Do Vault rankings correlate with exit options? Forum

[Rahviveh]

What exactly do hedge fund lawyers do? Is it the same as capital markets because if so I have no idea why hedge fund work is considered sexy

If you have to ask this question then you would never understand the answer. It's like taking the most prestigious elements of law, the most prestigious elements of finance, and then mixing the two together into an exit-option elixir.

Who are Schulte's peer firms in HF work?

http://m.chambersandpartners.com/12788/ ... torial/5/1

Must not be a very prestigious practice area if Sidley is your only peer

[mirroroferised7]

Oh god. This thread just made my night.

[bearsfan23]

If you definitely want to do corporate, Skadden/Cravath/Sullcrom will probably do you better than Latham, GDC PW.

But Skadden isn't V4. So strike Skadden and substitute Schulte.

Honest question: why so much Skadden hate on TLS?

First, I'm pretty sure AMG was making a Schulte troll joke, not seriously digging Skadden. Second, it's not really "hate," just a projection of the same exclusivity-obsession that dominates this board. Skadden's a huge firm and it receives a higher vault ranking than its perceived selectivity would otherwise suggest. And third, yea, people have died of overworking in Skadden offices and it kind of represents "big law" in all its sweatshop monstrosity, even though I highly doubt its worse than the other firms in its tier.

Wait, seriously?

[Swimp]

What exactly do hedge fund lawyers do? Is it the same as capital markets because if so I have no idea why hedge fund work is considered sexy

If you have to ask this question then you would never understand the answer. It's like taking the most prestigious elements of law, the most prestigious elements of finance, and then mixing the two together into an exit-option elixir.

Who are Schulte's peer firms in HF work?

Seward & Kissel is the only other firm that's in the same ballpark as Schulte in NYC, though they're probably second choice if you're a HF manager.

[Anonymous User]

If you definitely want to do corporate, Skadden/Cravath/Sullcrom will probably do you better than Latham, GDC PW.

But Skadden isn't V4. So strike Skadden and substitute Schulte.

Honest question: why so much Skadden hate on TLS?

First, I'm pretty sure AMG was making a Schulte troll joke, not seriously digging Skadden. Second, it's not really "hate," just a projection of the same exclusivity-obsession that dominates this board. Skadden's a huge firm and it receives a higher vault ranking than its perceived selectivity would otherwise suggest. And third, yea, people have died of overworking in Skadden offices and it kind of represents "big law" in all its sweatshop monstrosity, even though I highly doubt its worse than the other firms in its tier.

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity, which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers. Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

BTW I wasn't arguing against you, just pointing out the absurdity of that sentiment on these boards.

[rpupkin]

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain people on TLS obsessed with exclusivity, which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none Schulte among corporate executives and lawyers. Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled surpassed by a select few Schulte.

[jbagelboy]

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain people on TLS obsessed with exclusivity, which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none Schulte among corporate executives and lawyers. Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled surpassed by a select few Schulte.

-.-

[SLS_AMG]

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity, which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers. Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

BTW I wasn't arguing against you, just pointing out the absurdity of that sentiment on these boards.

(Skadden associate with no other V5 offers)

But I'll bite...

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity

That is part of it, yes. Skadden is not as exclusive as CSM/S&C/DPW/STB/Cleary and therefore not as "prestigious" among law students. It is certainly the easiest V5 to get a job at and probably the easiest V10 to get a job at.

which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers

While those weird corporate rankings do seem to indicate that Skadden has the best brand recognition among corporate execs, the rankings also seem to indicate that the "best brands" also mean the biggest firms. I think Baker & McKenzie and Jones Day are also in the top five?

As to your second point, Skadden's brand is second to many in the legal world. It's probably the most-bashed firm in the profession. It's a great firm, with many top practice areas, but to say it's second to none among lawyers is just wrong.

Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

I think most would agree to that.

[Neal Patrick Harris]

Skadden was on Suits sooooooo

[911 crisis actor]

Wait, seriously?

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/in-re-th ... associate/

[Anonymous User]

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity, which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers. Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

BTW I wasn't arguing against you, just pointing out the absurdity of that sentiment on these boards.

(Skadden associate with no other V5 offers)

But I'll bite...

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity

That is part of it, yes. Skadden is not as exclusive as CSM/S&C/DPW/STB/Cleary and therefore not as "prestigious" among law students. It is certainly the easiest V5 to get a job at and probably the easiest V10 to get a job at.

which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers

While those weird corporate rankings do seem to indicate that Skadden has the best brand recognition among corporate execs, the rankings also seem to indicate that the "best brands" also mean the biggest firms. I think Baker & McKenzie and Jones Day are also in the top five?

