Milbank/Davis Polk/Cravath Scale: NYC to 215-415k Forum

[Anonymous User]

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

But these two (bolded) are interchangeable, and both below market, so I don't get your point.

[Anonymous User]

HYS = WLRK
CCN = any market paying firm
Rest of T13 = DPW, Cravath, Skadden, rest of below-market firms

[Anonymous User]

HYS = WLRK
CCN = any market paying firm
Rest of T13 = DPW, Cravath, Skadden, rest of below-market firms

Y= WLRK, Milbank
H/S= market paying firm

[Anonymous User]

HYS = WLRK
CCN = any market paying firm
Rest of T13 = DPW, Cravath, Skadden, rest of below-market firms

YS=WLRK
H,C,N,GULC= Skadden, KE, LW, Baker Mckenzie
Rest of the T13= Wall Street White Shoe

[Anonymous User]

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

But these two (bolded) are interchangeable, and both below market, so I don't get your point.

I've never once heard someone say "I go to one of the T3." Lol. Also why are you shadily lumping Cravath with WLRK?

[Anonymous User]

Someone told me yesterday that they had some inside information that DPW is planning to re-raise significantly but don’t expect it to happen until closer to the summer. Obviously I’m not going to immediately believe that but if it is as significant as a raise as they described I would probably ultimately be happy even though it’s not convenient.

Bullshit. If DPW was going to do this there is absolutely no reason not to do it by now. They'll have to true up anyways.

I wrote a brilliant analysis upthread about why they wouldn't do it now (and didn't even mention the potential market crash in the works). I'm glad other people who exist outside of this forum agree with my analysis (or at least are willing to troll on my behalf). Pasted below for your edification

Alright look I got an A- in law firm finance seminar at YHSCCN so I can tell you exactly what's happening. (lol)

(but seriously) Think like a managing partner for a second. If v10 matches now, then v10 will be expected to pay increased salary all year and at least one mid year special bonus. If they all collectively agree to ignore this, DPW can SHATTER the millybank scale effective April 1 or July 1, with a 3 or 6 month true up disguised as a pretty fat "special bonus" (like 2018 or whatever year that happened). And the market will follow. Final result: DPW maintains its spot as top comp dog and they nip the firehose of *actual* special bonuses. Remember, firms DO NOT want to pay us these bonuses for the rest of forever. The gravy train has to end eventually.

The one big risk is whether all firms play ball (kind of a millionaire prisoner's dilemma). A cascading match would force DPW to abandon this plan and match/raise early. Debatably this has already started with Cooley but we'll see.

And take note that no recruiting season exists between now and April/July so there is not a real risk of recruiting issues until late summer/early fall. If peer firms are playing along, then your top talent will stay. They won't leave for a temporary pay increase.

Unfortunately, that analysis cannot be considered brilliant because it purports to be from a "YHSCCN" alum who thinks we are too dumb to understand that no one who writes "YHSCCN" went to any of Y, H, or S.

Like the Skadden associate who says "I work at one of the v3"

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

Ehhh Y and S are better than H but not by THAT much. Pretty sure H's incoming class numbers are still better than S's but I'm too lazy to look it up.

Oh yeah YS are THAT much better than H and MORE. H took more students than YS combined. YS students have amazing softs and luck on top of numbers. H students got 3 more questions right on the lsat than the Cornell student on their 4th try. At least to get in Skadden you actually kinda have to ace a couple of law classes that won't let you retake it 5 times

[Anonymous User]

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

But these two (bolded) are interchangeable, and both below market, so I don't get your point.

As an H alum at Skadden, I truly completely agree that I would view my H/Skadden combo as a literal equivalent to Y/Cravath, but that the version of me that went to Y/Cravath would just be a more insufferable version of my current self (maybe even insufferable enough to read this and respond with “well ackshually Yale is the better law school”). And probably would also be a shittier lawyer because of their rotation system.

[Anonymous User]

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

But these two (bolded) are interchangeable, and both below market, so I don't get your point.

But the "it" factor

[Anonymous User]

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

But these two (bolded) are interchangeable, and both below market, so I don't get your point.

As an H alum at Skadden, I truly completely agree that I would view my H/Skadden combo as a literal equivalent to Y/Cravath, but that the version of me that went to Y/Cravath would just be a more insufferable version of my current self (maybe even insufferable enough to read this and respond with “well ackshually Yale is the better law school”). And probably would also be a shittier lawyer because of their rotation system.

Y/WLRK though. S/Cravath is more like it.

[Anonymous User]

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

But these two (bolded) are interchangeable, and both below market, so I don't get your point.

As an H alum at Skadden, I truly completely agree that I would view my H/Skadden combo as a literal equivalent to Y/Cravath, but that the version of me that went to Y/Cravath would just be a more insufferable version of my current self (maybe even insufferable enough to read this and respond with “well ackshually Yale is the better law school”). And probably would also be a shittier lawyer because of their rotation system.

Y/WLRK though. S/Cravath is more like it.

Yeah Yale and WLRK are full of self-important elitist schmucks, but the institution is legit special enough that at least it’s kinda deserved. Cravath on the other hand is totally overrated.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone explain to me how Skadden ended up as V3 anyway? Much of the V10 are either richer or more selective or both.

