Take the money and Run; YS - CCNH? Forum

[Blessedassurance]

we may never know...

[IAFG]

So why is it that Stanford places incredibly well straight out of law school but lags behind in partner measures? Is it really all self selection?

Being partner seems a lot less cool once it's an actual possibility.

[Blessedassurance]

if the study had shown harvard putting up stanford's numbers the tls anti-harvard contingent would be out in full force screaming harvard is overrated. since it's stanford, it gets a pass, and everyone lets it slide.

that said, i still need to find out if the "partners" at kirkland are being included in the data. i suspect that may be inflating chicago's numbers.

[IAFG]

if the study had shown harvard putting up stanford's numbers the tls anti-harvard contingent would be out in full force screaming harvard is overrated. since it's stanford, it gets a pass, and everyone lets it slide.

that said, i still need to find out if the "partners" at kirkland are being included in the data. i suspect that may be inflating chicago's numbers.

80 HLS partners, 58 UChi partners, firmwide. chill the fuck out.

[Blessedassurance]

if the study had shown harvard putting up stanford's numbers the tls anti-harvard contingent would be out in full force screaming harvard is overrated. since it's stanford, it gets a pass, and everyone lets it slide.

that said, i still need to find out if the "partners" at kirkland are being included in the data. i suspect that may be inflating chicago's numbers.

80 HLS partners, 58 UChi partners, firmwide. chill the fuck out.

per capita etc.

[IAFG]

if the study had shown harvard putting up stanford's numbers the tls anti-harvard contingent would be out in full force screaming harvard is overrated. since it's stanford, it gets a pass, and everyone lets it slide.

that said, i still need to find out if the "partners" at kirkland are being included in the data. i suspect that may be inflating chicago's numbers.

80 HLS partners, 58 UChi partners, firmwide. chill the fuck out.

per capita etc.

it's still a drop in the bucket etc

[Blessedassurance]

it's still a drop in the bucket etc

that's a single firm accounting for over 13% of chicago's entire number of partners (426). why would it be a drop in the bucket?

[IAFG]

it's still a drop in the bucket etc

that's a single firm accounting for over 13% of chicago's entire number of partners (426). why would it be a drop in the bucket?

the delta is

since HLS grads still hold their nose and take KE partnerships

[Balthy]

What do you mean by inflating the numbers? If there's a firm that hires lots of Chi grads and makes many of them partners, how is that inflating or making inaccurate what we're trying to see--the rate that schools make partners.

Also i have no clue but aren't there boston biglaw firms that similarly "inflate" harvard numbers?

[EquallyWrong]

this is a very convoluted way you all are going about measuring dicks...or are these stats relevant in some other way I'm not getting?

[IAFG]

What do you mean by inflating the numbers? If there's a firm that hires lots of Chi grads and makes many of them partners, how is that inflating or making inaccurate what we're trying to see--the rate that schools make partners.

Also i have no clue but aren't there boston biglaw firms that similarly "inflate" harvard numbers?

he's talking about KE having a lot of nonequity partners

not that KE is the only firm with lots of nonequity partners

[aboutmydaylight]

So why is it that Stanford places incredibly well straight out of law school but lags behind in partner measures? Is it really all self selection?

Being partner seems a lot less cool once it's an actual possibility.

But why would its coolness vary depending on the law school you went to?

[Balthy]

What do you mean by inflating the numbers? If there's a firm that hires lots of Chi grads and makes many of them partners, how is that inflating or making inaccurate what we're trying to see--the rate that schools make partners.

Also i have no clue but aren't there boston biglaw firms that similarly "inflate" harvard numbers?

he's talking about KE having a lot of nonequity partners

not that KE is the only firm with lots of nonequity partners

Oh i see that makes sense.

[Blessedassurance]

What do you mean by inflating the numbers? If there's a firm that hires lots of Chi grads and makes many of them partners, how is that inflating or making inaccurate what we're trying to see--the rate that schools make partners.

Also i have no clue but aren't there boston biglaw firms that similarly "inflate" harvard numbers?

i specifically mentioned kirkland because it does a weird thing with its partnership classification.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/kirkland-ellis.html

"Kirkland has two partnership tracks: ten years to equity partner, and six years to non-equity. In practice however, non-equity partner at Kirkland is indistinguishable from senior associate at most other firms. The only difference is a fancy title on your business card..."