As to your second point, Skadden's brand is second to many in the legal world. It's probably the most-bashed firm in the profession. It's a great firm, with many top practice areas, but to say it's second to none among lawyers is just wrong.

Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

I think most would agree to that.

Skadden NY is certainly not the "easiest" to get a job at out of the V10 based on available data such as honors chart from CLS. It accepts a handful of more median students than other V5s, but it's still tough to get a job at since 85%+ from CLS are honors students. Its other offices might be a bit easier (prob the reason it can't be as selective as its peers), although major offices like Chicago and DC are most likely similar. I agree the brand name rankings are weird, but to argue that its brand name isn't a peer to other V5s in (esp NYC corporate practice) would be absurd. No one besides certain number of law students cares how many median kids a firm decided to let in. Clients and lawyers don't. Oh and I had offers to three V5s so I'm not bitter.

[mvp99]

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity, which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers. Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

BTW I wasn't arguing against you, just pointing out the absurdity of that sentiment on these boards.

(Skadden associate with no other V5 offers)

But I'll bite...

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity

That is part of it, yes. Skadden is not as exclusive as CSM/S&C/DPW/STB/Cleary and therefore not as "prestigious" among law students. It is certainly the easiest V5 to get a job at and probably the easiest V10 to get a job at.

which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers

While those weird corporate rankings do seem to indicate that Skadden has the best brand recognition among corporate execs, the rankings also seem to indicate that the "best brands" also mean the biggest firms. I think Baker & McKenzie and Jones Day are also in the top five?

As to your second point, Skadden's brand is second to many in the legal world. It's probably the most-bashed firm in the profession. It's a great firm, with many top practice areas, but to say it's second to none among lawyers is just wrong.

Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

I think most would agree to that.

Skadden NY is certainly not the "easiest" to get a job at out of the V10 based on available data such as honors chart from CLS. It accepts a handful of more median students than other V5s, but it's still tough to get a job at since 85%+ from CLS are honors students. Its other offices might be a bit easier (prob the reason it can't be as selective as its peers), although major offices like Chicago and DC are most likely similar. I agree the brand name rankings are weird, but to argue that its brand name isn't a peer to other V5s in (esp NYC corporate practice) would be absurd. No one besides certain number of law students cares how many median kids a firm decided to let in. Clients and lawyers don't. Oh and I had offers to three V5s so I'm not bitter.

Umm yeah but still V5 > Shulte > Skadden

[Anonymous User]

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity, which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers. Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

BTW I wasn't arguing against you, just pointing out the absurdity of that sentiment on these boards.

(Skadden associate with no other V5 offers)

But I'll bite...

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity

That is part of it, yes. Skadden is not as exclusive as CSM/S&C/DPW/STB/Cleary and therefore not as "prestigious" among law students. It is certainly the easiest V5 to get a job at and probably the easiest V10 to get a job at.

which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers

While those weird corporate rankings do seem to indicate that Skadden has the best brand recognition among corporate execs, the rankings also seem to indicate that the "best brands" also mean the biggest firms. I think Baker & McKenzie and Jones Day are also in the top five?

As to your second point, Skadden's brand is second to many in the legal world. It's probably the most-bashed firm in the profession. It's a great firm, with many top practice areas, but to say it's second to none among lawyers is just wrong.

Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

I think most would agree to that.

Skadden NY is certainly not the "easiest" to get a job at out of the V10 based on available data such as honors chart from CLS. It accepts a handful of more median students than other V5s, but it's still tough to get a job at since 85%+ from CLS are honors students. Its other offices might be a bit easier (prob the reason it can't be as selective as its peers), although major offices like Chicago and DC are most likely similar. I agree the brand name rankings are weird, but to argue that its brand name isn't a peer to other V5s in (esp NYC corporate practice) would be absurd. No one besides certain number of law students cares how many median kids a firm decided to let in. Clients and lawyers don't. Oh and I had offers to three V5s so I'm not bitter.

Also curious/confused about all this exclusivity talk on TLS because for example people keep acting like S&C is super exclusive, while simultaneous giving it a hard time for not screening for fit. So does exclusivity necessarily entail gpa/class rank? Because I would much prefer to work at a firm that was a little less exclusive grades-wise (especially since there's all the skepticism concerning the LS grades and good lawyer correlation, even moreso when they're choosing among top schools - NOT trying to start that discussion here though) but more selective for personality. So in the end, I guess I'm asking, doesn't exclusivity really depend on what factors you care that they decide on (like personality vs gpa)? Or are people actually referring to %ages of offers given to people they interviewed?

