NYC to 200k Forum

[NakedPowerOrgan]

The Wall of Shame continues to effect change, with Akin and Shearman being the latest to buckle under the weight of being the former #1 and #4.

Wall of Shame for Firms Yet to Announce:

• Kirkland ($4.70MM PPP, 44.7% L5Y PPP growth, 3.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Davis Polk ($3.70MM PPP, 50.7% L5Y PPP growth, 3.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Weil ($3.64MM PPP, 63.2% L5Y PPP growth, 3.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Paul Weiss ($4.56MM PPP, 36.2% L5Y PPP growth, 3.6 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Milbank ($3.46MM PPP, 41.5% L5Y PPP growth, 2.6 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Fried Frank ($2.94MM PPP, 123.7% L5Y PPP growth, 2.9 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Simpson ($3.68MM PPP, 38.2% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Skadden ($3.47MM PPP, 32.7% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  SullCrom ($4.27MM PPP, 23.8% L5Y PPP growth, 3.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Willkie ($2.97MM PPP, 43.4% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Akin Gump ($2.39MM PPP, 54.9% L5Y PPP growth, 2.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  1. Latham ($3.25MM PPP, 33.0% L5Y PPP growth, 3.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  2. Paul Hastings ($2.91MM PPP, 39.7% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  3. Boies ($3.27MM PPP, 20.1% L5Y PPP growth, 2.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Shearman ($2.32MM PPP, 52.4% L5Y PPP growth, 2.6 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Vinson & Elkins ($2.36MM PPP, 60.6% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Quinn ($4.74MM PPP, 6.8% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  4. King & Spalding ($2.61MM PPP, 31.2% L5Y PPP growth, 2.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Cravath ($4.00MM PPP, 14.2% L5Y PPP growth, 4.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  5. Gibson Dunn ($3.24MM PPP, 15.3% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Schulte ($2.56MM PPP, 21.6% L5Y PPP growth, 2.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  6. WilmerHale ($2.12MM PPP, 44.9% L5Y PPP growth, 2.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Ropes ($2.32MM PPP, 46.1% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Dechert ($2.68MM PPP, 27.8% L5Y PPP growth, 3.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Goodwin ($2.15MM PPP, 42.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Proskauer ($2.37MM PPP, 27.9% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Cahill ($3.69MM PPP, 3.9% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Cooley ($2.08MM PPP, 39.4% L5Y PPP growth, 2.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Winston ($2.16MM PPP, 44.8% L5Y PPP growth, 3.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)[/s]
  
  7. Baker Botts ($1.84MM PPP, 35.1% L5Y PPP growth, 1.9 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Cleary ($3.07MM PPP, 17.3% L5Y PPP growth, 3.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Debevoise ($2.83MM PPP, 36.2% L5Y PPP growth, 5.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Sidley ($2.26MM PPP, 25.6% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Wilson Sonsini ($2.21MM PPP, 34.4% L5Y PPP growth, 3.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)[/s]
  
  8. Alston & Bird ($1.93MM PPP, 12.3% L5Y PPP growth, 1.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  White & Case ($2.26MM PPP, 32.9% L5Y PPP growth, 3.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Kramer Levin ($2.15MM PPP, 28.5% L5Y PPP growth, 3.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  9. Sheppard ($1.71MM PPP, 35.2% L5Y PPP growth, 2.4 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  10. Cadwalader ($2.51MM PPP, -5.3% L5Y PPP growth, 4.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  10. Mayer Brown ($1.58MM PPP, 37.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  12. Holland & Knight ($1.36MM PPP, 43.2% L5Y PPP growth, 2.1 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  13. McDermott ($1.71MM PPP, 17.3% L5Y PPP growth, 1.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  14. Katten ($1.57MM PPP, 19.8% L5Y PPP growth, 1.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  15. Fragomen ($1.98MM PPP, 31.4% L5Y PPP growth, 4.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  16. Covington ($1.54MM PPP, 22.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.0 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  16. Greenberg ($1.63MM PPP, 20.1% L5Y PPP growth, 2.2 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  18. Fish & Richardson ($1.63MM PPP, 9.8% L5Y PPP growth, 1.5 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  18. MoFo ($1.74MM PPP, 18.1% L5Y PPP growth, 2.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  20. O'Melveny ($2.01MM PPP, -2.5% L5Y PPP growth, 3.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Orrick ($1.86MM PPP, 14.3% L5Y PPP growth, 3.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  21. Fenwick ($1.51MM PPP, 31.0% L5Y PPP growth, 2.8 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  22. Jenner ($1.42MM PPP, -4.9% L5Y PPP growth, 1.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  
  Baker McKenzie ($1.30MM PPP, 19.3% L5Y PPP growth, 2.7 EP:Assoc. leverage)
  Morgan Lewis ($1.37MM PPP, -11.7% L5Y PPP growth, 1.3 EP:Assoc. leverage)

Legend:
New York
California
Washington, D.C.
Chicago
Houston
Boston
Atlanta
Philadelphia
Florida

[Anonymous User]

Akin Gump matched. That should put some pressure on DC.

Maybe there's some momentum going again today... that's 4 firms so far after a slow day yesterday.

Tomorrow is the day. Firms don't want it mid week. No need to relive the productivity debate re: distracted vs. partying.

Except there isn't really evidence for that. From 2016:

Friday week of Cravath: 5 matches

Monday after Cravath: 10 matches
Tuesday after: 7 matches
Wednesday after: 7 matches
Thursday after: 7 matches
Friday after: 6 matches
(ahh... those were the days...)

[Anonymous User]

They’re all gonna match eventually...

[Anonymous User]

They’re all gonna match eventually...

The DC dam is broken!