[Balthy]

So why is it that Stanford places incredibly well straight out of law school but lags behind in partner measures? Is it really all self selection?

Being partner seems a lot less cool once it's an actual possibility.

But why would its coolness vary depending on the law school you went to?

Maybe it's the kind of person drawn to Stanford over H or Y. Employing stereotypes here but maybe the palo alto folks actually try to enjoy life a bit.

[IAFG]

So why is it that Stanford places incredibly well straight out of law school but lags behind in partner measures? Is it really all self selection?

Being partner seems a lot less cool once it's an actual possibility.

But why would its coolness vary depending on the law school you went to?

not saying it would so much as saying it's kinda a dumb thing to worry about as a 0L/law student

90%+ of the people i know were pretty disinterested in partnership by 6 months into firm life

[EquallyWrong]

So why is it that Stanford places incredibly well straight out of law school but lags behind in partner measures? Is it really all self selection?

Being partner seems a lot less cool once it's an actual possibility.

But why would its coolness vary depending on the law school you went to?

Maybe it's the kind of person drawn to Stanford over H or Y. Employing stereotypes here but maybe the palo alto folks actually try to enjoy life a bit.

I mean, it has to be a personal thing or else it's a matter of firms discriminating against Stanford, which seems unlikely (I'm not an insider though)...but wasn't it already settled that quality of work and commitment leads to partnership not name on degree anyway? So why this focus on the particular school's reputation for what is an individual workplace accomplishment, one that comes long after your degree did its job and got you in the door?

[Balthy]

I mean, it has to be a personal thing or else it's a matter of firms discriminating against Stanford, which seems unlikely (I'm not an insider though)...but wasn't it already settled that quality of work and commitment leads to partnership not name on degree anyway? So why this focus on the particular school's reputation for what is an individual workplace accomplishment, one that comes long after your degree did its job and got you in the door?

Assuming the partner guy who posted that isn't a troll (hope not), you're right, no point in really arguing this. I guess we still wanted to get to the bottom of which schools made most partners, adjusted for class size and maybe also firms with weird non-equity partnership tracks (like the worry brought up about KE).

[Blessedassurance]

So why is it that Stanford places incredibly well straight out of law school but lags behind in partner measures? Is it really all self selection?

Being partner seems a lot less cool once it's an actual possibility.

But why would its coolness vary depending on the law school you went to?

Maybe it's the kind of person drawn to Stanford over H or Y. Employing stereotypes here but maybe the palo alto folks actually try to enjoy life a bit.

stanford has a "large firm score" of 48.5% (this is not counting the people who will return to biglaw after their clerkships). Harvard's is 54.5%. In contrast, yale's is 30.5% (more people go straight to clerkships [35%] than to biglaw at yale but the overwhelming majority may be returning to biglaw anyway). (see LST reports). by the way, yale's under-employment score is close to 10%. not sure what to make of it, but it has to be a bit disconcerting considering we're constantly being assured yale has a monopoly on the unicorn jobs.

Again, this does not take into account the clerks that will return to biglaw, but stanford's numbers for people who head straight into biglaw is way more closer to harvard's, than to yale's. maybe they really like transactional law, who knows. but at best, their realization of the perils of biglaw seem to occur a bit later than 9 months after graduation.

also, schools should make a better effort figuring out where the clerk go afterwards...since utmost transparency is in vogue now.

[rayiner]

http://webcast-law.uchicago.edu/centenn ... index.html. That's total enrollment. Its 589 now. In other words, for the relevant time, Harvard has been 2.5-3x larger than Chicago. Virginia's current enrollment hit its current 1,100 in 1978: https://www.law.virginia.edu/html/about/timeline.htm

there is a very, very real possibility of graduating uva unemployed. don't they hire an unusual number of their own students? lol at virginia being a part of this conversation. also, they cut class sizes recently if i'm not mistaken.

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/03/law-stud ... mployment/

You're the one who brought up the partner ranking, not me. UVA cut its class size this year, but using its typical class size of 360 it placed pretty close to Harvard in terms of partners over the last few decades. I suppose you'll change your argument now to: Harvard grads have better things to do than be partner?