[Anonymous User]

SLS is overrated. HLS has better medians.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone explain to me how Skadden ended up as V3 anyway? Much of the V10 are either richer or more selective or both.

I think a lot has to do with Skadden having strong non-NY offices, many of which tend to be self-sufficient and well regarded while most of their older white shoe peers (like Cravath, S&C) don't really have any major offices outside NYC. So Skadden has a stronger national reputation than the NY-centric firms. And while Skadden isn't as grade selective as some of its peers, they purportedly care a lot about fit/personality so they're weirdly selective in other ways (dgaf whether it's actually a better approach)

[Anonymous User]

Can someone explain to me how Skadden ended up as V3 anyway? Much of the V10 are either richer or more selective or both.

Skadden Fellowship may have something to do with it.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone explain to me how Skadden ended up as V3 anyway? Much of the V10 are either richer or more selective or both.

I think a lot has to do with Skadden having strong non-NY offices, many of which tend to be self-sufficient and well regarded while most of their older white shoe peers (like Cravath, S&C) don't really have any major offices outside NYC. So Skadden has a stronger national reputation than the NY-centric firms. And while Skadden isn't as grade selective as some of its peers, they purportedly care a lot about fit/personality so they're weirdly selective in other ways (dgaf whether it's actually a better approach)

??? Highly doubt that this is it. Vault is a NYC corp ranking first and foremost. Places like Kirkland, Sidley, Gibson have waaay stronger non-NYC offices than Skadden but are obviously not part of the "V3." Where does Skadden have a strong non-NYC office? Their DC office isn't even close to the top of the market. Their Houston office is bottom of the barrel. Kirkland and Sidley rule Chicago. NYC is literally the only city where Skadden has an unusually strong office.

[Anonymous User]

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

But these two (bolded) are interchangeable, and both below market, so I don't get your point.

As an H alum at Skadden, I truly completely agree that I would view my H/Skadden combo as a literal equivalent to Y/Cravath, but that the version of me that went to Y/Cravath would just be a more insufferable version of my current self (maybe even insufferable enough to read this and respond with “well ackshually Yale is the better law school”). And probably would also be a shittier lawyer because of their rotation system.

Y/WLRK though. S/Cravath is more like it.

Yeah Yale and WLRK are full of self-important elitist schmucks, but the institution is legit special enough that at least it’s kinda deserved. Cravath on the other hand is totally overrated.

Fair and agreed points

[Anonymous User]

Can someone explain to me how Skadden ended up as V3 anyway? Much of the V10 are either richer or more selective or both.

I think a lot has to do with Skadden having strong non-NY offices, many of which tend to be self-sufficient and well regarded while most of their older white shoe peers (like Cravath, S&C) don't really have any major offices outside NYC. So Skadden has a stronger national reputation than the NY-centric firms. And while Skadden isn't as grade selective as some of its peers, they purportedly care a lot about fit/personality so they're weirdly selective in other ways (dgaf whether it's actually a better approach)

??? Highly doubt that this is it. Vault is a NYC corp ranking first and foremost. Places like Kirkland, Sidley, Gibson have waaay stronger non-NYC offices than Skadden but are obviously not part of the "V3." Where does Skadden have a strong non-NYC office? Their DC office isn't even close to the top of the market. Their Houston office is bottom of the barrel. Kirkland and Sidley rule Chicago. NYC is literally the only city where Skadden has an unusually strong office.

I was referring to the older NY-centric white shoe peers (which aren't Kirkland, Latham, Sidley or Gibson) that don't have significant non-NYC offices and so I think Skadden gets a bump up in that regard. And totally agree that Skadden's non-NYC offices aren't all top of the market—I'm just saying they're generally pretty good or near the top of the market (and I think, at least with regards to corporate work, it's def an exaggeration to say that Kirkland, Sidley and Gibson have waaay stronger non-NYC practices). Skadden DC, Chicago, LA, Palo Alto, London, etc. are all well regarded. All I'm saying is that that counts for a lot, since it's not just NY lawyers who vote on vault.

[Ultramar vistas]

Have a read of the book Skadden: money, power or whatever it is.

By a journalist in the 90s, basically a history of how Skadden was the arch nemesis of WLRK in the M&A boom (Wachtell mostly doing defense, Skadden mostly representing the buyer).

Although it seems obvious now that corporate law would be dominated by M&A, before the M&A boom it was seen as dirty, ungentlemanly work, mostly practiced by rejects of the white shoe firms, who represented banks and blue chips.

Skadden benefited from those firms initially ignoring the space, and as a result was able to totally dominate the market for a decade before the others figured it out. Skadden was raking in money, and Skadden partners were too.

It got enormous criticism as an upstart full of less prestigious rejects now doing dirty work, but the Skadden partners were wiping away their tears with cash, so yeah.

Now, Skadden’s just a part of the landscape, but the book is very helpful at providing context as to how we arrived where we are today.

[Anonymous User]

Or the Harvard student who says "I go to one of the T3". H is as much of a peer to Y and S as Skadden is to Wachtell and Cravath.

