Top Law Schools

Given the fact that all BigLaw starting salaries are currently at 160K, what exactly is the relative advantage of working for a V10 firm as opposed to a V50 or V100 firm? Why do some people say things like "V10 or bust"? Do the higher ranked firms award larger bonuses? Do salaries start to significantly diverge after the first year? What exactly is it that these people are after?

Higher bonuses, better partnership opportunities, better exit opportunities, more prestige

Because they come from privileged families and have no idea how many people work in run of the mill jobs every day and believe that they must reach an arbitrary level of success for their life to have been successful.

Ego.

.

im_blue wrote:Higher bonuses, better partnership opportunities, better exit opportunities, more prestige

Isn't the difference in bonuses between V10 and V50-100 firms not that great? I recall seeing a chart showing that the difference was pretty small (but i may be mistaken).

And in terms of partnership opps, do you mean that the chance of making partner is higher at a V10, or that profits per partner are higher at a V10 vis a vis a V50-100?

mike7174 wrote:Given the fact that all BigLaw starting salaries are currently at 160K, what exactly is the relative advantage of working for a V10 firm as opposed to a V50 or V100 firm? Why do some people say things like "V10 or bust"? Do the higher ranked firms award larger bonuses? Do salaries start to significantly diverge after the first year? What exactly is it that these people are after?

It generally isn't, but some people are very very very big on prestige.

To what to the designations V10, V25 and V50 refer?

cutiewiddlebebe wrote:To what to the designations V10, V25 and V50 refer?

Vault

mike7174 wrote:Given the fact that all BigLaw starting salaries are currently at 160K, what exactly is the relative advantage of working for a V10 firm as opposed to a V50 or V100 firm? Why do some people say things like "V10 or bust"? Do the higher ranked firms award larger bonuses? Do salaries start to significantly diverge after the first year? What exactly is it that these people are after?

This is like asking "when NYLS students can potentially make 160K/year, why do people say "T10 or bust"

hth.

could it also be that V5, V10 etc. are so famous, and therefore get the "more important" cases/clients ? it probably feels better to do m&a work for Google than Joe the Plumber's hardware store for example.

From wikipedia article for WLRK:

"Working both sides of the mergers and acquisitions game, Wachtell Lipton has represented blue-chip clients like AT&T, Kraft, and JP Morgan Chase."

mike7174 wrote:Given the fact that all BigLaw starting salaries are currently at 160K, what exactly is the relative advantage of working for a V10 firm as opposed to a V50 or V100 firm? Why do some people say things like "V10 or bust"? Do the higher ranked firms award larger bonuses? Do salaries start to significantly diverge after the first year? What exactly is it that these people are after?

Just curious, at what point in the Vault rankings do first year associates make less then $160k? V100ish? Lower? Higher?

mistergoft wrote:

mike7174 wrote:Given the fact that all BigLaw starting salaries are currently at 160K, what exactly is the relative advantage of working for a V10 firm as opposed to a V50 or V100 firm? Why do some people say things like "V10 or bust"? Do the higher ranked firms award larger bonuses? Do salaries start to significantly diverge after the first year? What exactly is it that these people are after?

This is like asking "when NYLS students can potentially make 160K/year, why do people say "T10 or bust"

hth.

What a ridiculous OL analogy. No, it's not like asking that at all. It is like asking: "If Robins Kaplan has PPP that's nearly double that of Cravath, why the fuck do I care if Cravath is V2 and Robins Kaplan is unranked?"

englawyer wrote:could it also be that V5, V10 etc. are so famous, and therefore get the "more important" cases/clients ? it probably feels better to do m&a work for Google than Joe the Plumber's hardware store for example.

From wikipedia article for WLRK:

"Working both sides of the mergers and acquisitions game, Wachtell Lipton has represented blue-chip clients like AT&T, Kraft, and JP Morgan Chase."