As for K&E, it hires tons of Harvard grads, and moreover Chicago's lead in your ranking is larger than can be accounted for by K&E. No need to feign uncertainty about K&E's impact--you can do the math, using IAFG's numbers.

[rayiner]

it's still a drop in the bucket etc

that's a single firm accounting for over 13% of chicago's entire number of partners (426). why would it be a drop in the bucket?

And 9% of Harvard's entire number.

[Blessedassurance]

http://webcast-law.uchicago.edu/centenn ... index.html. That's total enrollment. Its 589 now. In other words, for the relevant time, Harvard has been 2.5-3x larger than Chicago. Virginia's current enrollment hit its current 1,100 in 1978: https://www.law.virginia.edu/html/about/timeline.htm

there is a very, very real possibility of graduating uva unemployed. don't they hire an unusual number of their own students? lol at virginia being a part of this conversation. also, they cut class sizes recently if i'm not mistaken.

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/03/law-stud ... mployment/

You're the one who brought up the partner ranking, not me. UVA cut its class size this year, but using its typical class size of 360 it placed pretty close to Harvard in terms of partners over the last few decades. I suppose you'll change your argument now to: Harvard grads have better things to do than be partner?

As for K&E, it hires tons of Harvard grads, and moreover Chicago's lead in your ranking is larger than can be accounted for by K&E. No need to feign uncertainty about K&E's impact--you can do the math, using IAFG's numbers.

please read the the author's musings concerning uva's disturbing condition in the status quo. it's struggling just to place grads in biglaw to begin with.

the better-things-to-do argument has already been associated with stanford by some. determining kirkland's impact is not as easy as just using the numbers. one would have care enough to go in to find the graduation dates of those 80 or so partners at harvard versus the 56 or so at chicago etc etc.

by the way, the whole numbers would have to be considered against the backdrop of the numbers that have been pumped into biglaw from the respective schools. there's no use calculating based on the entire class since there was a time (during the boom times) when students of the elite schools were eschewing biglaw. chicago students have nowhere to go but biglaw. chicago is impressive (to the extent biglaw is impressive), compared to columbia etc.

[UVAIce]

http://webcast-law.uchicago.edu/centenn ... index.html. That's total enrollment. Its 589 now. In other words, for the relevant time, Harvard has been 2.5-3x larger than Chicago. Virginia's current enrollment hit its current 1,100 in 1978: https://www.law.virginia.edu/html/about/timeline.htm

there is a very, very real possibility of graduating uva unemployed. don't they hire an unusual number of their own students? lol at virginia being a part of this conversation. also, they cut class sizes recently if i'm not mistaken.

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/03/law-stud ... mployment/

Talk about citing to a BS article from ATL written by Mystal in 2011! Almost no one leaves UVA unemployed. Yes, we have a high school funded rate. But read some of the information and data on the program and you will see it is qualitatively different from the school funded jobs from schools like GWU.

[cotiger]

this is a very convoluted way you all are going about measuring dicks...or are these stats relevant in some other way I'm not getting?

i too dont understand how this is relevant to anything.

[rayiner]

please read the the author's musings concerning uva's disturbing condition in the status quo. it's struggling just to place grads in biglaw to begin with.

So by that reasoning, UVA grads fare even better in terms of partnership prospects once they get big law in the first place.

determining kirkland's impact is not as easy as just using the numbers. one would have care enough to go in to find the graduation dates of those 80 or so partners at harvard versus the 56 or so at chicago etc etc.

Even a conservative estimate which assumes that none of the Harvard K&E partners graduated within that time frame and assumes that all of the Chicago K&E partners graduated within that time frame still has Chicago coming out ahead.

there's no use calculating based on the entire class since there was a time (during the boom times) when students of the elite schools were eschewing biglaw

During boom times, the NLJ 250 placement at HLS was higher, not lower. In C/O 2007, 61.1% of HLS grads went to NLJ 250 firms. For C/O 2013, it was 53.6%. (Compare: http://www.law.com/img/nlj/charts/20080 ... chools.jpg with http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog ... chool.html). It was down to 48.9% in C/O 2011: http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/bl ... statistics. The data suggests that when the economy is good, more HLS grads go into big law than when it's bad.