It feels silly to say Skaddens not that exclusive when top people from my t14 would've killed to work there but couldn't convert their CBs.

ETA: sorry if this didn't make much sense/illogical - typing stream of thought on phone and I probably missed things here and there.

[Anonymous User]

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity, which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers. Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

BTW I wasn't arguing against you, just pointing out the absurdity of that sentiment on these boards.

(Skadden associate with no other V5 offers)

But I'll bite...

I think the only people who feel that way about Skadden are certain law students on TLS obsessed with exclusivity

That is part of it, yes. Skadden is not as exclusive as CSM/S&C/DPW/STB/Cleary and therefore not as "prestigious" among law students. It is certainly the easiest V5 to get a job at and probably the easiest V10 to get a job at.

which is evident by the fact that Skadden has a brand name second to none among corporate executives and lawyers

While those weird corporate rankings do seem to indicate that Skadden has the best brand recognition among corporate execs, the rankings also seem to indicate that the "best brands" also mean the biggest firms. I think Baker & McKenzie and Jones Day are also in the top five?

As to your second point, Skadden's brand is second to many in the legal world. It's probably the most-bashed firm in the profession. It's a great firm, with many top practice areas, but to say it's second to none among lawyers is just wrong.

Its corporate practice, especially out of NYC office, is rivaled by a select few.

I think most would agree to that.

Skadden NY is certainly not the "easiest" to get a job at out of the V10 based on available data such as honors chart from CLS. It accepts a handful of more median students than other V5s, but it's still tough to get a job at since 85%+ from CLS are honors students. Its other offices might be a bit easier (prob the reason it can't be as selective as its peers), although major offices like Chicago and DC are most likely similar. I agree the brand name rankings are weird, but to argue that its brand name isn't a peer to other V5s in (esp NYC corporate practice) would be absurd. No one besides certain number of law students cares how many median kids a firm decided to let in. Clients and lawyers don't. Oh and I had offers to three V5s so I'm not bitter.

Also curious/confused about all this exclusivity talk on TLS because for example people keep acting like S&C is super exclusive, while simultaneous giving it a hard time for not screening for fit. So does exclusivity necessarily entail gpa/class rank? Because I would much prefer to work at a firm that was a little less exclusive grades-wise (especially since there's all the skepticism concerning the LS grades and good lawyer correlation, even moreso when they're choosing among top schools - NOT trying to start that discussion here though) but more selective for personality. So in the end, I guess I'm asking, doesn't exclusivity really depend on what factors you care that they decide on (like personality vs gpa)? Or are people actually referring to %ages of offers given to people they interviewed?

It feels silly to say Skaddens not that exclusive when top people from my t14 would've killed to work there but couldn't convert their CBs.

ETA: sorry if this didn't make much sense/illogical - typing stream of thought on phone and I probably missed things here and there.

Yea. For any given student at X%ile of the class at school "tier" Y (tiers debatable but basically T6, T14, other), it's more difficult to get an offer at a firm like Sullivan than Skadden, until your X/Y combination crosses their cutoff at which point the relationship reverses.

Since 95%+ of law students are below that cutoff, usually we say Sullivan is the more selective firm - but only in a very relative sense. The people saying Skadden is "not that exclusive" are typically above median students at Harvard, Columbia and Chicago who are best placed to find work at the most elite firms and, thankfully for their own ego but unthankfully for everyone else in the legal community, perch on that remote bank of the modesty Styx from which they access certain peer firms that other Skadden offerees cannot and binge on overcompensation

[Anonymous User]

Yea. For any given student at X%ile of the class at school "tier" Y (tiers debatable but basically T6, T14, other), it's more difficult to get an offer at a firm like Sullivan than Skadden, until your X/Y combination crosses their cutoff at which point the relationship reverses.