But these two (bolded) are interchangeable, and both below market, so I don't get your point.

As an H alum at Skadden, I truly completely agree that I would view my H/Skadden combo as a literal equivalent to Y/Cravath, but that the version of me that went to Y/Cravath would just be a more insufferable version of my current self (maybe even insufferable enough to read this and respond with “well ackshually Yale is the better law school”). And probably would also be a shittier lawyer because of their rotation system.

Y/WLRK though. S/Cravath is more like it.

Yeah Yale and WLRK are full of self-important elitist schmucks, but the institution is legit special enough that at least it’s kinda deserved. Cravath on the other hand is totally overrated.

Is WLRK like that? I haven't gotten that impression from my (limited) interactions.

[legalpotato]

Have a read of the book Skadden: money, power or whatever it is.

By a journalist in the 90s, basically a history of how Skadden was the arch nemesis of WLRK in the M&A boom (Wachtell mostly doing defense, Skadden mostly representing the buyer).

Although it seems obvious now that corporate law would be dominated by M&A, before the M&A boom it was seen as dirty, ungentlemanly work, mostly practiced by rejects of the white shoe firms, who represented banks and blue chips.

Skadden benefited from those firms initially ignoring the space, and as a result was able to totally dominate the market for a decade before the others figured it out. Skadden was raking in money, and Skadden partners were too.

It got enormous criticism as an upstart full of less prestigious rejects now doing dirty work, but the Skadden partners were wiping away their tears with cash, so yeah.

Now, Skadden’s just a part of the landscape, but the book is very helpful at providing context as to how we arrived where we are today.

So the book explains why none of the "elite" firms have matched Milbank or fucking Winston?

[Anonymous User]

Can someone explain to me how Skadden ended up as V3 anyway? Much of the V10 are either richer or more selective or both.

I think a lot has to do with Skadden having strong non-NY offices, many of which tend to be self-sufficient and well regarded while most of their older white shoe peers (like Cravath, S&C) don't really have any major offices outside NYC. So Skadden has a stronger national reputation than the NY-centric firms. And while Skadden isn't as grade selective as some of its peers, they purportedly care a lot about fit/personality so they're weirdly selective in other ways (dgaf whether it's actually a better approach)

??? Highly doubt that this is it. Vault is a NYC corp ranking first and foremost. Places like Kirkland, Sidley, Gibson have waaay stronger non-NYC offices than Skadden but are obviously not part of the "V3." Where does Skadden have a strong non-NYC office? Their DC office isn't even close to the top of the market. Their Houston office is bottom of the barrel. Kirkland and Sidley rule Chicago. NYC is literally the only city where Skadden has an unusually strong office.

I was referring to the older NY-centric white shoe peers (which aren't Kirkland, Latham, Sidley or Gibson) that don't have significant non-NYC offices and so I think Skadden gets a bump up in that regard. And totally agree that Skadden's non-NYC offices aren't all top of the market—I'm just saying they're generally pretty good or near the top of the market (and I think, at least with regards to corporate work, it's def an exaggeration to say that Kirkland, Sidley and Gibson have waaay stronger non-NYC practices). Skadden DC, Chicago, LA, Palo Alto, London, etc. are all well regarded. All I'm saying is that that counts for a lot, since it's not just NY lawyers who vote on vault.

Kirkland almost single-handedly dominates one of the most profitable transactions markets in the country (Houston). Skadden Houston, in contrast, is outmatched by the likes of Shearman and White & Case. Kirkland and Sidley corporate are leagues ahead of Skadden Chicago. Just two examples.

Everyone knows the Vault rankings are skewed by overwhelming numbers of NYC corporate associates. There are after waaay more biglaw jobs in NY than in other markets. Skadden's ranking isn't materially changed by the fact that they have some mediocre offices outside of NY. There are other reasons for Skadden's inflated ranking, as other posters have pointed out.

[Anonymous User]

SLS is overrated. HLS has better medians.

Implying medians matter compared to exits. Granted, S probably equals (or is only slightly better than) H in this regard. But LMFAO at the idea that medians make a school.

[Anonymous User]

Glad we're getting to the important questions here of comparing HLS to SLS.

[Anonymous User]

SLS is overrated. HLS has better medians.

Implying medians matter compared to exits. Granted, S probably equals (or is only slightly better than) H in this regard. But LMFAO at the idea that medians make a school.

SLS students are also significantly richer than HLS students on average. Financial freedom leads to shooting for "unicorn" outcomes, while debt leads to generic biglaw.

[Anonymous User]

SLS is overrated. HLS has better medians.

Implying medians matter compared to exits. Granted, S probably equals (or is only slightly better than) H in this regard. But LMFAO at the idea that medians make a school.

SLS students are also significantly richer than HLS students on average. Financial freedom leads to shooting for "unicorn" outcomes, while debt leads to generic biglaw.

Implying that vast majority of HLS students even have a shot at unicorn outcomes. 80% of HLS student body is indistinguishable from the rest of the T13 and is only free-riding Harvard undergrad's immense prestige. The remaining 20% are not as good as Y and S.