Speculating of course, but I think this could be a big factor. I feel like the cutting edge innovations in corporate law might happen more at the biggest and most powerful law firms.

mistergoft wrote:

mike7174 wrote:Given the fact that all BigLaw starting salaries are currently at 160K, what exactly is the relative advantage of working for a V10 firm as opposed to a V50 or V100 firm? Why do some people say things like "V10 or bust"? Do the higher ranked firms award larger bonuses? Do salaries start to significantly diverge after the first year? What exactly is it that these people are after?

This is like asking "when NYLS students can potentially make 160K/year, why do people say "T10 or bust"

hth.

Are you serious? That analogy is just ridiculous.

im_blue wrote:Higher bonuses, [strike]better partnership opportunities[/strike], better exit opportunities, more prestige

Fixed.

It's also the case that while a lot of "top" firms start you at $160k, the climb from there can be much slower at lower ranked firms than at V10 firms. That's the difference between making $250k after 5 years v. making $400k after 5 years.

You're thinking T10 or bust. V10 or bust is what we in the business refer to as hardcore trolling.

lakerfanimal wrote:

englawyer wrote:could it also be that V5, V10 etc. are so famous, and therefore get the "more important" cases/clients ? it probably feels better to do m&a work for Google than Joe the Plumber's hardware store for example.

From wikipedia article for WLRK:

"Working both sides of the mergers and acquisitions game, Wachtell Lipton has represented blue-chip clients like AT&T, Kraft, and JP Morgan Chase."

Speculating of course, but I think this could be a big factor. I feel like the cutting edge innovations in corporate law might happen more at the biggest and most powerful law firms.

innovation and corporate law in the same sentence filled me with mirth.

They probably don't have anything better to do with their lives. It's kind of sad.

Kohinoor wrote:You're thinking T10 or bust. V10 or bust is what we in the business refer to as hardcore trolling.

Yep.

Anyone saying "V10 or bust" has something wrong with them. The V10 includes Skadden. The non-V10 includes a number of firms that offer objectively better opportunities than Skadden.

JSUVA2012 wrote:

Kohinoor wrote:You're thinking T10 or bust. V10 or bust is what we in the business refer to as hardcore trolling.

Yep.

Anyone saying "V10 or bust" has something wrong with them. The V10 includes Skadden. The non-V10 includes a number of firms that offer objectively better opportunities than Skadden.

I used the phrase and only basically as a if you're a prestige whore and need to work for one of the tip top firms rather than just a v100 that pays market.

But even if we dismiss the folks who say things like “V10 or bust,” I still don’t understand why--in general--people try to land gigs as high up in the rankings as possible…is it really just for ego/prestige? Or are there actually, substantive differences in overall employment prospects? For example, is it really true (as one of the posters in this thread mentioned) that, even though starting salaries are the same, after a few years they start to substantially diverge (e.g. 250K vs. 400K after 5 yrs)? Is it easier to become parter? Are per partner profits higher?

What is it exactly?

It's not easier to become partner at a v10 than a v100. That would be incredibly counterintuitive, wouldn't it?

PPP are, GENERALLY, higher for the top firms, though this fluctuates.

Re: PPP
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... =3&t=53915

mike7174 wrote:But even if we dismiss the folks who say things like “V10 or bust,” I still don’t understand why--in general--people try to land gigs as high up in the rankings as possible…is it really just for ego/prestige? Or are there actually, substantive differences in overall employment prospects? For example, is it really true (as one of the posters in this thread mentioned) that, even though starting salaries are the same, after a few years they start to substantially diverge (e.g. 250K vs. 400K after 5 yrs)? Is it easier to become parter? Are per partner profits higher?

What is it exactly?

i alluded to it a bit in my post, but i think most people want to work on the most substantial and important legal work that they can out of a sense of ambition. it is cool to know what you are working on is being discussed in the WSJ that day.

i also think that the higher you go in the ranking, the more influential/powerful your client base becomes. that means you will develop a better professional network and have better exit options down the line. kind of like mckinsey in the business world...sucks to be there but after a few years you have amazing opportunities due to the resume eye-candy and crazy connections.