at least.

Strong anon. In any event, anyone who turns a job at Wachtell down for a job at Cravath is an idiot. I feel like that should be a relevant metric.

v5junior wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Startled Rabbit wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:not sure what's more lol worthy: Wachtell isnt #1 with $6M PPP and a fee structure only it can do or K&L gates climbing 8 spots right before bankruptcy.

So you think PPP should be the main consideration?

Probably not PPP, but revenue per lawyer (in the U.S.) I think would match most people's intuition pretty well. Much harder to manipulate that, and is a good indication of how clients view these things at least.

Strong anon. In any event, anyone who turns a job at Wachtell down for a job at Cravath is an idiot. I feel like that should be a relevant metric.

Go with the lower ranked firm instead of the top ranked firm? Yeah, okay buddy.

dixiecupdrinking wrote:Seriously, once you have actually done the Vault survey, you understand why these rankings are less than useless. It's complete nonsense.

It's hilarious to do them. My sense of a firm's preftige is 90% my memory of its rough previous vault ranking combined with how I personally feel about the classmates who went there or colleagues who lateralled to/from.

dixiecupdrinking wrote:Seriously, once you have actually done the Vault survey, you understand why these rankings are less than useless. It's complete nonsense.

I gave up when I saw the unending list of firms it required me to rank.

Well I for one am EXCITED to do my CIVIC DUTY in assigning numbers arbitrarily to firms I know next-to-nothing about.

Hmm so this means I should go to DLA Piper instead of Susman Godfrey right?

gaddockteeg wrote:Hmm so this means I should go to DLA Piper instead of Susman Godfrey right?

well it would certainly be more ENJOYable

Anyone know when the regional rankings come out? It's completely irrelevant, I know, but am curious.

gaddockteeg wrote:Hmm so this means I should go to DLA Piper instead of Susman Godfrey right?

Indeed. Also:

90 Keker & Van Nest LLP

97 Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, PLLC


LOL @ the strivers who fight to get into HYS, get good grades, clerk, and then end up at these bottom-of-the-barrel firms. Just LOL.

ETA: More LOLs.

rpupkin wrote:

gaddockteeg wrote:Hmm so this means I should go to DLA Piper instead of Susman Godfrey right?

Indeed. Also:

90 Keker & Van Nest LLP

97 Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, PLLC


LOL @ the strivers who fight to get into HYS, get good grades, clerk, and then up at these bottom-of-the-barrel firms. Just LOL.

Also FINALLY that trash outfit Williams & Connolly has been SURPASSED by the glorious Jones Day.

rpupkin wrote:

gaddockteeg wrote:Hmm so this means I should go to DLA Piper instead of Susman Godfrey right?

Indeed. Also:

90 Keker & Van Nest LLP

97 Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, PLLC


LOL @ the strivers who fight to get into HYS, get good grades, clerk, and then end up at these bottom-of-the-barrel firms. Just LOL.

ETA: More LOLs.

Seriously though unranked seems much better. At least if you're unranked you can pretend that your firm is above the unwashed Vault masses and in a category unto themselves. Once you sneak into the 90's you can't even fake it anymore.

Also lol @ Figel. Just let it go dude. No one goes six deep which means no one even considers you a name partner.

Tiago Splitter wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

gaddockteeg wrote:Hmm so this means I should go to DLA Piper instead of Susman Godfrey right?

Indeed. Also:

90 Keker & Van Nest LLP

97 Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, PLLC


LOL @ the strivers who fight to get into HYS, get good grades, clerk, and then end up at these bottom-of-the-barrel firms. Just LOL.

ETA: More LOLs.

Seriously though unranked seems much better. At least if you're unranked you can pretend that your firm is above the unwashed Vault masses and in a category unto themselves. Once you sneak into the 90's you can't even fake it anymore.

Agreed. Until yesterday, lawyers at these TTTs could try to rationalize their station by saying: "I work at a litigation boutique." Now, all they can do is meekly say: "I work at a....uh.....V90."

Very sad!

rpupkin wrote:

Tiago Splitter wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

gaddockteeg wrote:Hmm so this means I should go to DLA Piper instead of Susman Godfrey right?

Indeed. Also:

90 Keker & Van Nest LLP

97 Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, PLLC


LOL @ the strivers who fight to get into HYS, get good grades, clerk, and then end up at these bottom-of-the-barrel firms. Just LOL.

ETA: More LOLs.

Seriously though unranked seems much better. At least if you're unranked you can pretend that your firm is above the unwashed Vault masses and in a category unto themselves. Once you sneak into the 90's you can't even fake it anymore.

Agreed. Until yesterday, lawyers at these TTTs could try to rationalize their station by saying: "I work at a litigation boutique." Now, all they can do is meekly say: "I work at a....uh.....V90." Very sad!

Haha agreed.