[Anonymous User]

They’re all gonna match eventually...

The DC dam is broken!

No it's not.

[Anonymous User]

They’re all gonna match eventually...

The DC dam is broken!

No it's not.

Oh hai CovingTTTon partner. What real estate agent are you using to sell your 5th vacation home?

[Anonymous User]

Shearman matched with bonus. This is from a friend who works there so no i don't have the dang memo

https://abovethelaw.com/2018/06/its-app ... in-biglaw/

[Anonymous User]

Wow, just read through EVERY page of this thread… Major takeaways:
180:
Dude who questioned if dropping a fish in your lap is a euphemism
Comment that Cravath partner only pays 190 for high-end escorts
Jbagelboy for the C/Y thing
Dude who called out TX assoc who confused scotch/bourbon
Millbank
120:
Poseidon and his blog
People who don’t realize different locations appeal to different people based on subjective factors
CT resident who thinks 100k per family member is the bar for middle class
June 18 3:21
DPW required you to always have your bathroom pass when walking the halls
CovingTTTon

Also, BODEGAS!!!!

[Anonymous User]

They’re all gonna match eventually...

The DC dam is broken!

No it's not.

EMAIL FROM COVINGTON

We are aware of the recent announcement by an interloper D.C. firm that it is increasing its associate salary scale and providing special, one-time bonuses to associates. At this point, our view is that the special, one-time bonuses and the increase in carpetbagger salaries does not reflect the prevailing market among brain-trust firms in Washington or other cities outside New York. Traditionally, associate salaries for true Washington, D.C. firms have been somewhat lower than in other markets around the country. With the recent and exceptionally generous increase in associate bonuses and our salary scale to match New York levels (which we announced roughly two years ago), we see this recent move by some pseudo-D.C. firms as reinstating the modest differential that we’ve traditionally seen in other firms vis-à-vis the prestigious firm you really want to work for. To some extent, this may reflect on other firms greedy and downright not brain-trust ability to obtain higher profit margins, and it may also reflect a slight premium for working at a non-prestigious firm and having to mutter under your breath that you work at "Akin Gump" the next time you get the inevitable D.C. question at Le Diplomate. At this stage, we are not planning to increase associate salaries in any market outside of our one New York City office, though of course we will continue to study these issues carefully.

[Marshallian]

I knew this thread was DC-heavy, but didn't realize it was just a bunch of Akin Gump associates who have no reason to check back in while they're on their bender.

[Anonymous User]

I knew this thread was DC-heavy, but didn't realize it was just a bunch of Akin Gump associates who have no reason to check back in while they're on their bender.

Now its just Gibson and Latham associates manically refreshing the page in hopes of seeing that the other has matched.

[Anonymous User]

Any serious thoughts as to why Latham & GDC haven't matched yet?

[Anonymous User]

Any serious thoughts as to why Latham & GDC haven't matched yet?

Snitches get stitches, cuzzzz

[Anonymous User]

Any serious thoughts as to why Latham & GDC haven't matched yet?

They're both waiting for the other to match. More specifically, Latham has to vote on this sort of thing apparently but has no chairman atm, and GDC is waiting for Latham.

[Anonymous User]

Any serious thoughts as to why Latham & GDC haven't matched yet?

They're both waiting for the other to match. More specifically, Latham has to vote on this sort of thing apparently but has no chairman atm, and GDC is waiting for Latham.

So what you're saying is LaTTTham is a chicken with its head cut off...

[Anonymous User]

Any serious thoughts as to why Latham & GDC haven't matched yet?

Latham: they are cheap, and their process for approving raises/bonuses is complicated (and probably also slowed given their current lack of a chairman).

Gibson: they are cheap, and are waiting for Latham to match (which is the only firm they consider a true peer), so they can tell clients that they valiantly resisted raises to the bitter end, but were ultimately forced to match to remain competitive with peer firms.

Neither appears to care about the optics/messaging to current and future associates involved in such a long delay.

[Anonymous User]

Latham will match tomorrow.

[Anonymous User]

pretty sure someone said that last week.

[Anonymous User]

Akin ballers are getting ready to board their chartered sloop for the long weekend getaway down the bay.

CovingTTTon betas are refreshing the job board at the contract lawyer doc review portal hoping something has been added that they can pick up for this weekend.

[Anonymous User]

Latham will match tomorrow.

Different anon but +1 this is happening tomorrow

[Anonymous User]

Any serious thoughts as to why Latham & GDC haven't matched yet?

Latham: they are cheap, and their process for approving raises/bonuses is complicated (and probably also slowed given their current lack of a chairman).

Gibson: they are cheap, and are waiting for Latham to match (which is the only firm they consider a true peer), so they can tell clients that they valiantly resisted raises to the bitter end, but were ultimately forced to match to remain competitive with peer firms.

Neither appears to care about the optics/messaging to current and future associates involved in such a long delay.

Bolded is certainly true. Like the day Millbank raised firm sent email reminding us of 35K referral bonuses (side note anyone wanna send a resume?) for referring qualified associates because we have been "so busy" and working more than any of the partners want us to work. But takes 3 weeks to match market comp...

[Anonymous User]

Why is DLA not on these shame lists?

[LaLiLuLeLo]

Why is DLA not on these shame lists?

Bc there’s enough shame working at DLA already

[Anonymous User]

Why is DLA not on these shame lists?

Bc there’s enough shame working at DLA already

Hall of fame

[Anonymous User]

Why is DLA not on these shame lists?

Bc there’s enough shame working at DLA already

Hall of fame

Serious question -- why are they any worse than other firms? I thought the joke about DLA started like 15 years ago when forming mega-firms through mergers was still sort of a new thing. Not so much anymore