Since 95%+ of law students are below that cutoff, usually we say Sullivan is the more selective firm - but only in a very relative sense. The people saying Skadden is "not that exclusive" are typically above median students at Harvard, Columbia and Chicago who are best placed to find work at the most elite firms and, thankfully for their own ego but unthankfully for everyone else in the legal community, perch on that remote bank of the modesty Styx from which they access certain peer firms that other Skadden offerees cannot and binge on overcompensation

This is right on point. It's just relative. When someone says S&C is more "selective" than Skadden, it means that a Stone Scholar from Columbia will need to be 3.6+ (or whatever numerical GPA) to get S&C whereas he/she would just need to be Stone to get an offer at Skadden. So when it comes to grades, a person who has the numbers for S&C will also have the numbers for Skadden, but not necessarily vice versa. Obviously, this doesn't mean someone with an offer at S&C will have an offer at Skadden because firms like Skadden/DPW/STB (firms where students below Stone have a much better shot than S&C) are more sensitive to personality fit/culture. Idk how true that is but that's a whole different subject. This isn't a knock against S&C. I just find the "selectivity" talk among the elite firms to be silly when they are so similar in their quality of work.

[Anonymous User]

Do differences in exit options become less pronounced when you're looking at an e.g. V-40 vs. a V-100?

[SLS_AMG]

I think elitists on here also consider Skadden less prestigious than CSM/S&C/DPW/STB and maybe Cleary because the others seem to hire far fewer people from non-T14s than Skadden. TLS elitists don't want non T-14 students polluting their SA class because its hurts their pride to know that people they've been "better than" their whole lives end up in the same place.

[Anonymous User]

Yea. For any given student at X%ile of the class at school "tier" Y (tiers debatable but basically T6, T14, other), it's more difficult to get an offer at a firm like Sullivan than Skadden, until your X/Y combination crosses their cutoff at which point the relationship reverses.

Since 95%+ of law students are below that cutoff, usually we say Sullivan is the more selective firm - but only in a very relative sense. The people saying Skadden is "not that exclusive" are typically above median students at Harvard, Columbia and Chicago who are best placed to find work at the most elite firms and, thankfully for their own ego but unthankfully for everyone else in the legal community, perch on that remote bank of the modesty Styx from which they access certain peer firms that other Skadden offerees cannot and binge on overcompensation

This is right on point. It's just relative. When someone says S&C is more "selective" than Skadden, it means that a Stone Scholar from Columbia will need to be 3.6+ (or whatever numerical GPA) to get S&C whereas he/she would just need to be Stone to get an offer at Skadden. So when it comes to grades, a person who has the numbers for S&C will also have the numbers for Skadden, but not necessarily vice versa. Obviously, this doesn't mean someone with an offer at S&C will have an offer at Skadden because firms like Skadden/DPW/STB (firms where students below Stone have a much better shot than S&C) are more sensitive to personality fit/culture. Idk how true that is but that's a whole different subject. This isn't a knock against S&C. I just find the "selectivity" talk among the elite firms to be silly when they are so similar in their quality of work.

Actually davis polk and s&c have identical stone honors rates, so its not really true that below stone has a shot at either. But its beside the general point

[Anonymous User]

Do differences in exit options become less pronounced when you're looking at an e.g. V-40 vs. a V-100?

Also interested in this

[Anonymous User]

I think elitists on here also consider Skadden less prestigious than CSM/S&C/DPW/STB and maybe Cleary because the others seem to hire far fewer people from non-T14s than Skadden. TLS elitists don't want non T-14 students polluting their SA class because its hurts their pride to know that people they've been "better than" their whole lives end up in the same place.

Maybe this is partially true, but I've gotta say it's not just on here. I've heard partners at my firm (one of the 5 you listed) talk shit about Skadden far more than any of the other firms that are supposed to be viewed as our peers. They're like the Meg of elite transactional law firms IRL too.

[Crowing]

I think elitists on here also consider Skadden less prestigious than CSM/S&C/DPW/STB and maybe Cleary because the others seem to hire far fewer people from non-T14s than Skadden. TLS elitists don't want non T-14 students polluting their SA class because its hurts their pride to know that people they've been "better than" their whole lives end up in the same place.

Seems to me like S&C hires a lot of people from non T-14s. They seem a lot more focused on grades than name of school vs. other top firms and will take top students from a lot of places.

[El Pollito]

we all know it's v1 > V2-7 > V8 is actually v15 > Schulte > V9-etc.

Tbh I feel it should be more bifurcated... V1-10+Schulte if in hedgefund group > V11-40 > Schulte if not

Thanks for your honesty. I think, however, you undervalue Schulte's influence in the hedge fund world. To illustrate, there's a joke that's been making the rounds in the elite hedge fund circles in which I travel:

Q: What do you call a third-year associate at Schulte?

A: in-house counsel at Goldman Sachs!

Try that same joke using another firm--say, a V4 or a V7--and it just doesn't work.

I am still laughing at this.