NYC to 200k Forum

[Anonymous User]

I think we're missing a very important variable here. Every time a firm raises they have to justify it to their clients (sometimes explicitly assuring them rates will stay the same or telling them that it's going to cause a rate increase). Even if clients don't get explicit communications about this it's going to be on their mind. You don't want your clients asking twice in one month about how you pay your associates.

How so? Clients pay the attorneys' hourly rates. If the rates stay the same, what the client pays stay the same. It doesn't impact the client if 24% of the $575/hour you're paying for that associate goes to the associate instead of 20% of $575. You're still paying $575/hour for that associate.

It makes them wonder why they weren't paying $550 in the first place, plus they know that before too long it'll be $600.

Firms have raised billing rates much more the last 11 years than they've raised associate salaries. Associate salary raises appear independent of billing rate increases.

[Anonymous User]

Profits per partner keep going up, billing rates keep going up, hours worked are the same or higher.

=GIVE US MORE MONEY

[Anonymous User]

Profits per partner keep going up, billing rates keep going up, hours worked are the same or higher.

=GIVE US MORE MONEY

THIS

[Anonymous User]

Profits per partner keep going up, billing rates keep going up, hours worked are the same or higher.

This is the truth. All these whiny "but clients hate" posters. Clients care about their bottom line and their bottom line alone. They do not give a single shit about how their money gets allocated within the firm. PPP has skyrocketed in the last decade. This not about bilking clients, about distributing gains within the firm. Some idiot journalists will surely go out and drum up some cranky GC of a company you've never heard of to whine about paying first year associates more, but it is all a distraction.

[Anonymous User]

As if clients’ profits haven’t been increasing and they aren’t raising salaries for their employees?

[minnbills]

they aren’t raising salaries for their employees?

I thought it was a given that american wages are stagnant (speaking generally)

[Anonymous User]

As if clients’ profits haven’t been increasing and they aren’t raising salaries for their employees?

This. These companies just got pretty big tax cuts. They DGAF about our cute little $10K raises that they each pay .01% of.

[minnbills]

omg ATL made a podcast on milbank. They are really milking this

[Anonymous User]

Profits per partner keep going up, billing rates keep going up, hours worked are the same or higher.

This is the truth. All these whiny "but clients hate" posters. Clients care about their bottom line and their bottom line alone. They do not give a single shit about how their money gets allocated within the firm. PPP has skyrocketed in the last decade. This not about bilking clients, about distributing gains within the firm. Some idiot journalists will surely go out and drum up some cranky GC of a company you've never heard of to whine about paying first year associates more, but it is all a distraction.

You're right that clients care only about their bottom line, but don't pretend like they won't be suspicious that a raise (let alone TWO in one month) is going to up their bottom line. You give clients far too much credit.

[Anonymous User]

Here we go...

https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2018 ... n%20Update

[Anonymous User]

Cravath be like




(4) Cravath and DPW don’t raise because they’re the only 2 V10s to post PPP declines[/quote]

[Anonymous User]

omg ATL made a podcast on milbank. They are really milking this

LOL this is how ATL makes 99% of its revenue. No one reads that trash except when bonuses/raises are announced.

[jd20132013]

Is it true that clients are whining about the milbank raises ?

[Anonymous User]

Is it true that clients are whining about the milbank raises ?

https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2018 ... n%20Update

[jd20132013]

Cant read that but looks like based on the headline they are

[JustHawkin]

omg ATL made a podcast on milbank. They are really milking this

LOL this is how ATL makes 99% of its revenue. No one reads that trash except when bonuses/raises are announced.

And when David Lat posts. Otherwise it is useless.

[malibustacy]

Clients aren't stupid. They have several levels of firms for different work they need done. For routine and more simple matters, they will farm work out to local lawyers or regional firms that charge far less.

They hire top national firms that pay market when it comes to major matters, big acquisitions, or "bet-the-firm" litigation. Often the total legal fees amount to rounding errors compared to the money and issue at stake. Individuals might gripe about rising associate salaries from a theoretical standpoint, but "value" means getting maximum bang for your buck, and they will always go with the national firm that routinely does best work for them when it comes to bespoke legal issues.

[minnbills]

And when David Lat posts. Otherwise it is useless.

Nah he sucks. Patrice is ok

[estefanchanning]

And when David Lat posts. Otherwise it is useless.

Nah he sucks. Patrice is ok

second.

[Anonymous User]

And when David Lat posts. Otherwise it is useless.

Nah he sucks. Patrice is ok

second.

Patrice published the Milbank podcast. He's just another clickbaiter. They all suck.

[Anonymous User]

There is no shortage of clients more than willing to pay V10 rates for V10 work, which is more than enough for a raise to 210k. If some V70 clients aren't willing to pay those rates or those firms can't match those raises, so be it. The associate market place will finally be a little more efficient.

[Anonymous User]

the longer it goes on, makes 200k more likely right?

or am i delusional

[Anonymous User]

Is it true that clients are whining about the milbank raises ?

https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2018 ... n%20Update

The real tone-deafness is claiming that they want firms to "bill based on value" when really all they want is lower rates because who the f knows what "value" is when it comes to legal services. Certainly clients don't. And they can always find lower rates by hiring firms with lower rates; it's not like second-rate lawyers are hard to find...

[Anonymous User]

the longer it goes on, makes 200k more likely right?

or am i delusional

Yeah but I'd also think it makes not matching at all more likely. At least for firms out of the v10

[ghostoftraynor]

As others have said, we really need to stop playing this game of whether this will piss of GCs or not. It's completely conflating issues. GCs probably do not like to see rate increase, but from what I have seen, they go up every year anyway. Most of those years, associate comp is not raised. They will probably raise rates after this, but guess what, they were probably going to anyway.

Firms will charge clients as much as they think they can get away with. Firms will pay associates as little as they think they can get away with. The supply and demand levers here are distinct. It helps justify not giving us raises when everyone falls for this trap.